Duckjob wrote: » This. Or at very least slow right down to a crawl. Give people the respect of 5 f**king seconds of your time to let people get past safely and comfortably. Blindlingly simple concept to ensure the safety of other road users - and yet terrifyingly, it's such an alien concept to so many.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » 1) What percentage of speeding drivers are caught? (the 98% of drivers that break urban speed limits would be a good hint here) 2) How long do you think it will take for the arrested driver to be back behind the wheel of a car breaking speed limits again?
Duckjob wrote: » Funny how much you have to say about this, and how little on certain other topics in discussion on the thread. How about respect or disrespect for peoples safety and lives ? Personally I'd consider the actions of the driver in the video above, passing an unprotected family on a narrow road without slowing down a lot more "scrotebaggy" . Tellingly though, and oh so predictably, you prefer to spend all your time posting about very minor infringements of property being "criminal damage" and how the kids who might do it are "scrotebags".
Spook_ie wrote: » Respect or disrespect of property, give me a middle "grey" shade.
Spook_ie wrote: » Maybe that's more because I prefer to talk about the points I raise rather than posting to just agree with people.
breezy1985 wrote: » So about 25 on the 50 shades of grey spectrum. What's would the punishment be ; )
Duckjob wrote: » I'm gratified to know that you find my posts so agreeable
Spook_ie wrote: » There is no 50 shades of grey, except in your liberal namby pamby world where scrotes don't deserve any punishment because sure, weren't they just having a lark. However in the real world, we do actually have laws and punishments proscribed by the judiciary, so perhaps you'd like to direct that at a member of the judiciary. However the range of punishments available to them is wide ranging as set in law.
Spook_ie wrote: » Doesn't matter, he was regulated. BTW the 98% is the 30Kph Urban speed limit, just so people know which figure you love to use. Where as the rate of speeding for cars in all limits is actually ( still an unacceptably high ) 46% Anyways to your question of how many drivers caught speeding. Last year: 348 motorists were caught exceeded a 30km/ph speed limit. 38,060 were detected exceeding a 50km/ph speed limit. 19,367 were detected exceeding a 60km/ph speed limit. 14,255 were detected exceeding a 80km/ph speed limit. 19,944 were detected exceeding a 100km/ph speed limit. 12,787 were detected exceeding a 120km/ph speed limit. Source https://www.thejournal.ie/penalty-points-figures-4955966-Jan2020/ So hardly not being enforced or regulated The number of speed checks and radar traps in 30Kph zones would seem to be negligible ( in so far as I very rarely see one in Dublin city center ) compared to the speed checks and radar traps outside of the canal zone. Perhaps the number of posts on Garda Twitter might be used to show this as I don't recall many of them being of drivers caught speeding in the 30Kph areas, where as the number of drivers caught for drink/drug driving/no insurance/ etc. ( far worse crimes than doing 35-40 in a 30 zone ) would seem to be higher when rather than running 30 kph speed checks they actually run checkpoints. As to how long before he speeds again, who knows, if he's a career offender no punishment will deter him, even taking his car and crushing it isn't likely to act as a deterrent. Maybe you'd like him executed as that is the only surefire way to prevent him re offending
Spook_ie wrote: » Well in my mind you either respect the rule of law and common decency and respect for others property or you don't and if that means arguing/disagreeing with people on here, then so be it.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » So just to be clear, you NEVER break the speed limit yourself, right? Never - no grey area, no namby pamby excuses - just respect for the rule of law and common decency - yeah?
Charles Babbage wrote: » Cycling on the footpath is binary, you are either on the footpath or you are not, and so there is no justification for it whatsoever.
Charles Babbage wrote: » Speeding breaks a law, but in terms of safety 101Kmh is not much different from 100kmh and so speeding is not a binary thing in terms of effect. Cycling on the footpath is binary, you are either on the footpath or you are not, and so there is no justification for it whatsoever.
magicbastarder wrote: » another way at looking at your binary calculation. a 1.5 ton car doing 100km/h has a kinetic energy of 578704J a 1.5 ton car doing 101km/h has a kinetic energy of 590336J a combined cyclist+bike weighing 80KG doing 20km/h on a footpath has a kinetic energy of 1234J. in short, that trivial 1km/h increase in speed is an increase in kinetic energy nearly ten times what a cyclist might be carrying on a footpath. or another way, a cyclist (combined weight of cyclist and bike of 80KG) going from 0 to 60km/h adds less to their kinetic energy than a car going from 100 to 101km/h.
TaurenDruid wrote: » The super-lightweight cyclist-and-bike combo you postulate might only have a kinetic energy of 1.2kJ, but it does not require a force 1.2kJ to injure someone, cause them to drop their belongings, knock them over, cause them to jump out of the way - possibly into traffic, or cause them needless distress. On a bike on the footpath? Dismount, and wheel it. Simple.
jackofalltrades wrote: » Imagine being on a popular TV or Radio programme and making that argument.
Spook_ie wrote: » Wonder what the effect is on the human torso of being hit by a 25mm bar in their midriff or small of the back with that kind of force?
Pinch Flat wrote: » lots of kids back this morning around Dublin 15. Great to see so many cycling. A lot on the paths - hopefully the penny will drop with the council and join the dots where cycle lanes don't exist.
DoraDelite wrote: » Noticed that also yesterday morning in D9. Loads of kids cycling to school but having to do it on the footpath as there isn't a single safe cycle lane in the area. When it's 20-30 kids on the path it's fairly a stark contrast to see. DCC should be embarrassed with how bad it really is.
Spook_ie wrote: » I went through that argument with you several threads ago, not this thread but several ago, you can look up my answers to the same question there
Charles Babbage wrote: » Speeding breaks a law, but in terms of safety 101Kmh is not much different from 100kmh [100% physics viewpoint] and so speeding is not a binary thing in terms of effect. Cycling on the footpath is binary, you are either on the footpath or you are not [100% legal view] , and so there is no justification for it whatsoever.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Cycle lanes would be great but anyone who has a problem with kids cycling to school on footpaths just has a chip on their shoulder. For all the talk of kinetic energy and weight, bicycles are not harming anyone, except for the one or two posters here which cyclists are clearly targeting.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » So presumably you break the speed limit routinely, like the vast majority of motorists, while banging on about the importance of 'respect for law' from other people, but not yourself. Similar to your own views on hi-vis really - something for other people, but not you. So there's absolutely no difference between cycling on the footpath at 5kmph with a child perhaps and tearing along the footpath at 30 kmph on a road bike? Good to know... Interesting perspective from the UK on some of the broader issues:https://twitter.com/OConnorOisin/status/1299256906632933376?s=20
