Go Metric: Go Safe and other oxymoronic statements

magpie

Does anyone here understand the corrolation between going metric and increased road safety? Apparently €2.5 million is being spent to ram this oxymoronic mantra down our throats, along with 'Check the signs: Check your speed'. Who is the advertising genius behind these?

Here's a new one I thought up this morning on my way into work:

'Stare at the dash: Until you crash'

lomb

i tend to agree with that. waste of 22 million euro. could have been spent improving roads and saving lifes.

pork99

Or those ads which warn you to be careful driving across the border because the signs will still be in MPH up there.

If we were land linked to France or Germany I could see the point in switching to KPH but given that we link to an MPH country I see this as another piece of evidence that our Govt. has "special needs".

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

Here's a new one I thought up this morning on my way into work:

'Stare at the dash: Until you crash'

There are 4 speed limits. Is there no chance you could "learn" them rather than staring at you dash?

MrP

lomb

MrPudding wrote:

There are 4 speed limits. Is there no chance you could "learn" them rather than staring at you dash?

MrP

but why should we? give me one good reason to change the status quo. and dont say it is to standardise distance. they could just as cheaply or cheaper to change distance signs.

maxheadroom

lomb wrote:

but why should we? give me one good reason to change the status quo. and dont say it is to standardise distance. they could just as cheaply or cheaper to change distance signs.

They already did change distance signs. To the metric system. It took years. Now they're completing the job.

Do you honestly believe it would be cheaper to replace every distance sign in the country than to change every speed limit sign in the country? Distance signs are generally bigger, and there's more of them. They also have to be customised for each location, whereas a 60km/h sign can be mass produced and stuck up where necessary.

lomb

honestly think it was an error to put up distance signs in km. they should have duel signed them in miles.
its the liam lalwors and charlie haugheys of the world to blame never took a stand and lined there own pockets.

seamus

lomb wrote:

but why should we? give me one good reason to change the status quo. and dont say it is to standardise distance. they could just as cheaply or cheaper to change distance signs.

The purpose of metrification is easy calculation. Simple as that. A change back to MPH would be a step backwards.

weehamster

People, who really cares.

In a month or so it will be part of everyday life and you wont even notice it anymore. It’s done. So just get on with it and worry about far more important like obeying the basic rules of the road.

BrianD

... just like we though we would not survive without our plastic bags!!

BTW the reason they say safety will be improved is that speed limits will be reduced on 90% or so of roads. In theory people will be travelling slower.

laoisfan

personally speaking, i think it is a good idea that we went metric...brings us into line with the rest of mainland europe.

question: when are we going to switch to driving on the other side of the road?

--laoisfan

jhegarty

BrianD wrote:

... just like we though we would not survive without our plastic bags!!

BTW the reason they say safety will be improved is that speed limits will be reduced on 90% or so of roads. In theory people will be travelling slower.

people who speed cause accidents
people who speed break the speed limit
people who speed don't care what the speed limit is
so we will save lives because people who speed, and don't look at the speed limit , will slow down on country roads that hasn't seen a garda with a speed gun since 1985 ?

irlirishkev

Once again, a whole load of big talk and worry over something that will pass relatively easy.

The euro changeover..
The plastic bag levy..

We'll get used to it. We'll learn what the equivilant speed limit in miles is.
I had a Japanese Import up untill recently, and I had to convert the other way the whole time. It's not that big a deal. Us Irish just like to moan..

K.

PS - Those people who knowingly speed, or use the changover as an excuse to speed, are scum. And this particular breed of scum will always speed.. it doesn't matter how the speed limits are displayed.

Calina

I fail to see the sense in dual-measurement distance signs. But then, I've been living with kilometre signs since I was about 10 anyway...

In any case, regardless of whether they are in miles or kilometres, you should know the speeds anyway. That comes under the heading of being a competent driver.

BrianD

All we have to do now is to get the media to stop talking about how much a gallon of petrol is going up/down by? When was the last time anybody bought a gallon of petrol??? I have no idea what one is.

magpie

There are 4 speed limits. Is there no chance you could "learn" them rather than staring at you dash?

