Sneaky speedcheck on M1 today

Ayashii

I think I might have clocked up my first 2 penalty points this morning southbound on the m1....

Just before the airport exit they are doing some lane work and the inner lane uses the hard shoulder for a couple of hundred metres and then returns to the original lane. They have reduced the speed limit from 120kph to 60(?) for that stretch and the white van was waiting with its camera out the rear window.

Does anyone know the legality of this situation in terms of whether or not the speed limit reduction would be set by the contruction company or via a bye law of Fingal Co Co etc. The sneakiness of the speed trap is really what astounded me as there are no speed reduction signs prior to the roadworks only a sign indicating that there is road works ahead.

Dingatron

Bit sneaky alright. I'd say it's legal or why else would they bother being there. Funny thing is you don't see to many of them about during 9-5 rush hour traffic on the M1.

lanno

They were in the same spot last sat morning

peasant

Just think for a minute: Why would they reduce the speed in the first place?
Because you have to change lanes?
Because there are cones standing in the middle of the road?
Because there are people working just inches from the cars whizzing past?

Correct ...all of the above!

Doing the full 120 is just too dangerous, so they make you drive slow. And for those who don't get the point by themselves ...they dole out points.

Fair enough in my opinion and not "sneaky" at all

Victor

Ayashii wrote:

They have reduced the speed limit from 120kph to 60(?) for that stretch

The sneakiness of the speed trap is really what astounded me as there are no speed reduction signs prior to the roadworks only a sign indicating that there is road works ahead.

So how did you know it was 60 or any other figure?

formatman

move this to another thread if it not relevant but the was a speed trap up on the bridge near the shell garage ( the one that was robbed) today on the N11 near kilmac.. Speed cop with nothing better to do , just inside the drop from 100 to 60 etc

DubTony

formatman wrote:

move this to another thread if it not relevant but the was a speed trap up on the bridge near the shell garage ( the one that was robbed) today on the N11 near kilmac.. Speed cop with nothing better to do , just inside the drop from 100 to 60 etc

That's the section of the N11 where you're supposed to slam on your brakes to get down to 60k. Fine if you're the only car on the road. Shame the Gardai do this. Makes the people cynical and causes feelings of contempt. We have enough problems with rules and regulations without this kind of carry on

Tony

Dub13

formatman wrote:

Speed cop with nothing better to do

He was doing his Job.... :rolleyes:

John R

DubTony wrote:

That's the section of the N11 where you're supposed to slam on your brakes to get down to 60k. Fine if you're the only car on the road. Shame the Gardai do this. Makes the people cynical and causes feelings of contempt. We have enough problems with rules and regulations without this kind of carry on

Tony

It's a regular location for speed traps, most regular drivers do slow down because they know the chances of a trap are high.

It is absolutely astounding that there is a lower limit through there now with a Dual Carriageway, footbridge and overpass for the side road.

Alun

John R wrote:

It's a regular location for speed traps, most regular drivers do slow down because they know the chances of a trap are high.

It is absolutely astounding that there is a lower limit through there now with a Dual Carriageway, footbridge and overpass for the side road.

It's kind of justified on the southbound section because of the completely hair-brained "design", if that's the word, of the junction for the turn off to Glendalough, where cars coming out of the Shell garage are trying to merge onto the N11 from the off-ramp for that junction. Pure stupidity.

On the other side, cars joining from Kilmacanogue have plenty of room to accelerate up to speed to join, so, no excuse as far as I can see. There is a bus stop by the garage on that side, and the layout of the first part ofthe slip road is a bit chicane-like as a consequence, but the slip road is plenty long enough.

formatman

it was on the northbound side...bastards

what they need is a truck to veer off at the wrong moment , make them rethink their stupid policies .....if you want make an omlette you gotta break some eggs

Mick Jockson

What you need, is for a truck not to veer, but to drive straight at the **** hiding behind the bush, and mow squad car down and give him a wee scare. heh.

Or that sniper freak that was on the M50, pity them weridos dont target the speed gun cops.

BrianD

Ina ll fairness, is not waht the cops should be doing? Random speed traps. Having that the council/contractos should be putting up adequate warning signs.

