Speed vans on dark dual carriageway

restartagain

Does anyone else think it's dangerous to have these vans on the dual carriageway this time of the year when it's so dark. Motorists spot them at the last minute & then proceed to brake & continue their journey to the exit of the carriageway at 40 mph. There will be a serious pile up before long if the vans continue in this location

punisher5112

restartagain wrote: »

Does anyone else think it's dangerous to have these vans on the dual carriageway this time of the year when it's so dark. Motorists spot them at the last minute & then proceed to brake & continue their journey to the exit of the carriageway at 40 mph. There will be a serious pile up before long if the vans continue in this location

Just keep your distance, even the ones at 100km/h panic ..

restartagain

But that's my point, drivers panic even those driving at 80mph & even if you keep your distance on a wet, dark road it's hard to brake in time

biko

Moved out from old thread

Smee_Again

restartagain wrote: »

But that's my point, drivers panic even those driving at 80mph & even if you keep your distance on a wet, dark road it's hard to brake in time

Probably shouldn't be driving at 80mph on a dark and wet road.

Uncle Pierre

Smee_Again wrote: »

Probably shouldn't be driving at 80mph on a dark and wet road.

Not if it's a single lane rural road. Different story if it's a high standard national route or a motorway.

Smee_Again

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

Not if it's a single lane rural road. Different story if it's a high standard national route or a motorway.

80mph?

Uncle Pierre

Smee_Again wrote: »

80mph?

Sorry! Didn't spot how it said 80 mph instead of 80 km/h.

bazz26

So remove speed vans that cause speeding motorists to suddenly brake when they spot them? Sounds like another Irish solution to an Irish problems alright.

kirving

Drivers tend to brake when they see anything unexpected on the side of the road. An unlit van on the side of the road that quickly comes into view when your lights hit it does cause visceral reaction, even if you're below the limit.

The actual solution to the problem would be to install average speed cameras - but 100% compliance wouldn't allow a lucrative contract be awarded to your mates.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333766/amp/Speed-camera-tycoon-Xavier-McAuliffe-caught-speeding-twice-week.html

Isambard

i think fixed cameras that may or may not be operational , as in the UK, would be better and surely cheaper.

redcup342

restartagain wrote: »

Does anyone else think it's dangerous to have these vans on the dual carriageway this time of the year when it's so dark. Motorists spot them at the last minute & then proceed to brake & continue their journey to the exit of the carriageway at 40 mph. There will be a serious pile up before long if the vans continue in this location

Whenever I visit Ireland I wonder how the hell you miss those things, big white van with luminous stickers all over it saying SLOW DOWN

Meanwhile on the continent they disguise speed cameras as wheelie bins, cover them with leaves, make them look like trailer tents.

I'd take your option any day :pac:

mickdw

redcup342 wrote: »

Whenever I visit Ireland I wonder how the hell you miss those things, big white van with luminous stickers all over it saying SLOW DOWN

Meanwhile on the continent they disguise speed cameras as wheelie bins, cover them with leaves, make them look like trailer tents.

I'd take your option any day :pac:

We still have the gardai for doing that type of speed check - motorbike cop hiding behind bus shelter with speed gun. That type of thing.

Eggs For Dinner

mickdw wrote: »

We still have the gardai for doing that type of speed check - motorbike cop hiding behind bus shelter with speed gun. That type of thing.

Good to hear

un5byh7sqpd2x0

redcup342 wrote: »

Whenever I visit Ireland I wonder how the hell you miss those things, big white van with luminous stickers all over it saying SLOW DOWN

Meanwhile on the continent they disguise speed cameras as wheelie bins, cover them with leaves, make them look like trailer tents.

I'd take your option any day :pac:

Those luminous stickers are not reflective.

On a similar note, I passed a dark green mini bus type vehicle last night parked up on the N24. Camera on a tripod at the back, and PC Plod sitting in the passenger seat in the front. Never saw such a trap before.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

where on the n24 was this setup ?

redcup342

mickdw wrote: »

We still have the gardai for doing that type of speed check - motorbike cop hiding behind bus shelter with speed gun. That type of thing.

Common in 30 zones (Housing Estates Netherlands) spot the Speed Cam



Or the ol park the van out of sight around the corner and do a bit of Camouflage.



