Shane Ross' new speeding penalties

ectoraige

Kevin Irving wrote: »

That's more to do with a rubbish deal negotiated by someones mate rather than a competitive bidding process. We don't know any longer what the profitability of the company is, so you can be sure it's extremely profitable.

Yeah, it seems like the deal itself could be improved, but that's a different subject. I raised the costs to counter the argument that basically dismisses speed cameras as just another tax on drivers that have nothing to do with road safety. It's clearly wrong, but some people like to trot it out despite it having no basis in truth.

Dravokivich

Kevin Irving wrote: »

It's 30kph because the turn is too tight. The land nearby should have been CPO'd and proper standard junctions and flyovers built.

This leaves lower powered cars in a difficult situation trying to accelerate up to 100kph in a very short distance in order to join the motorway safely.

He's just talking about the overpass, not the merge onto M50. But yeah, I'm aware of poor design, means lower speed limits required due to risk of larger vehicles toppling. Sure there's someone else here who thinks because his car can go faster, the speed limits should be higher :pac:

Stephen Strange

Bailey Slow Pastrami wrote: »

Usually I am making progress in order to get away from the tailgaiters, and past the line of slugs in the middle and driving lane so I can find a bit of space to just drive at the limt +/-. Enforcement tends to focus on areas where there is overtaking or pass potential and shot a line of fish.

There have been a couple of times I drove waterford to dublin where everyone was driving properly, not too fast, not too slow, leaving room, planning ahead etc...its is a joy to drive in those conditions, you dont have to touch your brakes.

This! The M50 makes me so angry, due to the number of people in the centre lane, with the left lane empty....

OldMrBrennan83

DaveyDave wrote: »

Is there a reason we don't throw up some speed cameras on the M50 and the like? Or have any speed cameras at all?

I see speed camera signs and I've seen more of those 'your speed is' flashy signs but nothing else. Gardai out with the hair dryer isn't enough and just causes clowns to drop the anchor and drive slow while they're there.

Few cameras and feck anyone doing 160 on the M50. But of course that would be 'entrapment' 'money making scheme' etc.

Why do we keep wanting to change speed limits, change fines, points etc. All talk. Throw up some bloody cameras and get on with it.

Some red light cameras too.

It's madness that in this day and age they don't have average cameras covering every motorway in the country.

GreeBo

whomitconcerns wrote: »

Have to say fair play for keeping left. But your saying you don't go over 66% of the limit on a motorway, is that for confidence reasons as it's not really the safest option..

In what other facets of life do you operate at the limit?

Limit.
Lim-it.

Not target.
Not tar-get.

mickdw

Raisins wrote: »

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That's fine though. If you're doing whatever lower speed in the left lane and not holding anyone up who is driving a car comfortable at those speeds then there's no issue.

There’s no obligation on anyone in either lane to facilitate another driver doing 140.

You are the reason the roads get blocked up.
You sit in the outside lane at the speed limit or most likely 10 km/hr under it. Nobody can pass you. You are creating danger on the road. Lines behind you and an empty driving lane inside.
If you are the front car with a line of 20 behind you in the overtaking lane, you are the only one breaking the law.

GreeBo

sdanseo wrote: »

Ah sure let's summarily execute people for littering while we're at it. They knew the rules.

Pathetic argument.




I have a degree in Transport Planning and did my Thesis on road safety. Even if neither of these things were the case, it wouldn't make my point juvenile. Overreaction and over punishment are not effective ways to stem poor behaviour and if you scrolled up you'll see that far from being juvenile, I've gone and put time and effort into coming to the discussion with a solution rather than stamping my feet and insisting that everyone should behave immaculately and obey the exact letter of the ROTR.

But the only reason you want to lower the penalties is becuase you dont want to be penalised for breaking the speed limit.

ergo, you want to be able to just pay your way to speeding.

Whats the point in a speed limit if some people are *always* going to ignore it?