MrP

Actually, on a road like N7 there are probably 4 speed limits within a 1 mil.. I mean Kilometre stretch.

Before the red Cow roundabout: 50kmph
After the roundabout: 60kmph (except it's still marked 40mph)
At start of dual carriageway: 100kmph
going under bridge on dual carriageway: 60kmph
After bridge on dual carriageway: 100kmph
then, for no apparent reason 60kmph (that's 38 mph imperial fans) all the way to Naas.

If you're not staring at the bloody signs you are in danger of being done for speeding, which as everyone knows is a crime tantamount to mutilating babies.

Just a shame that these new seemingly random speed limits do nothing to address road safety and merely criminalise all road users. On my way in to work today not 1 driver was obeying these speed limits. I attempted to for about 2 minutes and to be frank almost caused an accident due to people honking, overtaking, undertaking etc.

Incidentally, nobody has managed to explain "Go metric: Go safe" to me yet. Presumably Brian wants people to stop talking about gallons as they are more dangerous than litres.

DubTony

BrianD wrote:

All we have to do now is to get the media to stop talking about how much a gallon of petrol is going up/down by? When was the last time anybody bought a gallon of petrol??? I have no idea what one is.

Hi Brian,

A gallon is 8 pints...or 4.54 litres. Unless you're in the USA where they have a smaller gallon, and they use things called fluid ounces and quarts. Buy they sell petrol in gallons. I bought a few gallons in Florida a couple of months back.

Tony

seamus

magpie wrote:

Incidentally, nobody has managed to explain "Go metric: Go safe" to me yet.

It's a very poor slogan. Obviously the intention is to say "Please be safe by observing the correct speed measurements when the changeover occurs". Instead it implies that metric is somehow safer...

sceptre

lomb wrote:

they should have duel signed them in miles.

Why?

magpie

Obviously the intention is to say "Please be safe by observing the correct speed measurements when the changeover occurs". Instead it implies that metric is somehow safer...

Either that or its a cynical attempt by the government to dupe the hard of thinking into believing that metric=safe and to play off the money wasted on this as being in some way related to road safety. Which it isn't.

If the government actually cared about road safety they would improve the roads, rather than constantly trying to shift the blame onto road users.

This site is quite informative http://www.irishlimits.com/hardpoints.htm

weehamster

magpie wrote:

Either that or its a cynical attempt by the government to dupe the hard of thinking into believing that metric=safe and to play off the money wasted on this as being in some way related to road safety. Which it isn't.

If the government actually cared about road safety they would improve the roads, rather than constantly trying to shift the blame onto road users.

Yes the slogan is stupid and it may seem a waist of money to a few but its just being sensible and harmonising the measuring system so that there is only one instead of two.

As for safety, are you saying that it is the Governments fault that people break the speed limit and other basic rules of the road. And if the roads aren’t safe then why do people treat them as if it’s a racetrack?

As for road improvements, I thought the government is improving the roads or is the billions of euros given to the NRA just to pay salaries.

magpie

As for safety, are you saying that it is the Governments fault that people break the speed limit and other basic rules of the road. And if the roads aren’t safe then why do people treat them as if it’s a racetrack?

As for road improvements, I thought the government is improving the roads or is the billions of euros given to the NRA just to pay salaries.

The problem is that road speeds are inappropriately marked / regulated.

On brand spanking new 3 lane roads there are nonsensical 60 km/ph speed limits, while on potholed country lanes there are 80 km/ph speed limits. Meanwhile the gardai spend their time enforcing speed on what are statistically the safest roads (dual carriageways and motorways) while ignoring the country roads where the real carnage is happening.

This leads me to believe that the Gardai are merely filling quotas in the easiest way possible in order to make it appear they are waging war on dangerous driving, when in fact they are doing nothing of the sort.

The Government's responsibility comes in its blithe use of multi-million euro advertising campaigns to tell you how metrification is actually contributing to road safety instead of spending the money on, say, driver education programmes.