The whole country is littered with these things;


You guys have it easy, flat fine for speeding as well, it's almost impossible to drive in NL without getting a few hundred quid a year in fines (taxes)

anplaya27

Quote:Redcup 342: You guys have it easy, flat fine for speeding as well, it's almost impossible to drive in NL without getting a few hundred quid a year in fines (taxes)[/QUOTE]

Not only a fine, a few penalty points too. Get more than 12 you're off the road. I dont suppose ye have them in the Netherlands. Must be handy just getting a fine in the Netherlands so.

SmartinMartin

Vincenzo Faithful Harpoon wrote: »

Those luminous stickers are not reflective.

On a similar note, I passed a dark green mini bus type vehicle last night parked up on the N24. Camera on a tripod at the back, and PC Plod sitting in the passenger seat in the front. Never saw such a trap before.

Were you in the UK?

Truckermal

SmartinMartin wrote: »

Were you in the UK?

On the N24? Pretty sure that's in Ireland.

Rather be in Spain where they have traffic helicopters that zoom in and record you inside the car then issue tickets for speeding, on the phone, taking hands off the wheel and whatever other offence is visible?

Ireland, where they use white vans with markings on the side and advertise the locations in advance parked in a straight section of a dual carraige = dodgy, unfair, money making and now unsafe.

Meanwhile the rest of the world records inside the car, disguises cameras, performs checkpoints on roundabouts and at the end of tunnels and doesn't use reflective markings or warn people online in advance = the right and fair way

SmartinMartin

Truckermal wrote: »

On the N24? Pretty sure that's in Ireland.

So what's the pc plod?

By the way, I think we have just about the easiest camera system to spot in the world.

kirving

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

straight section of a dual carraige = dodgy, unfair, money making and now unsafe.

Why position a camera on an otherwise safe section of straight dual carriageway, where wandering 10km/h over the limit is not dangerous? Hard to rationalise that one and get the general public behind their implementation.

SmartinMartin wrote: »

By the way, I think we have just about the easiest camera system to spot in the world.

Which in itself is a problem IMO. Drivers almost universally, instinctively brake when they see a van, just in case the limit has recently changed or they momentarily went over the limit.

The inbound N4 / M50 camera location was removed due to the negative reactions it caused among drivers. Far more important, and safer to be focused on maintaining a gap and match your speed to surrounding traffic that rigidly stick below the limit.

https://www.echo.ie/lucan/article/dreaded-speedtrap-on-n4-is-set-to-be-removed

Darc19

restartagain wrote: »

Does anyone else think it's dangerous to have these vans on the dual carriageway this time of the year when it's so dark. Motorists spot them at the last minute & then proceed to brake & continue their journey to the exit of the carriageway at 40 mph. There will be a serious pile up before long if the vans continue in this location

Can you show even ONE "pile up" or even a simple crash to back up your tabloid catastrophe syndrome post?

Ffs, "serious pile up"

Kevin Irving

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Why position a camera on an otherwise safe section of straight dual carriageway, where wandering 10km/h over the limit is not dangerous? Hard to rationalise that one and get the general public behind their implementation.[/url]

Allow me to educate, as per the website of an Garda siochana which has downloadable maps and statistics, all vans are positioned in areas where fatal collisions have occurred in the last few years. Thus, there is a constant movement of vans in response to the latest statistics.

What may I ask, is your alternative? Single Lane back roads on a bend, at night in the rain?

Uncle Pierre

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Allow me to educate, as per the website of an Garda siochana which has downloadable maps and statistics, all vans are positioned in areas where fatal collisions have occurred in the last few years. Thus, there is a constant movement of vans in response to the latest statistics.

That's what the website says all right.

But on the other hand, there are four regular speed van sites within 10 to 12 miles of where I live myself in Co. Wexford. Two of them are along what used to be a stretch of the N11 before the opening of the Gorey bypass about 10 years ago, and the other two are on what was the N11 before the Enniscorthy bypass opened last year. There hasn't been a fatal collision at any of them in the past ten years.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

kirving

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

What may I ask, is your alternative? Single Lane back roads on a bend, at night in the rain?

I've already suggested it (hidden or average speed cameras), but you've gone to the extreme there.

