What should I expect when the Gardaí knock on my door? Careless driving summons.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

I was driving on an 80 km/h stretch of road which changes from 60-80-60.

I maintained a constant 50 on all stretches due to hills, blind spots and there's often cyclists on it. Its a limit not a target. There was no cyclists at the time but I like to be careful.

A male driver and his female passenger came up behind me. She started shaking her head and he was jumping like he was in a rave. I could see in the rear view mirror. She started filming my car.

We ended up side-by-side at a T-junction.
He beckoned me to put down my window. He said he'll be reporting me for careless driving (holding up traffic) and driving so slow as to be causing an obstruction.

I'm afraid they might embellish the story and exaggerate that I was doing other things that I wasn't off camera.

I'm expecting a call out or summons soon.

PCeeeee

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

I was driving on an 80 km/h stretch of road which changes from 60-80-60.

I maintained a constant 50 on all stretches due to hills, blind spots and there's often cyclists on it. Its a limit not a target. There was no cyclists at the time but I like to be careful.

A male driver and his female passenger came up behind me. She started shaking her head and he was jumping like he was in a rave. I could see in the rear view mirror. She started filming my car.

We ended up side-by-side at a T-junction.
He beckoned me to put down my window. He said he'll be reporting me for careless driving (holding up traffic) and driving so slow as to be causing an obstruction.

I'm afraid they might embellish the story and exaggerate that I was doing other things that I wasn't off camera.

I'm expecting a call out or summons soon.

The devil you say

glomar

doubt they will do it .. saying that you driving a bit on the slow side

PsychoPete

If it was me I wouldnt worry about it

Cork981

Honestly I wouldn’t worry about it. The Guards have much bigger issues to deal with. It’s your word against theirs.

You won’t get a summons or a knock on the door for driving to slow.

You could report them for aggressive and threatening behaviour.

Irishphotodesk

I wouldn't worry about it, IF a Garda calls just tell them you don't want to say anything without a solicitor present.

To be honest it sounds like you were ahead of some seriously ignorant drivers who have a bee in their bonnet, I believe you were correct to drive at an appropriate speed to the conditions - just because there is a limit doesn't mean we should drive at that speed, we drive at the speed which is appropriate to the conditions and stay under the road LIMIT.

kirving

From the cycling forum today....

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

No video. Apologies if screen shots are not permitted.
My upload speed is atrocious because I am hotsotting my phone.

This man beeped me and tailgated.

He then punishment passed me and the woman in the passenger seat recored me and made a finger gesture. Worth reporting?

So you've been tailgated and recorded by the passenger in a car behind, both while you were cycling, and also in another incident while driving?

False Prophet

How long were they behind you?
Be odd that they got irate for say being behind you for 5 mins?

If more then 5 mins, had you any opportunity to pull in and let them overtake you?

Jimmy Garlic

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about it, IF a Garda calls just tell them you don't want to say anything without a solicitor present.

To be honest it sounds like you were ahead of some seriously ignorant drivers who have a bee in their bonnet, I believe you were correct to drive at an appropriate speed to the conditions - just because there is a limit doesn't mean we should drive at that speed, we drive at the speed which is appropriate to the conditions and stay under the road LIMIT.

Within reason. The op creeping along at well under the limit wasn’t reasonable, he was making a nuisance of himself, some people with nowhere to go think nobody else has anywhere to go either. Btw you will fail your driving test for failing to make progress.

Mjolnir

Ah lads give over 30 under is dangerous, especially on country roads.

53. - (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place at a speed or in a manner which, having regard to the circumstances of the case (including the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then is or may reasonably be expected to be therein) is dangerous to the public.

52. - (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

Op drive at an appropriate speed 50km/h in an 80km/h zone in fine conditions is certainly not appropriate and may lead to an accident. 30 under is most certainly not considerate of other road users.