Bluehair

magpie wrote:

the gardai spend their time enforcing speed on what are statistically the safest roads (dual carriageways and motorways) while ignoring the country roads where the real carnage is happening.

This is imho the core of the problem in Ireland, I have no problem with real enforcement of traffic laws but constantly see dangerous driving in areas the Gardai never seem to be.

MrPudding

A couple of points.



Firstly, is it possible that there are no speed checks on crappy country road cos it would be dangerous? I am not being sarcastic here, I am asking for opinion. I personally think it would be very dangerous for the peelers to set up speed checks on roads where there is barely enough room for to cars to pass each other. I reckon that someone that speed on the crappy roads will also speed on the good road so maybe it all balances out. And before anyone mentions it I realize that the limits on some road are inappropriately slow. Two point on this 1) It’s not an excuse fro speeding & 2) I think the legislation that has been brought in will allow the local authorities to look at and change these limits.



The next point I want to make is on the safety of the roads. By this I presume you mean from an engineering point of view? Studies have shown that as engineers make roads safer people drive on them faster. There seems to be an acceptable amount of risk that drivers will take. When a road become safer they will increase speed as there is now a larger margin of safety. I saw this on an Equinox programme on car crashes. I don’t have time at the moment but I will find some references over the weekend, unless someone beats me to it.



I don’t think the slogan is meant to imply that metric = safe. I think it simply suggests that you should try to be safe.



I have to say I don’t really see what all the fuss is about. I have always found it silly that distance signs changes but not speed. I prefer using metric measures. Children are being taught metric, pretty much all new drivers will have been taught metric in school. Whether or not you agree with it the country is obligated to move to metric.



My final point. Why do so many people in this country seem to think that any time they break the law it is someone else’s fault?



-You ran a red light. Excuse: That is because the traffic is bad because some politicians took bribes in the 80’s.

-You broke the speed limit. Excuse: That is cos I think it is stupid, probably set because of some corrupt politician.



How about taking responsibility for your own actions every once in a while instead of always trying to blame someone or something else.



MrP

magpie

How about taking responsibility for your own actions every once in a while instead of always trying to blame someone or something else.

I notice you've conveniently ignored my point about multiple speed limits on single stretches of road, but have as a result dropped the 'just learn the limits dummy' argument you so eloquently put forward before.

Now you're resorting to that old reliable sanctimonious argument that you should 'just obey the speed limits'.

Clearly you either a) live in denial, b) do not drive or c) honestly believe that every driver who goes above 30mph in a built up area is a 'criminal' and should be punished. Incidentally, this is all drivers without exception in my experience.

Why do so many people in this country seem to think that any time they break the law it is someone else’s fault?

Surely you can acknowledge that there is a problem whereby the vast majority of road users are criminalised without there being any corresponding reduction in road fatalities?

Do you believe that the law is infallible?

I reckon that someone that speed on the crappy roads will also speed on the good road so maybe it all balances out.

Yes, karma-based speeding tickets. What a brilliant idea. Let me know any of your other stunning insights into how the system 'all works out in the end'


Meanwhile, back in reality, I'd welcome your comments on this http://www.irishlimits.com/hardpoints.htm, especially the statistics from the NRA and the information regarding the Cambridgeshire Police's decision to publish locations of speed traps to actually reduce speeds.

Some interesting points here also http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2004/01/18/story411670553.asp

according to the NRA, in 80 per cent of all fatal twovehicle collisions no one was speeding.

Even more astounding, a large proportion of speed traps and cameras are on dual carriageways and motorways. But according to the NRA, a minuscule 0.3 per cent of fatal ac cidents oc cur on these roads.Some 86 per cent of fatal crashes happen on single carriageway roads.

The problem for the government is that drivers are not stupid.They have a fair idea what is really causing accidents, because they often witness that sort of dangerous driving.The NRA knows too; it reports that when cars collide and people die, "improper overtaking" or "went to wrong side of road" was responsible far more than any other factor.