Ayashii

Went along today (well it is Sunday ) to have another look and you might be able to see from the pics that there in fact 2 signs.... the first one at the curve in the road saying that the speed is 80kmph and another couple of hundred metres later saying its further reduced to 50kmph. The guards were positioned just past the 50kmph sign.

formatman

theres a very sniper look to those photos ! (-:

BrianD3

In roadwork situations like this it'd be far better if the cops did a few high visibility "manned" speed checks rather than just stick a Gatso van in the hard shoulder for 1 day or whatever. Speeding tickets from the Gatso may take a month or so to arrive by which time the roadworks may have finished. Most drivers are oblivious to the presence of Gatso vans until the ticket arrives in the post. Whereas a high vis speed trap will be seen by everyone who passes it, even those who aren't speeding on that particular day

I'd say anyone obeying the 50 km/h limit at those M1 roadworks will be beeped, flashed, ridiculed and other drivers wil try to bully them into speeding up. This happens on the N4 roadworks near Mullingar which I drive on sometimes. I stick to the 60 km/h limit but I always get some tosser driving 1 foot from my rear bumper trying to bully me into speeding up. A few high vis checkpoints would make life a lot easier for those who actually obey the limit as it might slow the tailgating tossers down.

formatman

solution for tailgaters ...just trip that brake and watch for the solied trousers look in the rear view mirror

Squirrel

That's a bit dangerous aswell, turn on your headlights, the red lights come on on the rear, than enjoy the soiled pants look without having some asshole nearly ram you

Dub13

Or if he/she is very close spray water on you windscreen if they are very close it will hit there windscreen aswell.

formatman

with practice you can just touch the brake enough to switch on the lights without braking itself

Our man in Havana

Has anyone actually checked to see if these temp limits are properly constituted? Do they have a valid order as in the RTA 2004?

saobh_ie

Or if being threatened in such a manner, while in a car where you can't really signal them so you could further reduce your speed in the interests of safety. If he's on your bumper and you brake suddenly he's going to hit you at 50km/h. Better you switch on your hazard lights, put a light pressure on your foot brake to activate the brake lights and then allow engine braking to bring you down to 20km/h then knock off the hazard lights and continue at that speed until he backs off, which he’ll have to if he’s going to try and over take.

Also, in the vicinity of roadworks or heavy traffic this one is impossible, but you can in general consider surrendering your position. Yes he’s an asshole and he’ll think he can do it again and again if people keep getting out of his way but your driving for yourself, its not your job to teach him how to drive. Where it suits you of course. As soon as somebody gets uncomfortably close start dropping speed, remain in a command position, that forces them to go fully onto the other side of the road if they mean to over take, and then when you see a nice safe place to get out of their way do so. Although I don't drive a car personally.

Although, you are supposed to be travelling at the speed limit posted as you reach the sign. You’re not supposed to drive past it at 80km/h, slam on the brakes and let them off at 50km/h. In good time on your approach to the sign you are to do a rear observation and then gradually slow down. If somebody were tail gating you at that point you would have to allow for that and take longer to slow down that you usually would, maybe even three times as much time. How far past the sign was the GATSO van?

Although if absolutly everybody went through a GATSO like NASCAR drivers nose to tail at 200km/h nobody except for the very last car would get a ticket because the camera wouldn't get an angle. Of course that would be stupid above all else. Funny though...

Bond has a good point. Ask for the schedule of speed limits on that road on that date. I think you ask the council, in all likley hood though the council would have offically changed the speed limit when they approved the works. Although the speed limit was there for a good and legimate reason and should have been observed.

Victor

Dub13 wrote:

Or if he/she is very close spray water on you windscreen if they are very close it will hit there windscreen aswell.

Not smart. The last thing you want at speed is a startled driver.

Gerry

No, what you do is boot it a bit, but slam the brake on for a fraction of a second with your left foot. The car will pitch a fair bit, but not really slow down, gets rid of the tailgaters every time

coolhandluke

Ayashii wrote:

Went along today (well it is Sunday ) to have another look and you might be able to see from the pics that there in fact 2 signs.... the first one at the curve in the road saying that the speed is 80kmph and another couple of hundred metres later saying its further reduced to 50kmph. The guards were positioned just past the 50kmph sign.

Yea,i had thought that myself,was goin to check it out in the morning.The gatso van was in the hard shoulder in the 80kmph zone not the 50kmph(there is no hard shoulder in the 50kmph),i had seen it way off and was only doing 80kmph meself.Basically if you were doing 80kmph or under your grand !.

BrianD

Bond-007 wrote:

Has anyone actually checked to see if these temp limits are properly constituted? Do they have a valid order as in the RTA 2004?

Does it really matter? There is roadworks and the area has been signed. It's up to a driver to observe these and modify his speed accordingly. In my view, it's a tad Irish to turn around and start trying to look for legal technicalities when it is a fair cop. The logical conclusion from your arguement is that if there is no valid order then it is OK to speed through the works at 120KPH. Where has common sense gone to??