In regards a knock, doubtful anything will come of it. Even if they knock chances are they'll tell ya to cop on and drive to the conditions.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

Kevin Irving wrote: »

From the cycling forum today....
So you've been tailgated and recorded by the passenger in a car behind, both while you were cycling, and also in another incident while driving?

Yes, I was tailgated and dangerously overtaken on the same stretch as a cyclist which is specifically why I reduced my speed as a motorist.

Mjolnir

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

Yes, I was tailgated and dangerously overtaken on the same stretch as a cyclist which is specifically why I reduced my speed as a motorist.

Whilst it is a speed limit and not a target, if you really aren’t comfortable driving on faster roads, either avoid them, or pull in when safe to do so and allow other vehicles past

Quote frome a PSNI officer but applicable here.
You reduced your speed to 62.5%? Stick to 60km/h roads op you're only causing hazard and inciting people to take unnecessary risks.
Just a heads up on blind bends having to break hard mid bend is incredibly dangerous to motorcycles.

RobAMerc

you were driving like an idiot and making a nuisance of yourself on the road - while the manor of their actions were not appropriate, you shouldn't be on the road if you cannot keep up with the traffic and they were advising you of such.
You wont hear from the guards - but in future, keep a reasonable pace, pull in or get lessons

Mjolnir

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about it, IF a Garda calls just tell them you don't want to say anything without a solicitor present.

To be honest it sounds like you were ahead of some seriously ignorant drivers who have a bee in their bonnet, I believe you were correct to drive at an appropriate speed to the conditions - just because there is a limit doesn't mean we should drive at that speed, we drive at the speed which is appropriate to the conditions and stay under the road LIMIT.

Not to be pedantic but no, you are permitted to travel at the speed indicated on the sign but not above it.

You're not required to say anything when being charged with an offence, nor are they required to allow you access to a solicitor until you are in custody.

As most of us have stated no he really wasn't correct.
Of course the driver behind him was irate 30 under is dangerous, ridiculous and yes contrary to what you believe amounts to an offence.

50 on a 60 grand I've no problem with that bit annoying at times but what ever. 50 in an 80? Pull in, or learn to drive appropriately.
Conditions haven't been bad enough of late to warrant that.

AndrewJRenko

Mjolnir wrote: »

Op drive at an appropriate speed 50km/h in an 80km/h zone in fine conditions is certainly not appropriate and may lead to an accident. 30 under is most certainly not considerate of other road users.
.

Can you please expand on how driving like this can lead to collisions?

AndrewJRenko

Mjolnir wrote: »

Just a heads up on blind bends having to break hard mid bend is incredibly dangerous to motorcycles.

Just a heads up - driving or riding blindly around blind bends in incredibly dangerous. There could be anything around any bend. That's why you are required by law to drive in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

RobAMerc

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just a heads up - driving or riding blindly around blind bends in incredibly dangerous. There could be anything around any bend. That's why you are required by law to drive in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

Can you show where the law states this ? Its virtually impossible to see round bends you know !

Mjolnir

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Can you please expand on how driving like this can lead to collisions?

1)Driver a is approaching a blind bend travelling at 80km/h on an 80km/h Road and suddenly approach op driving 50km/h further through the bend.
Driver a now needs to emergency brake depending on the distance driver a may not have enough time / space to do so.

2) ops failure to drive at an adequate speed entices a driver to over take in a less than ideal condition.( while not the root cause, would be a factor)

3) replace driver a with a motorcyclist, most of which don't have abs and suddenly becomes a passenger in the ops back seat.

Also I said accident not collision, accident doesn't nesecarily imply a collision has occurred.

Lurching

If this is all you have to worried about at the moment, then things must be ok.

Worry about things when they happen.

Mjolnir

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just a heads up - driving or riding blindly around blind bends in incredibly dangerous. There could be anything around any bend. That's why you are required by law to drive in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

Please quote to me that specific piece of legislation we'll all wait.

Mjolnir

Lurching wrote: »

If this is all you have to worried about at the moment, then things must be ok.