GreeBo

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I know that was tongue in cheek but there lies the flaw in the proposed legislation. A huge % of people killed in collisions are in the VRU category,ie pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists. Vast majority of these fatalities occur in residential 50km or 60 km speed limit areas. These are the areas least likely to have enforcement under current speed van system as the vans look for somewhere safe and if possible discrete to park. Not so easy to find beside a school, post office, library, shop etc. So unless we move to a different form of enforcement your taxi drivers will be safe but unfortunately children and older people wont be

I believe the goal is that you get people to change their attitudes and rather then just slow down for the cameras, they actually just obey the posted limits all the time.

mgn

More people die from suicide in this country than the do on the roads,but you don't see any ministers doing anything about that.It's the same with all these muppets in government one looking for a bigger headline than other.

sdanseo

GreeBo wrote: »

But the only reason you want to lower the penalties is becuase you dont want to be penalised for breaking the speed limit.

ergo, you want to be able to just pay your way to speeding.

Whats the point in a speed limit if some people are *always* going to ignore it?

I want a proportionate penalty for the offence. If it's enforced properly then people who consistently drive dangerously then they will end up off the road anyway.

I would like speed limits to also be reformed. But the fact that there are stupidly low speed limits in some areas is a separate tangent, albeit a very valid one.

amcalester

sdanseo wrote: »

I want a proportionate penalty for the offence. If it's enforced properly then people who consistently drive dangerously then they will end up off the road anyway.

I would like speed limits to also be reformed. But the fact that there are stupidly low speed limits in some areas is a separate tangent, albeit a very valid one.

Proportionate from the POV of who? The motorist, the pedestrian, the cyclist, road sweeper, ditch digger etc.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

amcalester wrote: »

Proportionate from the POV of who? The motorist, the pedestrian, the cyclist, road sweeper, ditch digger etc.

Proportionality is not relative by definition, but good virtue signalling.

amcalester

Bailey Slow Pastrami wrote: »

Proportionality is not relative by definition, but good virtue signalling.

Yeah, you’re right about the proportionality and I do think % based system would be better/fairer.

I’m not virtue signaling, it just appears to me that a lot of posters generally only consider speeding from the POV of the motorist, not other road users.

sdanseo

amcalester wrote: »

Yeah, you’re right about the proportionality and I do think % based system would be better/fairer.

I’m not virtue signaling, it just appears to me that a lot of posters generally only consider speeding from the POV of the motorist, not other road users.

If you actually read my contributions in full you'll see I suggested doubling the penalties in 50km/h zones or below (where vulnerable road users are)

The 50km/h and 30km/h speed limits are generally fair and given the proportionate (pun intended) risk increase for injury to those types of road user resulting from even a small increase in speed they deserve to be punished more harshly.

You would have to do 61km/h in a 30km/h zone (more than 100% the limit) to be charged with dangerous driving under Lord Ross's grand pile of vomit. This while surrounded by pedestrians, cyclists, children, bus lanes, and countless other obstacles. In contrast 151km/h on the M1 (25% over the limit) would also get you the book thrown in your general direction.

Where's the objective proportionality there from anyone's point of view?

Yes, that I think motorway limits should be 130km/h and dual carriageway 110km/h like most other civilised European countries, and a general tolerance for up to 160km/h on motorways because that is the speed those roads were generally designed to handle and which my research has shown is perfectly safe relatively speaking. But I'm still capable of explaining why even with the existing system of speed limits these penalties are nothing short of stupid.

The proposal is ludicrous and founded in either flawed logic or delirious desire for re-election by his octogenarian constituents.

99nsr125

The Germans are right as always

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

Because the Swiss do something ludicrous doesn't mean we should follow them.

How about the way the Germans let you drive as fast as you like on some of their roads?

Pythagorean

As a motorist, motorcyclist, and cyclist of over 40 years accident free road use, I think I am qualified to judge what is a safe speed.
However, I got caught out while riding an old motorcycle, the speedo in mph, and angled away from the rider, therefore difficult to read. I was clocked at 60 kph in a 50 zone, but I do not recall seeing any 50 signs, or speed camera warning signs. The road ahead was clear, and free of any hazards, being a quiet summer evening, I was accelerating towards an open stretch of road, in perfect safety. A few days later, the letter arrived, 80 euro fine, 3 penalty points, and increased insurance premiums. Fair enough, if it was a heavily congested urban area, on a dark wet winters night, ( when I would be doing less than 50 anyway). Mr Ross no doubt sees himself as some sort of reforming hero, but by draconian penalties, he will only succeed in criminalising perfectly safe and careful drivers, who occasionally get their speed wrong, thereby alienating a substantial section of the population. He will not get my vote next time.