Our man in Havana

It does matter if the cops are acting illeagaly in a revenue generating mode. But i do not condone barrelling thru at 120 km/h, they should go thru at a reasonable safe speed.

The cops should not be acting in an intimidating manner.

jesus_thats_gre

Bond-007 wrote:

Has anyone actually checked to see if these temp limits are properly constituted? Do they have a valid order as in the RTA 2004?

I was actually talking to a Garda friend last week from a nearby district..

He reckons its bull**** (his words). When they erect those speed signs they are never ok'd properly by the local CoCo's and thus are tehnically only a guideline, i.e. you cannot be done for exceeding them..

If in fact they have been properly constituted, you are obviously ****ed

Ayashii

As was mentioned and as I think back on this its very possible that the van was indeed just past the initial 80kmph sign..... its hard to remember exactly because at the time your annoyance impacts memories of the event and I didn't want to circle back and go through that road again

From the RTA section 4.3 it says that Road Works Speed Limit Orders

County and city Managers are empowered by the 2004 Act to make Orders for the purposes of applying speed limits at road works. The Order cannot be for a period of more than 12 months.

Where a manager proposes to make a Road Works Speed Limit Order, the manager must notify the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána of the proposal to make the Order and must consider any representations made by the Commissioner. If the proposed Order is in respect of a national road or a motorway, the consent of the National Roads Authority must be obtained. When an Order has been made the manager must publish a notice in at least one newspaper circulating in the area giving details of the location where the Order will have effect, the period for which it will have effect and the speed limit that is being applied through the Order.

BrianD

Bond-007 wrote:

It does matter if the cops are acting illeagaly in a revenue generating mode. But i do not condone barrelling thru at 120 km/h, they should go thru at a reasonable safe speed.

The cops should not be acting in an intimidating manner.

No actually it does not matter. The Garda are acting in a perfectly legitimate manner and in a manner that you and any sensible and responsible motorist would expect them to do - random speedcheck in an area where road works are taking place.

Furthermore, whether or not there is a valid order in place is secondary to your civic responsibility as a road user in obeying a speed limits in such a area for the safety of other motorists and workers in that zone. Try to think of others outside of your metal shell. There should be no requirement for speed limit orders. The only requirement should be clear and adequate signage.

Finally, it's time to drop this revenue generating nonsense. It is probably the lamest arguement I have heard from people who are unable or to careless to regulate their speed while driving. The revenue generated from speed traps is pretty insignificant in the bigger picture though I do think that there is a problem with these league tables that apparently exist. What we need to see is Gardai carrying out random speed traps anywhere and everywhere (as opposed to the spots we all know). Will you be calling for those?

How exactly are the cops acting in an intimidating manner???

edmund_f

Revenue generation, while it may be incorrect, would be a obivious reason for them to do it. Other options would be statistic collection, numbers. If the cops were doing 'random' speed checks, then i should see them equally on all types of roads and at all times. I do not, therefore they are not random, being human i cannot help but wonder what their motivations are.

What would you suggest?

If there are any cops on here, feel free to correct and enlighten us all.

Andrew Duffy

While you could contest a speeding fine issued for speeding through roadworks, you would probably also be charged (correctly) with dangerous driving, and this carries a much higher penalty. Pay the speeding fine and take the points.

Ayashii

I don't think most motorists would have a problem with universal random speed checks but presented in a way that acts as a deterrant to speeding. In other words signs indicating that speed checks are in operation, high visibility vans/cameras and a policy of effective education rather than punishment. Even without that, I'm sure most motorists with the present system in place would also agree that speeding in inappropriate areas is not acceptable.

Driving along a new motorway at approved speeds of up to 120kmph, approaching a curve in the road to be presented with roadsigns on the grass margins held down by sandbags without any specific prior warning well in advance that there will be a neccessary reduction change of speed (and what that reduction will be), and then having a covert police speed check just past the speed drop is just not reasonable.

Anyway, I'll let ye know how many points I get.... :rolleyes:

Einstein

Gerry wrote:

No, what you do is boot it a bit, but slam the brake on for a fraction of a second with your left foot. The car will pitch a fair bit, but not really slow down, gets rid of the tailgaters every time

Nothing like a promoter of safe driving.

BrianD

I concurr that we do need better distribution of these speed checks accross the road network whether they be covet or overt. Every driver knows that speed checks take place so signage is not really necessary (but I have no issue with roadside cameras being signed as often the sign will produce the desired reduction in speed).