Worry about things when they happen.

if you're referring to me, as a motorcyclist I have to constantly worry about it when I jump on my bike.

If you're referring to op I'd agree as the likelihood that the passenger recorded anything which would indicate either cars speed or road speed limit would be incredibly minuscule.

Lurching

Mjolnir wrote: »

if you're referring to me, as a motorcyclist I have to constantly worry about it when I jump on my bike.

If you're referring to op I'd agree as the likelihood that the passenger recorded anything which would indicate either cars speed or road speed limit would be incredibly minuscule.

Sorry, yes, referring to OP.

Mjolnir

Lurching wrote: »

Sorry, yes, referring to OP.

No worries just wanted to clarify.

I would agree though, multiple complaints they'll do something, one video that probably doesn't actually have evidence nah. Chances the driver actually went to the guards as well is tiny.

AndrewJRenko

Mjolnir wrote: »

Please quote to me that specific piece of legislation we'll all wait.

Section 7

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2017/si/244/made/en/print

Have you actually passed a driving test?

AndrewJRenko

RobAMerc wrote: »

Can you show where the law states this ? Its virtually impossible to see round bends you know !

Not when you slow down. It's quite easy to see round bends when you slow down.

AndrewJRenko

Mjolnir wrote: »

1)Driver a is approaching a blind bend travelling at 80km/h on an 80km/h Road and suddenly approach op driving 50km/h further through the bend.
Driver a now needs to emergency brake depending on the distance driver a may not have enough time / space to do so.

2) ops failure to drive at an adequate speed entices a driver to over take in a less than ideal condition.( while not the root cause, would be a factor)

3) replace driver a with a motorcyclist, most of which don't have abs and suddenly becomes a passenger in the ops back seat.

Also I said accident not collision, accident doesn't nesecarily imply a collision has occurred.

There are no accidents - just crashes or collisions.

In the scenarios to outline above, the driver behind is the problem. No one is responsible for the decision to overtake except the overtaking driver.

RobAMerc

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Not when you slow down. It's quite easy to see round bends when you slow down.

Do you get out and walk ?
You mention slow down twice in one point - so if I am doing 30kph and I slow down to 15 kph can I bend the rules of physics and see round a bend ?

I hate that phrase 'slow down' - its lazily used all over the place and over simplifies the issue. The problem with it is blanket slowing down is not the answer - someone already driving too slow who slows down is not being safer, in fact they are being more dangerous !

Mjolnir

Mjolnir wrote: »

Ah lads give over 30 under is dangerous, especially on country roads.

53. - (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place at a speed or in a manner which, having regard to the circumstances of the case (including the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then is or may reasonably be expected to be therein) is dangerous to the public.

52. - (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

Op drive at an appropriate speed 50km/h in an 80km/h zone in fine conditions is certainly not appropriate and may lead to an accident. 30 under is most certainly not considerate of other road users.

In regards a knock, doubtful anything will come of it. Even if they knock chances are they'll tell ya to cop on and drive to the conditions.

They courts hold a general policy based on previous cases that less than half the speed limit is needed. 50km in an 80km while annoying, wouldn't result in a court case. Like he said, it's a limit not a target.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There are no accidents - just crashes or collisions.

Of course they are accidents. An accident is unintentional. That's what the word means. That's just rubbish wording by someone who needed to justify their job.

RobAMerc

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There are no accidents - just crashes or collisions.

In the scenarios to outline above, the driver behind is the problem. No one is responsible for the decision to overtake except the overtaking driver.

Oh FFS - are you a new driver who just swallowed the rules of the road and every RSA ad ever published - there are accidents, dont be so naive.
Jesus h, we have been ruined in this country with people who believe every accident could have been avoided - utter nonsense

Irishphotodesk

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about it, IF a Garda calls just tell them you don't want to say anything without a solicitor present.

