Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Shane Ross' new speeding penalties

1235712

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    sdanseo wrote: »
    No problem with the principle if speed limits are increased to be sensible in some areas. There's too many examples to list.

    The increase in points is overkill - it has Shane Ross written all over it. The man has departed from reality.

    His suggested penality is up to 5 points for going as little as 2-3km/h over the limit, and 7 points for going the equivalent of 7mph over. That's like forfeiting your car for parking on double yellows.

    Instead of starting at 3 points, it should start with 1, and the financial penalty should be much higher.
    Hit people in the pocket but don't put them off the road for two mistakes. You can come back from a €1,000 fine - you can't necessarily replace a job which relied on the car. It'd be too harsh.

    i.e.
    <15% over - 1 point €80
    16-25% over - 2 points €160
    26-30% over - 3 points €320
    31-35% over - 4 points €640
    36%+ over - 6 points €1280
    50% + over dangerous driving, automatic 6 month ban, €2560 minimum fine

    That seems fair and reasonable.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,893 ✭✭✭Allinall


    highdef wrote: »
    You say that a HGV/coach should never be in the overtaking lane of a motorway but at the same time you state that you drive at around 80/90 on the motorway. Anything under 90 and you are holding up HGVs who may want and usually do want to go as fast as they can. As for coaches, that's a significant reduction in speed.

    Are you saying that if you were driving from Galway to Dublin at 80/90, any coach or HGV that comes up behind you in the driving lane must stay there for the full length of the motorway because you feel they have no right to pass you by in the overtaking lane? You have to be kidding me :confused:

    HGVs are restricted to 80, and coaches are allowed use the outer lane.

    Hope that clears up your confusion.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    It’s a ridicolous speed to be driving a car on a motorway and musn’t be much of a car if it needs to be drive at that speed to feel relaxed. My car is absolutely at ease at 160kmh on a motorway, 120kmh is so so easy and slow for it I just could not see how you need to drive at such slow speeds.

    A previous car of mine was fine with 160kmh, doesn't mean i expected everyone else's to be.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,248 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    ,120kmh is so so easy and slow for it

    What happens to it, does it get unwell? Maybe you should get rid of it and replace it with one of those ones where the driver actually controls the speed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,776 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Yeah because you are willingly going to sit behind a car doing 40kph less than the limit?

    The hint is in the "willingly" bit. It is a choice - to stay behind and a choice to overtake.

    And the driver is responsible for the overtake.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    Allinall wrote: »
    HGVs are restricted to 80, and coaches are allowed use the outer lane.

    Hope that clears up your confusion.

    Incorrect, HGV's are legally limited to 80 on non-motorway roads with a speed limit of 80 or greater however they are mechanically/electronically limited to 90 on motorways.

    Although you will still find them travelling at their maximum speed of 90kmph on R and N roads with 80/100 speed limits.

    I hope that clears up your confusion.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭flexcon


    If i read this right :

    If I get caught speeding 141kph at 10pm on a quite cork to Dublin motorway - I am to get a fine of €200 and 7 points in my licence?

    I just went to liberty insurance for the crack and changed my position to 7 points as a new quote. it adds €300 to my policy. What in the hell? So that’s €300 x 3 years(until i loose my points) and €200 for the fine? You’d only find this going on in australia.

    The proportionate penalty is absolutely absurd considering you only get
    12 points to use in 3 years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    flexcon wrote: »
    If i read this right :

    If I get caught speeding 141kph at 10pm on a quite cork to Dublin motorway - I am to get a fine of €200 and 7 points in my licence?

    Unless I have somehow missed some major part of the ROTR, I'm pretty sure that motorway speed limits do not vary depending on the time of day. I know there are variable speed limits to be introduced on the M50 soon but not aware of variable speed limits anywhere else.

    Having said that, it's most likely going to be dark at 10pm so I'd be very weary of driving at an indicated speed of about 150kmph.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭flexcon


    highdef wrote: »
    Unless I have somehow missed some major part of the ROTR, I'm pretty sure that motorway speed limits do not vary depending on the time of day. I know there are variable speed limits to be introduced on the M50 soon but not aware of variable speed limits anywhere else.