Pretzeluck

sdanseo wrote: »

If you actually read my contributions in full you'll see I suggested doubling the penalties in 50km/h zones or below (where vulnerable road users are)

The 50km/h and 30km/h speed limits are generally fair and given the proportionate (pun intended) risk increase for injury to those types of road user resulting from even a small increase in speed they deserve to be punished more harshly.

You would have to do 61km/h in a 30km/h zone (more than 100% the limit) to be charged with dangerous driving under Lord Ross's grand pile of vomit. This while surrounded by pedestrians, cyclists, children, bus lanes, and countless other obstacles. In contrast 151km/h on the M1 (25% over the limit) would also get you the book thrown in your general direction.

Where's the objective proportionality there from anyone's point of view?

Yes, that I think motorway limits should be 130km/h and dual carriageway 110km/h like most other civilised European countries, and a general tolerance for up to 160km/h on motorways because that is the speed those roads were generally designed to handle and which my research has shown is perfectly safe relatively speaking. But I'm still capable of explaining why even with the existing system of speed limits these penalties are nothing short of stupid.

The proposal is ludicrous and founded in either flawed logic or delirious desire for re-election by his octogenarian constituents.

You're delusional if you think this proposal won't pass and be implemented. As the people have spoken "You ain't have to worry about this if you're doing nothing wrong" just like "why you worry if you got nothing to hide" attitude. Pathetic

Pretzeluck

Pythagorean wrote: »

As a motorist, motorcyclist, and cyclist of over 40 years accident free road use, I think I am qualified to judge what is a safe speed.
However, I got caught out while riding an old motorcycle, the speedo in mph, and angled away from the rider, therefore difficult to read. I was clocked at 60 kph in a 50 zone, but I do not recall seeing any 50 signs, or speed camera warning signs. The road ahead was clear, and free of any hazards, being a quiet summer evening, I was accelerating towards an open stretch of road, in perfect safety. A few days later, the letter arrived, 80 euro fine, 3 penalty points, and increased insurance premiums. Fair enough, if it was a heavily congested urban area, on a dark wet winters night, ( when I would be doing less than 50 anyway). Mr Ross no doubt sees himself as some sort of reforming hero, but by draconian penalties, he will only succeed in criminalising perfectly safe and careful drivers, who occasionally get their speed wrong, thereby alienating a substantial section of the population. He will not get my vote next time.

Who the hell voted him in, in the first place. How can this specimen even win.

sdanseo

Pretzeluck wrote: »

You're delusional if you think this proposal won't pass and be implemented. As the people have spoken "You ain't have to worry about this if you're doing nothing wrong" just like "why you worry if you got nothing to hide" attitude. Pathetic

Of course it'll pass. We're a backward country with politicians who will screw 2 million motorists to raise their profile.

Not being rocket science doesn't make it right.

sdanseo

sdanseo wrote: »

Of course it'll pass. We're a backward country with politicians who will screw 2 million motorists to raise their profile.

Not being rocket science doesn't make it right.

Or maybe not

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/shane-rosss-new-driving-laws-branded-draconian-and-punitive-at-fg-party-meeting-37621270.html

Shane Ross's new driving laws branded 'draconian and punitive' at FG party meeting
TDs and senators shoot down plan to fine motorists more the faster they speed

Pythagorean

I have just read that the FG parliamentary party meeting, ( a mix of senators and TDs) have branded Ross's proposals as " Draconian and punitive". I can only hope that common sense will prevail, and put a stop to Mr Ross's campaign against the law abiding, and heavily taxed motorist

mickdw

Pythagorean wrote: »

I have just read that the FG parliamentary party meeting, ( a mix of senators and TDs) have branded Ross's proposals as " Draconian and punitive". I can only hope that common sense will prevail, and put a stop to Mr Ross's campaign against the law abiding, and heavily taxed motorist

FG will knock this down, Ross will get some small part of his plan and everyone is a winner except the motorist.

ExoPolitic

you see the problem is, it takes the power away from the courts and gives power to the garda. This is wrong. The courts already have discretion to give fines relating to the exact offence in question and with the courts it should stay. And only the higher speeding offences reach the courts...