Less TV for you. When a Garda makes a lawful demand for you to nane the driver of your vehicle, you are committing an offence by refusing.

There's plenty of occasions where your refusal will result in you being charged / summoned. Breath sample, producing license, and so on.

Not too mention looking like a dick that doesn't know as much as he thinks he does

Mjolnir

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There are no accidents - just crashes or collisions.

In the scenarios to outline above, the driver behind is the problem. No one is responsible for the decision to overtake except the overtaking driver.

Actually the reason the word accident isn't used anymore is due to the implication or lack there of, of blame. A crash and collision are interchangeable and amount to the same meaning.

Never said op would be responsible for anyones actions, but would have had a part to play.

Yes I have passed a test thanks, whilst you read it correctly your interpretation of it in the given scenario is incorrect and you'd need to find an incredible stickler to be given a fpn for that one.

Here ya go definition of a blind bend.
blind bend - a curve or bend in the road that you cannot see around as you are driving.

Mjolnir

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

They courts hold a general policy based on previous cases that less than half the speed limit is needed. 50km in an 80km while annoying, wouldn't result in a court case. Like he said, it's a limit not a target.

Honestly too lazy to boot up the laptop and log in to Justis to search for case law, so I'll take your word on that, but each case is decided on its own merits and precedent only binding if from a higher court so unless brought through the hc or sc it won't be a absolutely binding. Have however seen incredibly interesting decision handed down by the sc one involving a blind man in his 70's.
If you ever want a good head scratcher and laugh try find a first year tort mock trial based on a road traffic collision.

Mellor

The OP being tailgated, and recorded by a female passenger n the front seat twice in a day is very unusual.

Mjolnir

I have to say thanks to everyone this has been great craic with not being able to sleep. Jesus we've gone off topic

Op chances are nothing will happen if they knock comply and seek legal advice if charged chances are beyond microscopic most will give a warning if stopping for being to slow. Seriously though please pic up the pace for the safety of others.

begbysback

Really, driving miss daisy and hairy Japanese b, something doesn’t add up here.

Irishphotodesk

Mjolnir wrote: »

Not to be pedantic but no, you are permitted to travel at the speed indicated on the sign but not above it.

Valid point, you are correct.

Mjolnir wrote: »

You're not required to say anything when being charged with an offence, nor are they required to allow you access to a solicitor until you are in custody.

I'm not sure I understand your point, anyone can seek legal advice at any point before being charged or in custody, gardai have zero influence on your ability to seek advice, and you are within your rights to refuse to say anything without legal advice.

Mjolnir wrote: »

As most of us have stated no he really wasn't correct.

Without being pedantic, you are claiming that random people on the internet can decide if the OP has been incorrect in his/her driving without knowledge of the road, if you have the time have a look at Google maps/street view for some of the roads between kinvara and finavarra in co Clare or surrounding areas , the road signage may say 80km but anyone travelling at that speed is asking for an accident, some of the roads around Ireland are incorrectly signposted, we don't know what stretch of road the OP was on or if it may be one which may not be suitable for an 80km limit but yet people are quick to judge.

Mjolnir wrote: »

50 on a 60 grand I've no problem with that bit annoying at times but what ever. 50 in an 80? Pull in, or learn to drive appropriately.
Conditions haven't been bad enough of late to warrant that.

Weather conditions may not have been that bad at your part of the country but most of the west has had plenty of bad weather, and as I mentioned above, some of the roads in this country of ours are incorrectly signposted... Mainly country back roads which would easily match the 60km 80km 60km zones ... The 80km stretches could be the bendy back roads between 1 street villages where the 60km limits would apply....unless the OP tells us what roads they were on we are equally both correct and incorrect in our opinions.

colm_mcm

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

I was driving on an 80 km/h stretch of road which changes from 60-80-60.

I maintained a constant 50 on all stretches due to hills, blind spots and there's often cyclists on it. Its a limit not a target. There was no cyclists at the time but I like to be careful.