    Having said that, it's most likely going to be dark at 10pm so I'd be very weary of driving at an indicated speed of about 150kmph.

    Don’t get me wrong here. Speeding is speeding.

    If i’m caught i won’t give grief to a guard.

    It’s the penalty that seems out of whack witt reality. Living in germany obviously hasn’t helped with my perception of safe speed living next to autobhans.

    finally i said 141kph - not close to 150kph. If it was 150 i’d be up in court.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    highdef wrote: »
    Unless I have somehow missed some major part of the ROTR, I'm pretty sure that motorway speed limits do not vary depending on the time of day. I know there are variable speed limits to be introduced on the M50 soon but not aware of variable speed limits anywhere else.

    Having said that, it's most likely going to be dark at 10pm so I'd be very weary of driving at an indicated speed of about 150kmph.

    He has to use up his points some way


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,486 ✭✭✭Red Alert


    It should start at 1 penalty point and work upwards from there. Someone going 1-5km/h over the limit doesn't automatically become "dangerous". Ross is just interested in penalising motorists and not positively changing behaviour.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,241 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    Red Alert wrote: »
    It should start at 1 penalty point and work upwards from there. Someone going 1-5km/h over the limit doesn't automatically become "dangerous". Ross is just interested in penalising motorists and not positively changing behaviour.

    I think he is genuinely interested in changing behaviour. The problem is he wants to change behaviour far too drastically because he is spectacularly uneducated about matters within his remit.

    A grumpy old man who wants to be re-elected by all the other grumpy old people in his constituency who have almost no speed limits above 50km/h to worry about, are spoiled with probably the best selection of relatively good public transport in Ireland, and who collectively think that Stepaside Garda Station will permanently end all crime.

    Meanwhile, fúck the real world with the rest of us in it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,248 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    flexcon wrote: »
    If I get caught speeding 141kph
    ......
    12 points to use in 3 years.

    The solution is pretty obvious.

    It's absurd that people are arguing that they should be allowed speed and then complain about potential consequences.
    sdanseo wrote: »
    .

    Meanwhile, fúck the real world with the rest of us in it.

    Oh woe is me, a poor motorist. Don't be so juvenile.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭flexcon


    amcalester wrote: »
    He has to use up his points some way

    Ironically it will now mean my cruise control is set to 120 period if this comes in so i suppose it would work, purely out of fear though as opposed to agreeing with the penalty. It just seems
    imho opinion too harsh based on my professional driving experience.

    I drove a truck for years and i can tell you those lads in the
    bmw’s and audi’s doing 140kph were
    more
    aware
    and respective of my
    space and needs than clowns doing the speed limit.

    anyway it’s all my subjective experience but it’s quite a lot of it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 698 ✭✭✭Tazio


    Anyone see the RTE report tonight ? The reporters were driving in a car with speedo on camera 'showing' dangerous drivers in lane 3 driving >100km/h on what looked like M50... while they were sitting in lane 2 with an empty lane 1! Hmmmmm


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭flexcon


    Hurrache wrote: »
    The solution is pretty obvious.

    It's ridiculous that people are arguing that they should be allowed speed and then complain about potential consequences.

    Context. See my post above.

    Been witness to a few crashes and hairy moments over the years but it wasn’t the lads doing 20kph with cruise control on the motorway in a safe as designed zone.

    Again I humbly realise speeding is speeding. I don’t take away from the research that shows speed kills.
    I’d love to see to what effect doing 20kph over on a motorway was a contributing factor.

    PS i was on the dublin to cork road twice a day for nearly 3 years. I’ve seen some fair bad driving.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,248 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Tazio wrote: »
    Anyone see the RTE report tonight ? The reporters were driving in a car with speedo on camera 'showing' dangerous drivers in lane 3 driving >100km/h on what looked like M50... while they were sitting in lane 2 with an empty lane 1! Hmmmmm

    I don't think they said anything about dangerous driving?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,241 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    Hurrache wrote: »
    The solution is pretty obvious.
    It's absurd that people are arguing that they should be allowed speed and then complain about potential consequences.