And so when a motorist in low-accident Dublin does 45 miles an hour on a dual carriageway where the speed limit is 40, and gets a heavy fine and two points on the licence, he or she is absolutely correct in considering that what has happened is unfair, and perfectly right to feel resentful.

And

In Ireland, gardai are under huge pressure to be seen to be doing something about road deaths. The force also sees itself as being seriously underresourced at the moment.

Local super intendents could devote the massive manpower required to trawl the single-carriageway roads of Ireland at the most dangerous times and days - between 9pm and 3am on Sundays and Mondays - filming the evidence of dangerous driving. We know from the figures that such an approach would put
genuinely dangerous drivers off the road.

Or they can send a few men andwomenouttothe straightest, safest stretch of dual carriageway in the area, at a more convenient time and day, and quickly nab dozens of speeders.We know from the figures that this is highly unlikely to have any effect on road deaths,but will appear very industrious indeed.

Does this sound familiar Mr P?

Any public objections to this will be met with the standard shrill response of the road safety lobby: Speed kills, anyone who questions this is irresponsible, and the penalty points are working because road deaths are falling.

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

I notice you've conveniently ignored my point about multiple speed limits on single stretches of road, but have as a result dropped the 'just learn the limits dummy' argument you so eloquently put forward before.

Don't have timejust yet to read the whole post. I will later. I just want to address this point. I was not suggesting that you learn all the speed limits. That would be stupid. I was suggesting that you learn what each new speed limit is in MPH. I suggested this as you seemed to be suggesting that the change would cause people to be confused and have to keep looking at their speedo in a way they would not have to were the signs still in MPH.

I will get to the rest of your post later. I don't have time right now.

MrP

BrianD3

I've been doing a lot of driving the last couple of days and have to say that the 60 km/h limit on certain fairly decent roads is feckin painfully slow. Feels quite a bit slower than the old 40 mph limit.

Also, I'm going to murder someone with a wheelbrace next time I hear that moronic "check the signs, check your speed" Was driving on the M50 today and I didn't see a single speed limit sign between the toll bridge and the M1 yet passed at least 3 notices telling me to "check the signs..." :mad:

BrianD3

BrianD

Magpie, it is all very simple. You learn and observe the speed limits. Multiple speed limits on a strech of road are not unusual in other countries. How come they can do it there?

And yes speed does kill and there is no such thing as safe speeding. Speeding is dangerous driving. 80% of two car collisions may be caused by other factors but this implies that 20% are caused by speeding. This is a significant number of incidents and justifys the current policies on speeding.

I do agree that enforcement is lazy and patchy at best. However, if you are caught you are speeding and really the location is irrelevant. Furthermore, the average motorist does not possess the knowledge or expertise to decide if a particular speed limit is appropriate to a particular road.

magpie

this implies that 20% are caused by speeding. This is a significant number of incidents and justifys the current policies on speeding.

And of this 20% what percentage occur on dual carriageways or motorways? And what % occur in Dublin? Have a look at the NRA statistics on any of the links I've posted up before. The % is miniscule, yet the vast majority of speeding fines are handed out in urban dual carriageway locations.

the average motorist does not possess the knowledge or expertise to decide if a particular speed limit is appropriate to a particular road.

Which is why you might have hoped that the government would actually seek expert advice on this, rather than operating a knee-jerk 'make everything slower' policy.

Victor

according to the NRA, in 80 per cent of all fatal twovehicle collisions no one was speeding.

Lies, damed lies and statistics. The author conveniently omits the twenty something percent of people who were on the wrong side of the road. I wonder, what were they doing there? Overtaking at speed perhaps?

Something like only 1% of speed checks are on motorways.

BrianD

Magpie wrote:

Which is why you might have hoped that the government would actually seek expert advice on this, rather than operating a knee-jerk 'make everything slower' policy.

Slower by a couple of km/h adding a miniscule amout of time to your journey. So what?

I travel 100km on a R road. It used to take me 1 hour now it takes me an extra 15 min.