A male driver and his female passenger came up behind me. She started shaking her head and he was jumping like he was in a rave. I could see in the rear view mirror. She started filming my car.

We ended up side-by-side at a T-junction.
He beckoned me to put down my window. He said he'll be reporting me for careless driving (holding up traffic) and driving so slow as to be causing an obstruction.

I'm afraid they might embellish the story and exaggerate that I was doing other things that I wasn't off camera.

I'm expecting a call out or summons soon.

I don’t believe you.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

The internet really is a bizarre place.

I tell you I was accosted for driving below the speed limit and you lambasted me for it.

I can guarantee you the same people would gallop on their high horse if I was caught driving at 82 km/h on an 80 km/h road.

Mjolnir

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Valid point, you are correct.


I'm not sure I understand your point, anyone can seek legal advice at any point before being charged or in custody, gardai have zero influence on your ability to seek advice, and you are within your rights to refuse to say anything without legal advice.


Without being pedantic, you are claiming that random people on the internet can decide if the OP has been incorrect in his/her driving without knowledge of the road, if you have the time have a look at Google maps/street view for some of the roads between kinvara and finavarra in co Clare or surrounding areas , the road signage may say 80km but anyone travelling at that speed is asking for an accident, some of the roads around Ireland are incorrectly signposted, we don't know what stretch of road the OP was on or if it may be one which may not be suitable for an 80km limit but yet people are quick to judge.


Weather conditions may not have been that bad at your part of the country but most of the west has had plenty of bad weather, and as I mentioned above, some of the roads in this country of ours are incorrectly signposted... Mainly country back roads which would easily match the 60km 80km 60km zones ... The 80km stretches could be the bendy back roads between 1 street villages where the 60km limits would apply....unless the OP tells us what roads they were on we are equally both correct and incorrect in our opinions.

I'll give ya the incorrectly sign posted one, I've been on some roads I'd be terrified to hit 80 because they are single lane pothole ridden with grass down the centre. I'll still do 60-65 as long as it permits. Country lanes up to farms and farm houses are another story.

There's one road I can't remember where exactly on the way to Enfield sign posted at 100 me and my mate laughing away at ourselves the roads in that bad of a shape the locals have stuck their own signs up with 300+km/h on them

Irishphotodesk

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Less TV for you. When a Garda makes a lawful demand for you to nane the driver of your vehicle, you are committing an offence by refusing.

Valid point but beyond giving the name of the driver - if the Garda asks for their version of events they risk admitting an offence by their decision to badly word their answer, this is based on my own experience of this and as such I would advise anyone to seek legal advice if they have a need to deal with a situation they may not fully understand the law.

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

There's plenty of occasions where your refusal will result in you being charged / summoned. Breath sample, producing license, and so on.

and there are many times that charge/summons will go nowhere because there isn't enough evidence. I'm all for co-operating with gardai but if there's a chance I will get the blame for something because of someone twisting my words I think it's better to seek advice from the masters ... Which in this case would be a well educated and well practiced Solicitor.

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Not too mention looking like a dick that doesn't know as much as he thinks he does

I would rather look like a dick than be convicted of a criminal offence when it's avoidable.

On a side note, why would you advise someone against seeking legal advice ?

Mjolnir

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

The internet really is a bizarre place.

I tell you I was accosted for driving below the speed limit and you lambasted me for it.

I can guarantee you the same people would gallop on their high horse if I was caught driving at 82 km/h on an 80 km/h road.

Bit bit of a difference in 2km over and 30 under, we've all looked down and caught ourselves being slightly over for whatever reason. Don't forget most speeds read over by a percentage so chances are you were under 50km/h. I actually pity people who get done for being 2 over.

Actually I seen you posted asking for how to find a court case, it may be unpublished so you'd need the number of the case or names. Even with access to justice, westlaw and lexus nexus it can be hard find a case without details.

begbysback

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

The internet really is a bizarre place.