What we have is a solution looking for a problem, which was never a problem in the first place.

RobbieMD

ExoPolitic wrote: »

you see the problem is, it takes the power away from the courts and gives power to the garda. This is wrong. The courts already have discretion to give fines relating to the exact offence in question and with the courts it should stay. And only the higher speeding offences reach the courts...

What we have is a solution looking for a problem, which was never a problem in the first place.

I don’t see it as taking the power away from the courts at all. It’s a broadening of the current FCPN system. Not all speeding offences go to court. The district courts would be backlogged if that was the case.

The dangerous drivers will still go to court, and the courts will still have all the powers they currently have to fine/imprison. If the driver wants to challenge the FCPN they can still go to court with it. The courts aren’t losing any power and the Gardai aren’t getting any extra power. It’s a measure to make drivers think twice before speeding.

And casual speeding is rampant in Ireland. Literally no one sticks to the 50kmph limits anywhere. Try driving at 50 and the person behind is right up behind you. And then we love to moan about getting caught speeding, or come on boards looking to get out of it.

I think it’s a good idea to have some sort of scale for fines but the way it’s being proposed seems too simplistic. Maybe a % scale or linked to income.

emptyhouse2222

shane ross is not irish, nor christian

i wont like to say what he really is or i will be banned for anti-semitism


Mod note:banned

rex-x

RobbieMD wrote: »

I don’t see it as taking the power away from the courts at all. It’s a broadening of the current FCPN system. Not all speeding offences go to court. The district courts would be backlogged if that was the case.

The dangerous drivers will still go to court, and the courts will still have all the powers they currently have to fine/imprison. If the driver wants to challenge the FCPN they can still go to court with it. The courts aren’t losing any power and the Gardai aren’t getting any extra power. It’s a measure to make drivers think twice before speeding.

And casual speeding is rampant in Ireland. Literally no one sticks to the 50kmph limits anywhere. Try driving at 50 and the person behind is right up behind you. And then we love to moan about getting caught speeding, or come on boards looking to get out of it.

I think it’s a good idea to have some sort of scale for fines but the way it’s being proposed seems too simplistic. Maybe a % scale or linked to income.

If noone sticks to the limits does that not mean the limits maybe are in need of raising? speeding is not a big contributing factor in most crashes or road deaths.
If he really wanted to save lives then making only goodyear eagle f1 tyres or Michelin PS3 legal and changing the wear limit to 3mm would make a much bigger impact!

btkm8unsl0w5r4

emptyhouse2222 wrote: »

shane ross is not irish, nor christian

i wont like to say what he really is or i will be banned for anti-semitism

Holy cow batman, I pride myself on not being PC or a snowflake but thats making me nervous. Fight the argument not the man.

nice_guy80

Shane needs a bit of time living in rural longford or Mayo to appreciate that the current laws are perfectly fine, if the Gardai actually enforced them better.
They need a fleet of unmarked cars with ANPR

The amount of kamikaze drivers I see everyday is crazy.

Henry Ford III

Having reread the proposals I agree they are overly harsh.

McCrack

Pythagorean wrote: »

As a motorist, motorcyclist, and cyclist of over 40 years accident free road use, I think I am qualified to judge what is a safe speed.
However, I got caught out while riding an old motorcycle, the speedo in mph, and angled away from the rider, therefore difficult to read. I was clocked at 60 kph in a 50 zone, but I do not recall seeing any 50 signs, or speed camera warning signs. The road ahead was clear, and free of any hazards, being a quiet summer evening, I was accelerating towards an open stretch of road, in perfect safety. A few days later, the letter arrived, 80 euro fine, 3 penalty points, and increased insurance premiums. Fair enough, if it was a heavily congested urban area, on a dark wet winters night, ( when I would be doing less than 50 anyway). Mr Ross no doubt sees himself as some sort of reforming hero, but by draconian penalties, he will only succeed in criminalising perfectly safe and careful drivers, who occasionally get their speed wrong, thereby alienating a substantial section of the population. He will not get my vote next time.

If your story is true it would mean youd have to be driving your motorcycle away from the van and on a quiet summer evening how on earth did you not see the van parked on the side of the road