Red light jumping

Don199

What’s the problem with people not obeying traffic lights in Ireland? Seen about 5 people going through a red light this morning alone. Is there any way of getting caught other than a Garda catching you, which is a slim chance they will.

magicbastarder

people do it because they know there's zero chance of being caught. the issue is chronic now, i recently saw four motorists driving blatantly through a red, and one was driving an artic.

LeinsterDub

Don199 wrote: »

What’s the problem with people not obeying traffic lights in Ireland? Seen about 5 people going through a red light this morning alone. Is there any way of getting caught other than a Garda catching you, which is a slim chance they will.

AGS don't care. They'd rather catch people on e Scooters it seems. Illegal motoring behavior is rife in Ireland. We need ANPR and parking wardens.

Of course if you changed the title slightly to include the word cycling in it some would be happy with death squads doing the enforcement

blackbox

So many people, even though they stop, cross the white line.
In the UK they would be done for breaking the red light for this by either cops or red light cameras.

Salary Negotiator

The sooner we have red light cameras to catch offenders the better.

Bus lane cameras too would be great.

Don199

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

The sooner we have red light cameras to catch offenders

Don’t they have 2 or 3 of these cameras in operation in Dublin City or are these still in operation?

Xterminator

Build it and they will come.

We need

legislation in the dail to allow automatic fines issued by the cameras
cameras on every major junction
fines issued automatically
& people will change their behaviour.

Irish roads will be safer, and the whingers will have a good moan about cash cows and road tax is high enough etc. But it would reduce the number of users running red lights because at the moment the know the chance of getting caught is negligible.

Salary Negotiator

Don199 wrote: »

Don’t they have 2 or 3 of these cameras in operation in Dublin City or are these still in operation?

I think there might be cameras with the capabilities but they are not functioning.

AFAIK there needs to be a change to legislation before they can be introduced.

Don199

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

I think there might be cameras with the capabilities but they are not functioning.

AFAIK there needs to be a change to legislation before
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/cameras-to-be-installed-at-three-blackspots-to-catch-red-light-runners-1.3852548%3fmode=amp do you reckon these aren’t working

collywobble7

Salary Negotiator wrote:

I think there might be cameras with the capabilities but they are not functioning.

Salary Negotiator wrote:

AFAIK there needs to be a change to legislation before they can be introduced.

Ireland in a nutshell there..

Don199

collywobble7 wrote: »

Ireland in a nutshell there..

100%

Dravokivich

There's only what 10-12 thousand Gardaí in the entire country? The issue isn't just a lack of enforcement, there isn't enough people to do it.

is_that_so

Don199 wrote: »

What’s the problem with people not obeying traffic lights in Ireland? Seen about 5 people going through a red light this morning alone. Is there any way of getting caught other than a Garda catching you, which is a slim chance they will.

The average here is three in cars. Cyclists can be higher in my experience.

magicbastarder

Dravokivich wrote: »

There's only what 10-12 thousand Gardaí in the entire country? The issue isn't just a lack of enforcement, there isn't enough people to do it.

drew harris recently postponed the transfer of approx. 130 gardai to roads policing due to resource issues.
one issue is that road deaths are at an historic low, so it's probably not on their list of priorities.

Banana Republic.

Don199 wrote: »

What’s the problem with people not obeying traffic lights in Ireland? Seen about 5 people going through a red light this morning alone. Is there any way of getting caught other than a Garda catching you, which is a slim chance they will.

What's your thoughts on the Amber light if your going a speed not safe enough to stop? Red lights are changed to green too fast I think also with traffic lights, there's no margain for error if someone mashes a mistake and doesn't or can't stop in time.

LeChienMefiant

magicbastarder wrote: »

drew harris recently postponed the transfer of approx. 130 gardai to roads policing due to resource issues.
one issue is that road deaths are at an historic low, so it's probably not on their list of priorities.