I tell you I was accosted for driving below the speed limit and you lambasted me for it.

I can guarantee you the same people would gallop on their high horse if I was caught driving at 82 km/h on an 80 km/h road.

Absolutely bizarre, the only place in the world where “Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!” Would be deemed an acceptable username.

TheBoyConor

Mjolnir wrote: »

1)Driver a is approaching a blind bend travelling at 80km/h on an 80km/h Road and suddenly approach op driving 50km/h further through the bend.
Driver a now needs to emergency brake depending on the distance driver a may not have enough time / space to do so.

2) ops failure to drive at an adequate speed entices a driver to over take in a less than ideal condition.( while not the root cause, would be a factor)

3) replace driver a with a motorcyclist, most of which don't have abs and suddenly becomes a passenger in the ops back seat.

Also I said accident not collision, accident doesn't nesecarily imply a collision has occurred.

The bolded bit is the attitude that I have the problem with. Going at a blind bend at 80 because it is an 80km/h limit. Again, it is a limit, not a target.

What if there was a pedestrian, or a tractor, or other slow moving vehicle on the road around the bend? What if there was an accident there already?

You should drive at a speed that allows you to stop safely in the clear distance you can see ahead of you. That is the #1 rule of driving. If people could be relied upon to observe that rule, then we wouldn't even need speed limits.

Far too many speed hungry, inconsiderate assholes on the road, obsessed with accelerating to the speed limit and staying there nomatter what.

Op did nothing wrong, going a little slow is not an offence. What if OP was a tractor or other slower moving vehicle. the onus is on the driver behind to be observant and be able to slow down in time and be patient without throwing a temper tantrum like a toddler.

As for the notion of the Gardai sending a summons, rofl. Think about that and realise how preposterous it sounds.

" -Yes, Garda, I saw a motorist who was driving well within the speed limit!! Can you do something to teach them a lesson?
- What? OMG, thank you for reporting. We will go after them and put a stop to them once and for all!!!"

carq

I would love it if the Gardai cracked down on drivers like the OP.
i have seen so many cases of near accidents where people like OP hold up traffic and cause people to take stupid risks.

If you are not capable of driving at 80kmh then you should not be on the road plain and simple.
The only exception would be country lanes but any national road you should be driving near the limit or within-15% of it.

AndrewJRenko

RobAMerc wrote: »

Do you get out and walk ?
You mention slow down twice in one point - so if I am doing 30kph and I slow down to 15 kph can I bend the rules of physics and see round a bend ?

I hate that phrase 'slow down' - its lazily used all over the place and over simplifies the issue. The problem with it is blanket slowing down is not the answer - someone already driving too slow who slows down is not being safer, in fact they are being more dangerous !

No, I don't get out and walk. I slow down to whatever speed is necessary so I can see where I am going.

There is no problem with the laws of physics. We're not talking about 90 degree turns here. We're talking about bends. If you can't see through the bend, then you're going too fast.

It sounds like you don't like that phrase 'slow down' because you don't like slowing down. There could be anything around any bend - a crashed car or a bunch of scouts or a few cyclists or cattle or a couple of horses. Don't drive blindly around bends or in blinding sun or in heavy fog or very heavy rain. If you can't see where you're going, then slow down or stop if necessary.

AndrewJRenko

carq wrote: »

I would love it if the Gardai cracked down on drivers like the OP.
i have seen so many cases of near accidents where people like OP hold up traffic and cause people to take stupid risks.

If you are not capable of driving at 80kmh then you should not be on the road plain and simple.
The only exception would be country lanes but any national road you should be driving near the limit or within-15% of it.

No one is 'caused to take stupid risks'. If you take stupid risks, that's on you.

carq

TheBoyConor wrote: »

The bolded bit is the attitude that I have the problem with. Going at a blind bend at 80 because it is an 80km/h limit. Again, it is a limit, not a target.

What if there was a pedestrian, or a tractor, or other slow moving vehicle on the road around the bend? What if there was an accident there already?