In my experience, the vans don't really slow traffic, but do tend to invoke bad reactions. People drive as normal and slam on the brakes on a dual carriageway when they see a camera. That's human behaviour above all else, it's not stupidity per se.

There is also no need for an operator to be in the van, it's a complete waste of money (nevermind the terrible working conditions).

Smee_Again

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Allow me to educate, as per the website of an Garda siochana which has downloadable maps and statistics, all vans are positioned in areas where fatal collisions have occurred in the last few years. Thus, there is a constant movement of vans in response to the latest statistics.

What may I ask, is your alternative? Single Lane back roads on a bend, at night in the rain?

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

That's what the website says all right.

But on the other hand, there are four regular speed van sites within 10 to 12 miles of where I live myself in Co. Wexford. Two of them are along what used to be a stretch of the N11 before the opening of the Gorey bypass about 10 years ago, and the other two are on what was the N11 before the Enniscorthy bypass opened last year. There hasn't been a fatal collision at any of them in the past ten years.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

It also includes serious collisions where speed was a factor.

Uncle Pierre

Smee_Again wrote: »

It also includes serious collisions where speed was a factor.

Well, none of the four I'm referring to are in particularly bad spots for speed-related crashes either. On the other hand, two of them are in locations where the cameras are trained on what's the last small stretch of a 60 km/h zone before you enter an 80, so that they can catch somebody who speeds up to a whopping 70 or 75 km/h just a little too soon.

For anybody familiar with the roads I'm talking about, the first one I'm thinking of is as you go through Clough on the way towards Gorey. There's a sneaky spot on the bend where they look back to what's still just inside the 60 zone, even after you've passed through the village. Basically, it's to catch people doing 70 km/h along here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6436163,-6.3413434,3a,75y,21.45h,80.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s07U3OxEWeDJxlX5PPeGznQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The other is as you leave Gorey, heading towards Clough. Along here is still inside the 60 km/h zone, and the speed van sets up near the speed limit signs ahead, again to catch anybody doing a dizzying 70 km/h here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6708756,-6.305808,3a,75y,230.5h,76.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssyj0TqtCptuXV-DECCseDw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

However, I can think of two other locations I'm very familiar with too, where there are regular speed-related crashes (including fatal ones), but where I've never seen a speed van. These are Ballycarney Cross on the Bunclody to Enniscorthy road, and Kyle Cross between Oylegate and Wexford:

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.5826262,-6.5784291,3a,75y,180.85h,77.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdLHldyI1X7BAZw0-txF8NQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3842747,-6.5181264,3a,75y,193.99h,78.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stbqW6v3buyNJT0NkfRPjbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Please forgive the long post and all the links. But if you look at those locations and consider the ones that regularly have speed vans, and those that don't (even though they should have), you'll see why it's easy to be sceptical about claims that sites are chosen on the grounds of history of speed-related collisions, and how it can look like they're sometimes about maximising revenue instead.

9935452

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

Well, none of the four I'm referring to are in particularly bad spots for speed-related crashes either. On the other hand, two of them are in locations where the cameras are trained on what's the last small stretch of a 60 km/h zone before you enter an 80, so that they can catch somebody who speeds up to a whopping 70 or 75 km/h just a little too soon.

For anybody familiar with the roads I'm talking about, the first one I'm thinking of is as you go through Clough on the way towards Gorey. There's a sneaky spot on the bend where they look back to what's still just inside the 60 zone, even after you've passed through the village. Basically, it's to catch people doing 70 km/h along here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6436163,-6.3413434,3a,75y,21.45h,80.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s07U3OxEWeDJxlX5PPeGznQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The other is as you leave Gorey, heading towards Clough. Along here is still inside the 60 km/h zone, and the speed van sets up near the speed limit signs ahead, again to catch anybody doing a dizzying 70 km/h here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6708756,-6.305808,3a,75y,230.5h,76.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssyj0TqtCptuXV-DECCseDw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

However, I can think of two other locations I'm very familiar with too, where there are regular speed-related crashes (including fatal ones), but where I've never seen a speed van. These are Ballycarney Cross on the Bunclody to Enniscorthy road, and Kyle Cross between Oylegate and Wexford:

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.5826262,-6.5784291,3a,75y,180.85h,77.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdLHldyI1X7BAZw0-txF8NQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3842747,-6.5181264,3a,75y,193.99h,78.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stbqW6v3buyNJT0NkfRPjbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Please forgive the long post and all the links. But if you look at those locations and consider the ones that regularly have speed vans, and those that don't (even though they should have), you'll see why it's easy to be sceptical about claims that sites are chosen on the grounds of history of speed-related collisions, and how it can look like they're sometimes about maximising revenue instead.