    Ah sure let's summarily execute people for littering while we're at it. They knew the rules.

    Pathetic argument.

    Hurrache wrote: »
    Oh woe is me, a poor motorist. Don't be so juvenile.

    I have a degree in Transport Planning and did my Thesis on road safety. Even if neither of these things were the case, it wouldn't make my point juvenile. Overreaction and over punishment are not effective ways to stem poor behaviour and if you scrolled up you'll see that far from being juvenile, I've gone and put time and effort into coming to the discussion with a solution rather than stamping my feet and insisting that everyone should behave immaculately and obey the exact letter of the ROTR.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,248 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Jesus, what a bunch of babies the way some of the reactions are to it. You'd think points and fines are mandatory each time your step into a car.

    Doesn't matter what your qualifications are, they didn't exclude you being juvenile in your reaction.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 156 ✭✭bingobars


    Late night taxi drivers in residential areas don’t stand a chance 😂😂😂


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,248 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    bingobars wrote: »
    Late night taxi drivers in residential areas don’t stand a chance 😂😂😂

    There'll be no more enforcement if it passes bar a day or two for publicity, then it'll be back to the way it is now.

    The reality is that nothing much is going to change unless you're doing more than 10 over the limit.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    flexcon wrote: »
    finally i said 141kph - not close to 150kph. If it was 150 i’d be up in court.

    Yes, but if you are done for doing 141kmph (your actual real speed at time of detection), your speedo would have been reading in or around 150 so as far as your speedometer was concerned you would be knowingly doing about 30kmph over the indicated speed limit which is rather substantial.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭flexcon


    highdef wrote: »
    Yes, but if you are done for doing 141kmph (your actual real speed at time of detection), your speedo would have been reading in or around 150 so as far as your speedometer was concerned you would be knowingly doing about 30kmph over the indicated speed limit which is rather substantial.

    eh? Not aware of this rule? That’s like 8% off then? Is that actually a hard and fast thing or down to tyre pressure and wheel rim?

    my understanding was most speedos under read. So if i was doing 140kph in reality it was more
    like 135kph.

    Edit. Silly me. We are saying the same thing.

    Ok so i wouldn’t personally go to 150kph on the clock. Cruise control at 141kph is what i set it at in the
    car.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    flexcon wrote: »
    eh? Not aware of this rule? That’s like 8% off then? Is that actually a hard and fast thing or down to tyre pressure and wheel rim?
    There's no rule being mentioned here. All car speedometers over-read by varying amounts. My partners Nissan Leaf over reads by exactly 10% so if he's doing 110 kmph on the speedo, he's actually doing bang on 100 kmph in the real world.

    The last car I had was an Astra and if I did 128 kmph on the speedo, I was doing 120 in the real world. New car is a Focus and I need to do 125/126 kmph on the speedo to be doing real speed of 120. In each case, I tested with 3 different GPS devices to ensure consistency in results.

    In short, I almost always drive as fast as I legally can (the other times I am driving under the limit, in case anyone thinks I meant the opposite).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 643 ✭✭✭Corca Baiscinn


    bingobars wrote: »
    Late night taxi drivers in residential areas don’t stand a chance &#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56834;

    I know that was tongue in cheek but there lies the flaw in the proposed legislation. A huge % of people killed in collisions are in the VRU category,ie pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists. Vast majority of these fatalities occur in residential 50km or 60 km speed limit areas. These are the areas least likely to have enforcement under current speed van system as the vans look for somewhere safe and if possible discrete to park. Not so easy to find beside a school, post office, library, shop etc. So unless we move to a different form of enforcement your taxi drivers will be safe but unfortunately children and older people wont be


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,241 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    highdef wrote: »
    Yes, but if you are done for doing 141kmph (your actual real speed at time of detection), your speedo would have been reading in or around 150 so as far as your speedometer was concerned you would be knowingly doing about 30kmph over the indicated speed limit which is rather substantial.

    It's a matter of relative risk though. Opening a wine bottle is unsafe compared to lying in bed.

    People see the headline number 140km/h or 160km/h or whatever and think "oh how unsafe".