In regards to the specific case referred to, it appears to me that the signs are large and obvious (where else would they be but on the grass margins??) and I also note that the traffic cones extend beyond the speed signs. I don't know if there was advance signage of impending road works but that would be your cue to be alert for a possible change in speed limit. You should have been travelling at 80kph by the time you reached the first signs so reducing to 50kph should be achievable.


The notion of having to publish temp speed limits for road works is ridiculous and a classic example of bureaucracy gone wrong. That's not to say that there should be not be public information available on the limit through council web sites, AA roadwatch or newspapers.

jlang

I have to say that I am often "slightly guilty" of ignoring temporary speed limit signs (particularly advance ones). I do notice them and see them more as an indication that there may be activity on the road, narrower lanes, etc. Yes I slow down, but not necessarily to exactly 20/30/50km or whatever the new limit is. The effects on my driving are more subtle than just blind speed reduction, more related to preparedness and I suppose a more careful eye out for vans by the side of the road! Of course, I still wouldn't beep, flash or tailgate someone else who did slow to the 30km/whatever, as their interpretation is just more literal than mine and ultimately more defensible. I see it as analogous to not going 5km/h in car parks when that's the posted limit, but still keeping a very close eye out for reversing cars, trollies, lose babies, etc.

Macy

I suppose it depends on whether you think the gard's main role is in prevention or prosecution.

Personally I'd far rather a police presence prevented my car being nicked in the first place, rather than hearing that they've caught the scumbag who stole it later on.

My opinion of speeding is the same - better a highly visible presence slowing people down, rather than a snide GATSO van catching the oblivious....

Our man in Havana

So you rather the Gardai trample your civil and consitutional rights, if the limits were invalid. So you are willing to accept all laws even if morally wrong?
So if there was a new law allowing the Gardai to on the first friday of each month enter your house and help themselves to your stuff, you would just roll over and accept it? I bet not , but there is no real difference here.

You are just a typicial Irish who allow the govt to ream you sideways and yee just take it. God help us all.

BrianD3

BrianD wrote:

The notion of having to publish temp speed limits for road works is ridiculous and a classic example of bureaucracy gone wrong. .

Disagree. There should be a defined and transparent process for setting temp speed limits and publishing them in the papers is a good start. This will both encourage competence on the part of authorities and will also encourage compliance on the part of motorists (the logic being that if motorist think the limits have been set competently and are legally binding, then they're more likely to respect and obey them)

At the moment the situation is a joke. Contractors install non standard speed limit signs. Signs are placed poorly. Signs fall over or are blown away. Big flashing displays display limits which conflict with other speed limit signs (which speed limit do you believe) Temp speed limit signs are left up long after the roadworks have finished. Mph signs are used even though all other speed limit signs have changed to metric. I have seen all of the above problems and others at roadworks.

BrianD

Bond-007 wrote:

So you rather the Gardai trample your civil and consitutional rights, if the limits were invalid. So you are willing to accept all laws even if morally wrong?
So if there was a new law allowing the Gardai to on the first friday of each month enter your house and help themselves to your stuff, you would just roll over and accept it? I bet not , but there is no real difference here.

You are just a typicial Irish who allow the govt to ream you sideways and yee just take it. God help us all.

What constitutional and civil rights???? Are you pulling my leg? It's a speed limit on a set of roadworks. Your second example has no relevance whatsoever to this arguement. The only moral issue at stake is your willingness to disregard a speed limit and put others at risk

It is morally repugnent of you suggest that it is OK to challenge the validity of a speed trap in a set of roadworks because some irrelevant piece of paper does or does not exist. It seems that your attidude is that you can disregard the speed limit and then allow the decision of whether you should be punished be decided at a later date on the existence of documents.

You are typically Irish! Refuse to obey something that is put in the good of the motoring community and then heading off on some legalistic/constitutional mumbo jumbo because you will not accept the punishment for your own actions. This has nothing to do with the government - you are simply being asked to slow down for the safety of others on the road and those working on it. Accept some personal responsibilty for once in your life.

Alun

BrianD3 wrote:

At the moment the situation is a joke. Contractors install non standard speed limit signs. Signs are placed poorly. Signs fall over or are blown away. Big flashing displays display limits which conflict with other speed limit signs (which speed limit do you believe) Temp speed limit signs are left up long after the roadworks have finished. Mph signs are used even though all other speed limit signs have changed to metric. I have seen all of the above problems and others at roadworks.

Agreed 100%. Add to that the total failure to comprehend the difference between signs indicating lanes narrowing and lanes totally disappearing, even if they do understand getting right and left mixed up, signs warning of ramps ahead placed on the ramp itself, ....

There's a typical example on the M11 at the moment. A big dot matrix display that's meant to flash chevrons pointing in one direction to indicate a lane closure. No problem with that, but at times when it's not applicable, what do they do? Switch it off? Oh no, they leave it flashing some weird kind of flashing diamond pattern, which is meant to indicate what exactly?

Our man in Havana

.

edmund_f

Bond-007 wrote:

i do not condone barrelling thru at 120 km/h, they should go thru at a reasonable safe speed.

i think he already stated his case pretty well, i think it is very irish to take the extreme view just prove yourself right, or more importantly someone else wrong. The point here is that the speed camera at this position is extreme, and while technically correct and legal is not fair.

anyone doing 120+ through here will be just as likely to be doing 140+ on the motorway, so why not catch them there. As far as i can see, there is a pretty major hazard and all a gatso van will be doing will be adding another dangrous element to it.

whippet

Ì drive the M1 every day, and I can't understand anyone arguing with the signage of the road works. There is plenty of notice, big speed signs (does it matter if they are held down with sandbags or cement as long as they are there), flashing lights sign over head warning 'reduce speed', loads of cones ... .the 80kph and 60kph signs are visable from a great distance back.

Anyone who justifies going faster than 80kph with in inches of where men are working on the road must have rocks in their head.

Looking for loop holes, blaming revenue hungry cops are excuses used by those caught. Funnily enough I am more or less 100% compliant with speed limits and I have no gripe with the enforcement of the limits (i would like to see more).

It seems that people who have been caught are the ones who moan about the system. It's the irish condition of 'it wasn't my fault'; 'its not fair' etc ..

ambro25

edmund_f wrote:

The point here is that the speed camera at this position is extreme, and while technically correct and legal is not fair.

Once and for all, the legal system (and it's application/enforcement) and 'fairness' are two totally distinct concepts.

Following the immortal words of Yoda the Sage "Do or do not, there is no try", breach the statute (by exceeding the legally-enforceable speed limit) or do not breach, there is no 'fair'.

And I drive daily, carefully and not always within the speed limits. But then again, if I get caught, my bad... You can't have you cake and eat it, simple enough.

Paul (MN)

"Driving along a new motorway at approved speeds of up to 120kmph, approaching a curve in the road to be presented with roadsigns on the grass margins held down by sandbags without any specific prior warning well in advance that there will be a neccessary reduction change of speed (and what that reduction will be), and then having a covert police speed check just past the speed drop is just not reasonable."


baloney! I use that road every morning and if what you write is how you really feel that you shouldn't be on the road!

edmund_f

exactly.. there is the law and the enforcement of the law.. one is the courts and the other is based on the ability of the cops to be fair.
the speed trap on the M1 was because some cop made a consious decion to put one there. He got up, went to work, looked at all the possible position he could put a speed trap, and decided that the gatso parked at roadworks at a temporary speed limit would be a good, fair, way to enforce the laws as handed down to him by the goverment and the courts.

i am personally complaining here about the manner in which our road traffic laws are being enforced (or more accuratly our road traffic law)

ambro25

Paul (MN) wrote:

baloney! I use that road every morning and if what you write is how you really feel that you shouldn't be on the road!

Why? Because I choose to (at times) not respect speed limits but propose not to complain if I get caught in the act?

edmund_f wrote:

exactly.. there is the law and the enforcement of the law.. one is the courts and the other is based on the ability of the cops to be fair.

No, sorry Edmund. Enforcement is by Courts who apply the law in respect of a finding of facts by cops (which finding may be fair/unfair/both given any set of beliefs, but is still factual).

edmund_f wrote:

the speed trap on the M1 was because some cop made a consious decion to put one there. He got up, went to work, looked at all the possible position he could put a speed trap, and decided that the gatso parked at roadworks at a temporary speed limit would be a good, fair, way to enforce the laws as handed down to him by the goverment and the courts.

Or was ordered by his Super' to do it, because the Super' himself had got complaints from the working party on the ground that it was getting hairy working there...

Macy

edmund_f wrote:

i am personally complaining here about the manner in which our road traffic laws are being enforced (or more accuratly our road traffic law)

Which would also be my long standing complain (long before I got penalty points).

A marked patrol car parked there would've slowed people down far more than a GATSO van. If people had come by taking the píss, then pull them for it. I'll repeat, the policing of the roads in this country is not about preventing speeding or accidents/crashes and all about catching people.

Paul (MN)

ambro25, I wasn't directing my comment at you. I was quoted something from way back.

whippet

the policing of the roads in this country is not about preventing speeding or accidents/crashes and all about catching people.

if you didn't catch the law breakers there would be no incentive for others to respect the law. You can't have it both ways.