Numbers of people walking and cycling to work/school/creche should be the metric they use as opposed to traffic deaths (not to mention the horrible injuries).

LeChienMefiant

Banana Republic. wrote: »

What's your thoughts on the Amber light if your going a speed not safe enough to stop? Red lights are changed to green too fast I think also with traffic lights, there's no margain for error if someone mashes a mistake and doesn't or can't stop in time.

The person who smashes into the back of that car is responsible for the accident in those circumstances. The motorists by virtue of being surrounded by a couple of tonnes of metal, plastic, airbags etc are better placed to be involved in a collision than the entirely blameless flesh and bone that they might hit by proceeding.

magicbastarder

Banana Republic. wrote: »

What's your thoughts on the Amber light if your going a speed not safe enough to stop?

surely that's the very definition of what an amber light means? stop, unless it is dangerous to do so?

Banana Republic.

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

The person who smashes into the back of that car is responsible for the accident in those circumstances. The motorists by virtue of being surrounded by a couple of tonnes of metal, plastic, airbags etc are better placed to be involved in a collision than the entirely blameless flesh and bone that they might hit by proceeding.

So cause a crash and whiplash to a huge degree instead of going through an Amber light when the other lights by law can't move as they won't be green yet?

Banana Republic.

magicbastarder wrote: »

surely that's the very definition of what an amber light means? stop, unless it is dangerous to do so?

Yea it's a real hard one that I find alot of the times, it's a split second decision.

lorcand1990

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Yea it's a real hard one that I find alot of the times, it's a split second decision.

If the light has just turned amber & you really only have a split second decision, I'd generally keep going because you must be very close to the light if the reaction to stop would need to be that sudden. Therefore in all likelyhood the light won't have gone red by the time you pass

Now if you're approaching the light from a distance & can see it turning amber & have a few seconds to react, then I'd be preparing to stop

Don199

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Yea it's a real hard one that I find alot of the times, it's a split second decision.

Yeah I agree, I try my best to obey the lights but it happens so quick and sometimes you end up going through an amber light.

lorcand1990

Don199 wrote: »

Yeah I agree, I try my best to obey the lights but it happens so quick and sometimes you end up going through an amber light.

In fairness I think the issue is mostly with people who blatantly jump a red light, rather than make a quick decision on amber. I see it every day that my light would be green, but you still have one of two cars coming through from a light that has already long gone red

bot43

Theres a difference between the "amber gambler" and the outright light breaker. I always beep at fellas doing it, not tat they will notice. But I regularly see fellas flying trough a red a good 2/3 seconds after going red. Funnily enough I regularly am right behind them then at the next lights :rolleyes:

Banana Republic.

lorcand1990 wrote: »

In fairness I think the issue is mostly with people who blatantly jump a red light, rather than make a quick decision on amber. I see it every day that my light would be green, but you still have one of two cars coming through from a light that has already long gone red

Yea they are the dangerous ones, only if it's Amber I keep going otherwise as lights change so quick I'll stop on the Red but yea one can be a mistake but when it's two and three it's ridiculous plus very very dangerous.

shar01

Stick red light cameras at the south bound off ramp at Cherrywood/M50 - national debt solved by lunchtime with something left over for the new children's hospital.

LeChienMefiant

Banana Republic. wrote: »

So cause a crash and whiplash to a huge degree instead of going through an Amber light when the other lights by law can't move as they won't be green yet?

By the time the vehicle crosses the junction the pedestrian light will in many cases be green. What does the car that broke the light do in that situation? In my experience they plough on through the pedestrian crossing. The traffic engineers are in the practise now of delaying green on the opposite side. This just begets worse behaviour.

antodeco

There's a right turn beside the convention centre to go up the north quays. The lights going straight from the the other side turn red about 4/5 seconds before the "right turning" green light goes red. I've been unable to turn right for those 4/5 seconds on nearly every occasion due to the amount of cars that jump the red lights. Easily 3-5 cars go through the red. Also then have another handful of cyclists going through it aswell

Silent Running

I stopped at a light controlled roundabout over the M50. After I had stopped, a car passed me in the other lane, completely ignoring the already red light. The Garda in his car in pole position at the light turning green completely ignored the situation.