    150km/h in a 120km/h is 25% over or roughly the same as doing 62km/h in a 50 zone. But if you ask most people which is more dangerous, they will say the higher speed, despite the overwhelming evidence that it's not and the fact that the motorway is a single-direction, grade-seperated, concrete protected dual lane highway with no parked car, pedestrians or obstacles of any kind on which everyone is required to be trained to a higher standard (full licence).

    Like Ross, the Irish psyche on this issue is devoid of logic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,776 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    I know that was tongue in cheek but there lies the flaw in the proposed legislation. A huge % of people killed in collisions are in the VRU category,ie pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists.
    What percentage of road deaths are VRUs?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    More cash revenue from the financial livestock who are motorists


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    I know that was tongue in cheek but there lies the flaw in the proposed legislation. A huge % of people killed in collisions are in the VRU category,ie pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists. Vast majority of these fatalities occur in residential 50km or 60 km speed limit areas. These are the areas least likely to have enforcement under current speed van system as the vans look for somewhere safe and if possible discrete to park. Not so easy to find beside a school, post office, library, shop etc. So unless we move to a different form of enforcement your taxi drivers will be safe but unfortunately children and older people wont be

    Children and older people are still being protected by speed vans elsewhere though. The crucial thing is to get those of a speeding mindset on as many points as possible, which mutes their enthusiasm for it. Making everyone else safer. It doesnt matter where they accumulated the points, as long as they have them. So using the most discrete parking places, or where the most speeder can be caught in a given time increases the effectiveness of the vans.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,346 ✭✭✭highdef


    sdanseo wrote: »
    It's a matter of relative risk though. Opening a wine bottle is unsafe compared to lying in bed.

    People see the headline number 140km/h or 160km/h or whatever and think "oh how unsafe".

    150km/h in a 120km/h is 25% over or roughly the same as doing 62km/h in a 50 zone. But if you ask most people which is more dangerous, they will say the higher speed, despite the overwhelming evidence that it's not and the fact that the motorway is a single-direction, grade-seperated, concrete protected dual lane highway with no parked car, pedestrians or obstacles of any kind on which everyone is required to be trained to a higher standard (full licence).

    Like Ross, the Irish psyche on this issue is devoid of logic.

    Just to be clear, I would love to legally drive a good bit faster on the motorway however I can't legally do so and I keep to within the legal limit. It doesn't grind my gears. I just get on with life. I have a fuel card so the much higher costs of driving at say 150 kmph real speed versus 120 kmph real speed wouldn't even impact my pocket but if I was paying the fairly higher amounts of cash for those extra few kmph, I'd probably quick enough to tame it down again when I notice I'm down a tenner or so every week, as an estimate.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 643 ✭✭✭Corca Baiscinn


    What percentage of road deaths are VRUs?

    I think I saw 43% (to Nov this year) but will have to check. Some horrific deaths/injuries in single and multi-vehicle collisions but cars have got so much safer for the occupants while becoming bigger and faster for VRU's


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,478 ✭✭✭✭dastardly00


    It's all kicking off on Prime Time now about the new proposed changes!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,153 ✭✭✭jimbobaloobob


    This is being debated on primetime at the moment


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,868 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Watching it...

    That lady has just went off on a personal rant/attack on Mattie, just because he wasn’t in full agreement on these proposals...weird..


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,904 ✭✭✭mgn


    Prime time is a disgrace.Who does that woman think she is.I speak for the whole of Ireland.You only speak for yourself to Mattie McGrath.
    And was let rant away.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,868 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    mgn wrote: »
    Prime time is a disgrace.Who does that woman think she is.I speak for the whole of Ireland.You only speak for yourself to mattie McGrath.

    That was utterly bizarre. Her rant was a disgrace, and Miriam a disgrace to allow it..


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 568 ✭✭✭rgodard80a


    walshb wrote: »
    Watching it...

    That lady has just went off on a personal rant/attack on Mattie, just because he wasn’t in full agreement on these proposals...weird..

    Neither of them represented their side very well.

    The lady said Mattie was a bitter old man, only thinking of himself because he's too old to fulfil his dreams... bizarre rant.