There is a spot at home where there was fatal accidents 15 years ago. And a few seeious crashes.
It was a 2 lane main road with a good few twists and bends in it and a cross roads.
At the time if speed vans existed there would have been nowhere for them to park safely.
7 or 8 years ago the road was straightened and widened.
The old section of the road still exists but it now services a few houses and farms.
The speed van now parks up regularily on the side of the new road where there hasnt been a serious accident in over 10 years.

Uncle Pierre

^^^

Sounds like a situation where they can just about claim that the speed van is at a site where there's been a history of speed-related crashes. So long as they don't say how far back in history they have to go!

Tilikum17

Speed van on my way do work most mornings - a 50km dual carriageway.
He’s there’s before 7 in the morning most mornings.

I love how facts and stats from the internet are ignored as while anacdotal personal opinion is entered as fact.

the stats are there, download them and read them.

breezy1985

Kevin Irving wrote: »

I've already suggested it (hidden or average speed cameras), but you've gone to the extreme there.

In my experience, the vans don't really slow traffic, but do tend to invoke bad reactions. People drive as normal and slam on the brakes on a dual carriageway when they see a camera. That's human behaviour above all else, it's not stupidity per se.

There is also no need for an operator to be in the van, it's a complete waste of money (nevermind the terrible working conditions).

Why are you slamming on the break unless you are speeding?

Wildly Boaring

Actually thought this thread was a wind up and would get no traction.

Yes there are speed vans at night too.

Don't speed.
Don't tailgate.

You'll be golden.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

Why can't we just have average cameras instead?

It'll eventually lead to almost 100% compliance.

There'll be no fish in the barrel argument because you'll know they'll be there always.

The state won't be losing money to expensive gatso contractors (the vans cost more than they bring in).

breezy1985

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

Why can't we just have average cameras instead?

It'll eventually lead to almost 100% compliance.

There'll be no fish in the barrel argument because you'll know they'll be there always.

The state won't be losing money to expensive gatso contractors (the vans cost more than they bring in).

Could do with a few to catch "magic parking light" users blocking up roads too

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

breezy1985 wrote: »

Could do with a few to catch "magic parking light" users blocking up roads too

? What?

You mean people driving with just parking lights or DRL?

Does my nut in.

Uncle Pierre

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I love how facts and stats from the internet are ignored as while anacdotal personal opinion is entered as fact.

the stats are there, download them and read them.

If that's a retort to the examples I've given - well, go ahead then.

See if you can download and read stats about any history or series of speed-related crashes at the two locations near Gorey that I've highlighted, for instance. The places where speed cameras are set up to catch people who speed up to 70 km/h just a little too soon, after already passing through 90% or more of a 60 zone.

Now look at stats or even press reports for crashes at Kyle Cross and Ballycarney crossroads - the places where you rarely if ever see a speed camera at all, but where they should be stationed far more often.

See how you get on, and come back to us then.

Uncle Pierre

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

If that's a retort to the examples I've given - well, go ahead then.

See if you can download and read stats about any history or series of speed-related crashes at the two locations near Gorey that I've highlighted, for instance. The places where speed cameras are set up to catch people who speed up to 70 km/h just a little too soon, after already passing through 90% or more of a 60 zone.

Now look at stats or even press reports for crashes at Kyle Cross and Ballycarney crossroads - the places where you rarely if ever see a speed camera at all, but where they should be stationed far more often.

See how you get on, and come back to us then.

theres hundreds, if not thousands of crashes not reported in the papers. Journalists dont leave the office anymore. They barely go to the courts even.

The stats are there, the map of the areas they operate are there and theres safety issues at play. Its all there, DONT SPEED simples

Heres the link to the wexford stats, Kyles cross is on the N11, numerous collisions and its a straight road. No reason for speeding and no reason for not seeing the van which is there in rotation as any other area. Just because YOU dont see it doesnt mean its not there. I have never seen a great white shark

https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/safety-cameras/wexford-feb-2020.pdf

Uncle Pierre

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

theres hundreds, if not thousands of crashes not reported in the papers. Journalists dont leave the office anymore. They barely go to the courts even.

The stats are there, the map of the areas they operate are there and theres safety issues at play. Its all there, DONT SPEED simples

Heres the link to the wexford stats, Kyles cross is on the N11, numerous collisions and its a straight road. No reason for speeding and no reason for not seeing the van which is there in rotation as any other area. Just because YOU dont see it doesnt mean its not there. I have never seen a great white shark

https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/safety-cameras/wexford-feb-2020.pdf

First off, I agree with your message of "DON'T SPEED - simples". Nowhere here or anywhere else have I condoned excessive speed, and I don't speed myself.

It's been about eight years since I picked up a fine and points myself, and that was for doing 70 km/h in the 60 zone over Ferrycarrig Bridge (also near Wexford) late at night, with no other traffic around. Only other time I ever got points was a few years before that, for a doing around 60 passing by Wexford Racecourse, also at night with little or no other traffic around, when I mistakenly thought I'd already exited the 50 zone there and was in the 60 instead.

All I'm saying here is that when you see how often a van is located at some "easy pickings" locations (like those 60 km/h spots near Gorey), compared to how rarely at actual danger zones (like Kyle Cross), it's easy to see how some could be sceptical at the claim that they're set up to tackle actual dangerous speeding, and believe that they're often just set up instead for maximising revenue.

But let's continue to take Kyle Cross as an example. As you rightly point out, it's on the N11, and it's even on a stretch of road that's marked as a Safety Camera Zone on the map at https://www.garda.ie/gosafe.html

However, that stretch of road that's marked as a Safety Camera Zone is about three to four miles long. It's a stretch I've driven literally thousands of times myself, as I've commuted to Wexford town for more than 20 years, and have regularly headed there for shopping, matches, nights out, etc., as well.

There's regularly a speed van parked on the hard shoulder about a mile on the Wexford side of the cross, where it can catch vehicles coming too fast over the brow of a small hill as they head out of town. There's sometimes a van about a mile on the other side of the cross too. But I honestly don't think I've ever seen a van parked in a place where its camera could be trained on the junction itself. And I honestly don't believe that I could always have missed it, considering how often I see them in the other two places nearby.

Anyway, I'm not the enemy here, so if you want to go on a "just don't speed" crusade, you'll have to pick on somebody else. I'd actually like to see more speed cameras in the real danger zones, instead of the "easy pickings" places.

By the way, for some strange reason, the two locations I've been talking about near Gorey aren't marked on the map at https://www.garda.ie/gosafe.html, even though they're the places I see speed vans most often of all. So no stats for crashes there are readily available. But whatever the numbers are, I'm guessing they're negligible compared to the two fatal and nine overall at Kyle Cross, as stated in the stats that you linked to yourself.

So when all is said and done, would you not actually agree with me here - that it would be better to have cameras more regularly at a 100 km/h stretch in a genuinely hazardous location like Kyle Cross, than in a couple of relatively safe "60, just before it becomes 80" places on a road out of Gorey?

It would be unwise to have a speed check on a junction. Little point in sending the message of safety is you are causing crashes.

One mile either side is doing the job though. To use my shark again, if there an attack one mile to either side of the beach where I swim, Im not swimming there anymore

breezy1985

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It would be unwise to have a speed check on a junction. Little point in sending the message of safety is you are causing crashes.

One mile either side is doing the job though. To use my shark again, if there an attack one mile to either side of the beach where I swim, Im not swimming there anymore

Why are these vans causing crashes? Sounds like most drivers on irish roads should have their licenses revoked if this thread is anything to go by

Damien360

breezy1985 wrote: »

Why are these vans causing crashes? Sounds like most drivers on irish roads should have their licenses revoked if this thread is anything to go by

It just takes one idiot to cause a crash. I have passed a speed van in an 80 zone (not far from tullamore at usual spot) doing no more than 60 and the car in front of me dropped anchor and came down to 30 passing the van. He did that all within 30m of the van. I didn’t hit him but he caused chaos behind me for a long way back. One idiot !