It's not that he didn't see it happening, he had to take his foot off the accelerator to avoid the light breaker. You can't blame resources on that one.

plodder

I saw for the first time yesterday, the metering lights on the M1 being used, during the farmer M50 chaos. Most drivers were respecting them, but as I passed on the mainline, I watched one Audi A7 carefully drive around the car waiting at the front, and just carry on as if the lights weren't there.

cdaly_

Banana Republic. wrote: »

What's your thoughts on the Amber light if your going a speed not safe enough to stop? Red lights are changed to green too fast I think also with traffic lights, there's no margain for error if someone mashes a mistake and doesn't or can't stop in time.

This sounds like an excuse.
If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon. Therefore you should be driving at a speed which will allow you to safely stop.
If you are travelling at a speed 'not safe to stop' when the light turns amber, it seems like you have deliberately accelerated to 'catch the green'.

Banana Republic. wrote: »

So cause a crash and whiplash to a huge degree instead of going through an Amber light when the other lights by law can't move as they won't be green yet?

This sounds like an excuse.
I stop for amber lights. I've never had a rear-end crash or 'whiplash' in such circumstances.
Also, you do not 'cause a crash' by stopping. The driver behind you who fails to stop 'causes the crash' by not driving at a speed where they can safely stop in the distance they can see to be clear.
Incidentally, 'whiplash' doesn't seem to exist as a medical condition in jurisdictions where there is no insurance payout to be had...
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/07/science/in-one-country-chronic-whiplash-is-uncompensated-and-unknown.html

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Yea it's a real hard one that I find alot of the times, it's a split second decision.

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

lorcand1990 wrote: »

If the light has just turned amber & you really only have a split second decision, I'd generally keep going because you must be very close to the light if the reaction to stop would need to be that sudden. Therefore in all likelyhood the light won't have gone red by the time you pass

Now if you're approaching the light from a distance & can see it turning amber & have a few seconds to react, then I'd be preparing to stop

Would you not be stopping 'cos that's what you are required to do by law?

Don199 wrote: »

Yeah I agree, I try my best to obey the lights but it happens so quick and sometimes you end up going through an amber light.

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Yea they are the dangerous ones, only if it's Amber I keep going otherwise as lights change so quick.

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

By the time the vehicle crosses the junction the pedestrian light will in many cases be green. What does the car that broke the light do in that situation? In my experience they plough on through the pedestrian crossing. The traffic engineers are in the practise now of delaying green on the opposite side. This just begets worse behaviour.

Agreed.

Antares35

Banana Republic. wrote: »

What's your thoughts on the Amber light if your going a speed not safe enough to stop? Red lights are changed to green too fast I think also with traffic lights, there's no margain for error if someone mashes a mistake and doesn't or can't stop in time.

Amber means stop unless it is not safe to do so. A lot of Irish drivers think it means "speed up as you approach to catch the lights and sure we might as well sneak through on the red aswell, just tailgate the car in front". What's ironic is there is an entire thread somewhere of people giving out about drivers who are too slow to take off at lights (slow apparently being defined as more than 1 second or something) yet if we were all waiting to take off in a hurry the second the light goes green, chances are we'd collide with the inevitable 2 or 3 cars that have flown through from the other side. You see it all the time while waiting for the green man too. There will always be 1 or 2 flying through the pedestrian crossing after the green man shows up, even though there is a generous amount of time between one going red and the other going green (this I suspect, is actually part of the problem i.e. drivers know this)

lorcand1990

cdaly_ wrote: »

Would you not be stopping 'cos that's what you are required to do by law?

.