You should drive at a speed that allows you to stop safely in the clear distance you can see ahead of you. That is the #1 rule of driving. If people could be relied upon to observe that rule, then we wouldn't even need speed limits.

Far too many speed hungry, inconsiderate assholes on the road, obsessed with accelerating to the speed limit and staying there nomatter what.

Op did nothing wrong, going a little slow is not an offence. What if OP was a tractor or other slower moving vehicle. the onus is on the driver behind to be observant and be able to slow down in time and be patient without throwing a temper tantrum like a toddler.

As for the notion of the Gardai sending a summons, rofl. Think about that and realise how preposterous it sounds.

" -Yes, Garda, I saw a motorist who was driving well within the speed limit!! Can you do something to teach them a lesson?
- What? OMG, thank you for reporting. We will go after them and put a stop to them once and for all!!!"

Tractors are not capable of driving near the speed limit, cars are.
If you did the driving test and drove around at 50khm everywhere you would fail.
Do you think its ok + safe for all users to drive at 75kmh on the motorway?
Still 62.5% of the speed limit like the OP was doing.

AndrewJRenko

RobAMerc wrote: »

Oh FFS - are you a new driver who just swallowed the rules of the road and every RSA ad ever published - there are accidents, dont be so naive.
Jesus h, we have been ruined in this country with people who believe every accident could have been avoided - utter nonsense

Please give me a couple of real life examples of unavoidable 'accidents' that resulted in death or serious injury

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/11/17/crash-not-accident-better-road-safety-reporting-could-save-lives-show-researchers

carq

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

No one is 'caused to take stupid risks'. If you take stupid risks, that's on you.

Agreed but which scenario will the majority of people take stupid risks:

1) stuck behind someone / line of traffic for 5 minutes driving at 50kmh on a perfectly good road
2) driving behind someone progressing at 80 kmh at or near the speed limit.

The fact is that overly slow drivers can contribute to accidents.

Mjolnir

TheBoyConor wrote: »

The bolded bit is the attitude that I have the problem with. Going at a blind bend at 80 because it is an 80km/h limit. Again, it is a limit, not a target.

What if there was a pedestrian, or a tractor, or other slow moving vehicle on the road around the bend? What if there was an accident there already?

You should drive at a speed that allows you to stop safely in the clear distance you can see ahead of you. That is the #1 rule of driving. If people could be relied upon to observe that rule, then we wouldn't even need speed limits.

Far too many speed hungry, inconsiderate assholes on the road, obsessed with accelerating to the speed limit and staying there nomatter what.

Op did nothing wrong, going a little slow is not an offence. What if OP was a tractor or other slower moving vehicle. the onus is on the driver behind to be observant and be able to slow down in time and be patient without throwing a temper tantrum like a toddler.

As for the notion of the Gardai sending a summons, rofl. Think about that and realise how preposterous it sounds.

" -Yes, Garda, I saw a motorist who was driving well within the speed limit!! Can you do something to teach them a lesson?
- What? OMG, thank you for reporting. We will go after them and put a stop to them once and for all!!!"

Please see the law on careless and dangerous driving as it applies to driving dangerously slowly to given conditions. Op also said he was recorded which amounts to more than hearsay.
You are perfectly entitled to drive 80 on an 80 road as long as safe to do so.

Pedestrians don't occupy that much road space, tractors have a set speed limit most now capable of over 50 from what I'm told(no interest in them or the capabilities).
That is a possibility but stopped and slow moving vechicle appear different.

While it is good practice to slow into blind bends we all know most drivers don't adhere to it. Hell a good proportion don't obey the speed limit or consecutive white lines.

There's a reason emergency breaking is an aspect of the driving test and holy christ is it a skill ya need more and more now a days

I personally live rural and trail break every corner in low gears on my bike in anticipation of something around a corner I know many that don't but they don't deserve to end up mashed.