    And Mattie focused on a bizarre "holistic" approach, saying we should educate kids in schools. Educating children won't deal with the 20 years olds who'll be on the roads for the next 50+ years. It's more likely the "kids" will have self driving cars at that stage.
    He should've focused on people needing licences for jobs and the very narrow margin of error between driving the correct speed and creeping over the limit.

    They're trying to up the punishment to make up for little or no enforcement.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,478 ✭✭✭✭dastardly00


    I'm no cheerleader for Mattie McGrath and he was fairly incoherent went he was trying to make his points... But that lady was well out of order


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 619 ✭✭✭macnug


    mgn wrote: »
    Prime time is a disgrace.Who does that woman think she is.I speak for the whole of Ireland.You only speak for yourself to mattie McGrath.

    Yea if anything it was the other way round. He's elected by the people, she's not.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭larchill


    Overly emotionally involved to make a rational & balanced judgement.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭malinheader


    It wouldn't be Susan grey would it on prime time


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭DeepBlue


    I'm no cheerleader for Mattie McGrath and he was fairly incoherent went he was trying to make his points... But that lady was well out of order
    Unfortunately RTE is infested with the attitude that a sob story trumps everything else. Whoever invited her on should be embarrassed. Not a fan of Mattie but he didn't merit that bizarre attack.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 712 ✭✭✭GG66


    These are harsh. I've been caught for speeding twice in the last 5 years within 3 days of each other.

    Once doing 120kph coming off the motorway at Mullingar to a dual carriageway. Doing 120kph in a 100kph zone 150 meters after the motorway ended.

    Once doing 109kph in a 100kph zone. Accelerating coming out of a village onto a 100kph road.

    With the new rules I'd nearly be off the road in a few days


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,868 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Proposals are way OTT, but to come out and say it will see you labeled as being anti safety..

    It’s ridiculously difficult in certain areas to not break the speed limit..


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    GG66 wrote: »

    With the new rules I'd nearly be off the road in a few days

    That's the whole idea of it. Get motorists off the road. Helps the carbon footprint and makes public transport more viable.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,776 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    GG66 wrote: »
    These are harsh. I've been caught for speeding twice in the last 5 years within 3 days of each other.

    Once doing 120kph coming off the motorway at Mullingar to a dual carriageway. Doing 120kph in a 100kph zone 150 meters after the motorway ended.

    Once doing 109kph in a 100kph zone. Accelerating coming out of a village onto a 100kph road.

    With the new rules I'd nearly be off the road in a few days


    So I guess you need to slow down then?

    I think I saw 43% (to Nov this year) but will have to check. Some horrific deaths/injuries in single and multi-vehicle collisions but cars have got so much safer for the occupants while becoming bigger and faster for VRU's


    So the majority of road deaths are motorists killing themselves or other motorists and passengers - and speed is a major factor in those deaths.
    gozunda wrote: »
    More cash revenue from the financial livestock who are motorists
    Speeding fines don't bring in revenue. The contract for the vans costs much more than is brought in in fines.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,275 ✭✭✭august12


    If Shane Ross doesn't cop the feick on soon, then we will have a country of unemployed people as most will be unable to drive to work, we don't need another set of rules. I'm fed up of these Muppets. That's my rant for the day.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,868 ✭✭✭✭walshb




    Speeding fines don't bring in revenue. The contract for the vans costs much more than is brought in in fines.

    Of course speeding fines bring in revenue. Huge revenue...and I wouldn’t begrudge the state/people this revenue...use it wisely for the people.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭con___manx1


    All speed limits are way too slow to start with.

    I'd go 130/140 on the motorway regularly.

    50kph zones I'd easily go 60-65kph depending on the road.

    80kph zones, easily do 100kph.

    If you did 100k on some of the 80k roads in the country you would end up dead fairly quick. Some of the 80k roads are 80 k roads due to Eu classifications of the type of road. In reality alot of them should be alot less. County wicklow for instance has some brutal roads that are 80k.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,610 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    Just in case anyone wasn't watching Prime Time

    https://twitter.com/seanpurcellart/status/1072618368182685697


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement