30k speed limits for all urban areas on the way

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122113718#Comment_122113718

Strange how the largest category of road deaths are motorist vs motorist or single vehicle collisions. Who do you reckon is culpable in those cases?

You should get on a bike sometime, you'll be shocked by how many drivers have their phones on their laps, which is illegal. But leaving that aside, what % of drivers so you see that have their phone visible as they pass, whether to their ear speaking or in their hand for texting or held in front of them for hands-free chatting, because bluetooth pairing is just too much work.

What % of parked vehicles do you see to be parked legally? Not on a footpath or cycle lane or double-yellow or clearway?

What % of changes of traffic lights do you notice one or more drivers going through on red?

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122106701#Comment_122106701

I simply understand exactly what you're trying to do, which is to distract the conversation away from the core issue to play your "I'm smarter than you" game. Find someone else to play your games with. This is too serious for that kind of messing around.

Tenzor07

It's amazing when the usual suspect posts up things about cyclists such as "I know according to some "cyclists" or "pedal bikers" are a collective hive mind" get all offended when they feel them in their little car has been singled out..

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122113796#Comment_122113796

What does any of this have to do with the article you posted about the tragedy in Ennis? Did you establish that the driver was doing any of these things?

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114043#Comment_122114043

In fairness yes, it was probably all the fault of the one year old child, for not wearing hiviz or something.

SeanW

So no - you have zero evidence that the driver was culpable.

We now know that the accident occurred in a rural area outside Ennis, outside of permanent traveller accommodation.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2024/0508/1448041-fatal-ennis/

This looks like the place:

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8389301,-8.9549471,3a,90y,85.95h,87.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stoWN-4OXeatsO-7jS0HRLw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu

So we know the driver didn't cause the collision by running a light as this is in the countryside. Nor was parking likely an issue, and you have precisely zero evidence that the driver was on their phone or driving at a disproportionate speed for a rural road.

In other words, you have zero evidence against THIS driver, let alone "drivers" writ large.

loco_scolo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114327#Comment_122114327

The speed limit on that section of road is 80kph, despite it being a very short distance from Ennis town centre (just 1400m from the train station). It's also a narrow road with no footpaths, and with lots of houses, a halting site and a small business park along it.

This is exactly the reason speed limits need to be (and are being) reduced. A child of only 18mths has died. If the speed limit there was 60kph it's far more likely a car would have had time to stop, or slow down enough to avoid this horrible tragedy.

If you can't see that, I just don't know what to say...

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114387#Comment_122114387

Except that from the rte report on the incident it didn't happen on the road. The speed limit there has no relevance.

loco_scolo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114505#Comment_122114505

Yes, right you are. God help them, that's so tragic.

As a general point though, my point still stands regarding a narrow road, with no paths, lots of houses, very close to a town centre and yet the speed limit is 80kph.

It should be 60kph. There should also be paths, but it should still be 60kph.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122113804#Comment_122113804

If you see it that way, then so be it.

What I see is that you'll go to any lengths to avoid admitting that some of what you post is literally nonsense.

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114387#Comment_122114387

You could start by saying whether or not you agree that Andy was right to infer blame on the driver, despite the fact that he knew so little of the case.

As to the lack of footpaths, that's due to the location being in the countryside. In Ireland we generally don't built footpaths outside of towns, though why a halting site was built there is beyond me. As to why speed limits are being reduced, the data clearly indicate that incidents like these are freak accidents, as European countries collect data on deaths per billion vehicle-kilometres travelled and in Ireland's case it's in the low single digits. (3.4 as of the latest ETSC report)

https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/ETSC-17th-PIN-Annual-Report-DIGITAL-1.pdf

Widespread speed limit reductions - or any other widespread restrictions - because of a very small number of muppets is a textbook case of "hard cases make bad law." It also shows that Andy's claim of bad driving writ large against Irish motorists is certifiable horse ****.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122115828#Comment_122115828

What I see is an attempt to distract the conversation into an academic discussion on the definition on fluctuation, which comes on the back of an attempt to distract the conversation away from the dramatic increases in our death and injury rates by referring to them as 'fluctuations' in the first place.

You can play the 'smartest boy in the class' card all you like, while people are getting killed and injured with alarming regularity. Just don't expect me to play along.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122114327#Comment_122114327

As you well know before you asked the question, there is no information about what happened in this particular incident in the public domain. As you also well know, it's bigger than any one particular incident. It's an ongoing trend of very significant increases in death and injury rates, with people in cars being the largest category of those killed and injured. It's hard to find a way to blame pedestrians or cyclists for motorist vs motorist collisions.

You neatly avoided the questions about the number of drivers speeding, and the numbers using their phones - which has reached endemic levels. You're only kidding yourself if you don't see the connection between non compliance with traffic laws and road deaths and injuries.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122119898#Comment_122119898

I'm just going to make a few points before I leave things here.

Firstly, I suggest that if a person is going to refer to statistics to make a point, that person should at least understand the meaning of a word used to refer to those statistics.

Secondly, the fact that you continue to put the word fluctuations in inverted commas, and suggest it was inappropriate for the word to be used in the first place, strongly indicates that you still don't understand it. It seems you think it means inconsequential or irrelevant changes in statistical points. It doesn't.

Finally, if you're going to talk about distraction, you and others have long distracted this entire thread from its original intention, relating simply to the lowering of the default speed limit in built-up areas. You've broadened it into a discussion on road deaths and driver behaviour in general. You're even doing in the second part of the post I've quoted here.

Consensus even on this thread has moved away from any life-saving potential of dropping the limit from 50 km/h to 30 km/h. The most recent discussion on it focused instead on lower emissions and making places more pleasant.

But anyway, thanks for giving me a laugh with that post where you claimed you didn't refer to a fluctuation, before you immediately referred to the same fluctuation, and then referred to another one.

It was almost as funny as the time you claimed that a motorway is not a road. 😁

magicbastarder

anyone know if google will release data captured by their phones, on car movements? i suspect not.

but i suspect you'd be able to come up with a rough and ready guesstimate on the effect of lower limits, on overall traffic speeds, if the data is granular enough; i.e. you should be able to plot at what points cars are exceeding 30km/h and calculate the effect of holding them to 30km/h.

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122119898#Comment_122119898

You were very quick to infer blame not just on that driver but all drivers collectively.

And if your claim of widespread dangerous driving were accurate, how come Ireland remains near the bottom of global and European rankings for road fatalities, and how come there are still almost 300,000,000 vehicle-kilometres between any cause of fatalities?

Either your claims are bull ****e, or Irish drivers are just incredibly lucky writ large. And I don't believe in luck.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122120096#Comment_122120096

Have you worked out yet why Sean referred to the significant increase in deaths and injuries as 'fluctuations'?

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122120405#Comment_122120405

Where specifically did I "infer blame not just on that driver but all drivers collectively"?

CramCycle

I think in the majority of accidents, these people were members of the 3.25 million drivers who were not responsible for an accident or tragedy, until suddenly, one day, they were. For those who don't understand how stats work, the fundamental thing to take away from it is that if enough people go faster than is reasonable, a lot of them will never be in an accident, a good number will avoid an accident, a smaller number will have non fatal accidents, and a really small number will end up being involved in a fatality. If we keep going at the current rate, with no change in enforcement or public attitude, the rates of deaths will fluctuate every year but they are unlikely to decrease and will in fact increase as our population expands (over time). If enforcement is brought in properly, public attitude will slowly change but more importantly, the small number of fatalities will decrease, the number in any accident type will decrease, the number who just avoid an accident will by proxy reduce as well and the number who will never be in an accident will increase. It won't end fatalities, it won't stop accidents but it will reduce them.

This said, for me, this isn't the reason for 30km speed limits, it is one of the reasons. The others being lower noise, a push to public and alternative transport.

As for the bit about luck, in Ireland, that is actually what it is, luck is just statistics. Depite our reliance as a nation on cars rurally, we are still actually quite "quiet" on rural roadways. On a weekly basis, I see people coming round corners at speed who have crossed the line to get a better (what I would refer to as a racing line) line. If I had been doing the actual speed limit, rather than under it as its a bend, I would not have been able to stop in time. This is regular for me, and other drivers, but it is just stats, if we had more drivers in rural Ireland, the number that were actual collisions rather than near misses would be larger. As our population increases, this will shift one way unless other things are changed. The number of actual hits that are never reported either as people are so afraid of their premiums shooting up and paying out of pocket also skews the data somewhat as well.

Anyway, as a former Dublinite, I would be happy with the 30k speed limits, aside from during rush hour it won't make a difference to actual speed through town, outside of it, if it were enforced it would quieten the noise down and improve walking and cycling uptake in youths as parents trusted in the improved safety and let their kids out more.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122120825#Comment_122120825

Despite myself, I'm back to answer you one more time.

Firstly, I'm not arguing for or on behalf of Sean or any other poster here. But yes, I do know why he referred to the increase as a fluctuation. It's because that's precisely what it is.

Appears you STILL don't understand the word, so I'll explain it to you once and for all.

Fluctuations are changes in the level or number of something. The number of road deaths per year is in a state of constant fluctuation. Sometimes it goes down. Sometimes it goes up. But the key point is any increase or decrease in the number of road deaths is a fluctuation. Therefore, it was literally nonsense for you to claim you hadn't referred to a fluctuation when you referred to the increase (i.e. the upward fluctuation) we've seen so far this year.

And by the way, this is not about being smartest in class. It's simply about wishing others were smart enough to keep up. But they say you learn something new every day, so hopefully this is yours for today.

Edited to add - have just read the very good (and reasonable) post by @CramCycle above. And am heartened to see proper use of the word 'fluctuate' in the midst of it!