Yes, probably just my phrasing that confused you. By 'preparing to stop' I mean slowing down to a stop

Banana Republic.

cdaly_ wrote: »

This sounds like an excuse.
If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon. Therefore you should be driving at a speed which will allow you to safely stop.
If you are travelling at a speed 'not safe to stop' when the light turns amber, it seems like you have deliberately accelerated to 'catch the green'.

This sounds like an excuse.
I stop for amber lights. I've never had a rear-end crash or 'whiplash' in such circumstances.
Also, you do not 'cause a crash' by stopping. The driver behind you who fails to stop 'causes the crash' by not driving at a speed where they can safely stop in the distance they can see to be clear.
Incidentally, 'whiplash' doesn't seem to exist as a medical condition in jurisdictions where there is no insurance payout to be had...

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

Would you not be stopping 'cos that's what you are required to do by law?

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

This sounds like an excuse.

• If you are approaching a light that has been green for a while, you should be expecting it to turn to amber soon

Agreed.

Yea it is an excuse, that's why I said I'd share my experiences to see do ppl do similar plus that link was from the NY Times not relevant to Ireland. I think alot of ppl speed up for the green light.

Salary Negotiator

Banana Republic. wrote: »

I think alot of ppl speed up for the green light.

Some speed up for red and amber too.

Tomrota

I suspect it could also have a lot to do with the chronic traffic congestion in Dublin. I mean... sometimes you’re sitting there for 6+ traffic light changes and still aren’t getting through. Having waited that long, you would go through an amber light because that slow Yaris in front of you took five years to gain momentum.

cdaly_

Banana Republic. wrote: »

that link was from the NY Times not relevant to Ireland.

The link from the NY Times shows how 'whiplash' does not exist in a country (Lithuania) where there is no financial compensation to be had and demonstrates that 'whiplash' is a financial condition, not a medical one. This is certainly relevant to Ireland as it contributes to your high motor insurance premium...

cdaly_

Tomrota wrote: »

I suspect it could also have a lot to do with the chronic traffic congestion in Dublin. I mean... sometimes you’re sitting there for 6+ traffic light changes and still aren’t getting through. Having waited that long, you would go through an amber light because that slow Yaris in front of you took five years to gain momentum.

You do know that red light running contributes to congestion rather than easing it? Every traffic light in Dublin now has dead time between phases to account for red light running. Therefore there is less time with a green light for the Yaris to get going.

There's chronic traffic congestion in various cities around the UK. There isn't chronic red light jumping there though as you get caught and fined. It's pure selfishness here, no question, no excuse.

Stark

cdaly_ wrote: »

Banana Republic. wrote: »

that link was from the NY Times not relevant to Ireland.

The link from the NY Times shows how 'whiplash' does not exist in a country (Lithuania) where there is no financial compensation to be had and demonstrates that 'whiplash' is a financial condition, not a medical one. This is certainly relevant to Ireland as it contributes to your high motor insurance premium...

This came up in the Irish media a while back as well

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/neurosurgeons-report-finds-90-of-whiplash-patients-stop-treatment-after-legal-action-ends-955410.html

Antares35

Coming to work this morning, I was turning right at a junction and as the lights turned green for me and I went to execute the turn, there were 3 yes 3 cars coming towards me from the opposite side, who had presumably all hopped a red light. Two of them shot past me and only the third had the decency to stop. Such was the delay that only my car and the one behind got through before the lights changed again. Morons of the highest order. You see head on collisions and wonder how the hell they happened. That is how.

There is a black spot down near Smithfield where the Luas is constantly being smashed into by cars who have run the red and crossed the tracks. People are idiots and financial penalties are the only way to curb their idiotic behaviour.

magicbastarder

Tomrota wrote: »

I suspect it could also have a lot to do with the chronic traffic congestion in Dublin. I mean... sometimes you’re sitting there for 6+ traffic light changes and still aren’t getting through.

it's nothing to do with this. i left the house at 6:30am and traffic was lighter than usual, even for that time - and at the majority of junctions where there was an opportunity for a car to run a red, they did so.