Uncle Pierre

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It would be unwise to have a speed check on a junction. Little point in sending the message of safety is you are causing crashes.

One mile either side is doing the job though. To use my shark again, if there an attack one mile to either side of the beach where I swim, Im not swimming there anymore

Hmmmm. "Unwise" to have a speed check at a known and widely-recognised danger spot, despite how the stated reason for choosing locations for speed checks is that they're places with a history of speed-related collisions?

You're now arguing against the whole reason for speed checks in the first place, while I'm consistent in my call for greater enforcement where it's needed most. How does that sit with you?

And to stay with your shark analogy...how about if you knew that the shark is ONLY ever one mile either side from that swimming spot, but never at that spot itself? Surely any logic would suggest that spot is therefore the safest place to swim?

Finally, I notice that you've avoided directly answering the question that I ended my last post with. So the question remains.

Darc19

I think that there should be lane detection vans on all 3 lane motorways and any vehicle hogging the middle lane when lane one is obviously clear are fined €200

It would have a fund of millions within a couple of weeks

breezy1985

Damien360 wrote: »

It just takes one idiot to cause a crash. I have passed a speed van in an 80 zone (not far from tullamore at usual spot) doing no more than 60 and the car in front of me dropped anchor and came down to 30 passing the van. He did that all within 30m of the van. I didn’t hit him but he caused chaos behind me for a long way back. One idiot !

The speed camera didn't cause the crash. An idiot caused the crash it's the same as the falsehood that is the "dangerous road"

Uncle Pierre

Darc19 wrote: »

I think that there should be lane detection vans on all 3 lane motorways and any vehicle hogging the middle lane when lane one is obviously clear are fined €200

It would have a fund of millions within a couple of weeks

Well, there's some merit in your suggestion so long as it's understood that somebody is not "hogging" the lane if they're proceeding at the limit or just over it (i.e. within 5 to 10 km/h of it), even if lane one is empty.

The only ones who'd consider somebody else to be "hogging" the road if they're doing 105 km/h in the middle lane of a 100 zone, or 125 km/h in the middle lane of a 120 zone, are those who want to be able to bomb along well in excess of the speed limit. And they're the ones that the speed cameras are out to get in the first place.

Darc19

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

Well, there's some merit in your suggestion so long as it's understood that somebody is not "hogging" the lane if they're proceeding at the limit or just over it (i.e. within 5 to 10 km/h of it), even if lane one is empty.

The only ones who'd consider somebody else to be "hogging" the road if they're doing 105 km/h in the middle lane of a 100 zone, or 125 km/h in the middle lane of a 120 zone, are those who want to be able to bomb along well in excess of the speed limit. And they're the ones that the speed cameras are out to get in the first place.

Try driving the M7, a certain cohort drive slower than artics in the middle lane. - less than 85kmh.


Usually Dacia Duster drivers

Uncle Pierre

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

Hmmmm. "Unwise" to have a speed check at a known and widely-recognised danger spot, despite how the stated reason for choosing locations for speed checks is that they're places with a history of speed-related collisions?

You're now arguing against the whole reason for speed checks in the first place, while I'm consistent in my call for greater enforcement where it's needed most. How does that sit with you?

And to stay with your shark analogy...how about if you knew that the shark is ONLY ever one mile either side from that swimming spot, but never at that spot itself? Surely any logic would suggest that spot is therefore the safest place to swim?

Finally, I notice that you've avoided directly answering the question that I ended my last post with. So the question remains.

Your stand might be consistent but that's mostly because it's not based on informed knowledge, it's based on opinion.

Speed check one mile either side of a junction will reduce speeding at that junction. It takes time to increase speed and people are Jess likely to speed in the vicinity of checks.

And yes, of course you don't put a speed van on a junction or a bend, it's dangerous. That shouldn't need to be explained to you, it should be obvious. To don't make things safer by adding an additional danger.

breezy1985

breezy1985 wrote: »

The speed camera didn't cause the crash. An idiot caused the crash it's the same as the falsehood that is the "dangerous road"

Placing a van on a bend or a junction is not safe for the controller of the van or other road users. It's a simple safety assessment to do. You don't do checkpoints in the rain for the same reason unless vital. Yes additional steps by driver's would prevent a crash but you can't simple rely on that.