Speeding is endemic in this country, what can be done about it?

Macy0161 · 28-06-2021 12:49PM

Well I think it's clear there's an issue on enforcement, and the lack of use of available technology. I do disagree with the penalties being too harsh - when points were introduced there was an immediate effect on driver behaviour. That waned only when it became obvious nothing had changed regarding enforcement.

It's just one of many issues though - there's just as significant issue with inappropriate speed, particularly on the issue on driving at a speed for which you can safely stop in the distance you can see. I'm no idea how that can be enforced while there is still such relunctance to make use of dashcam/ bicyclecam/ bikecam/ pedestrian footage in an easy way like other jurisdictions seem able to do.

Furze99 · 28-06-2021 12:56PM

There's driving quickly and there's driving dangerously. They're two different things, which are conflated together in rather arbitrary speed designations. Speed limits and therefore speeding are a very coarse tool by which to measure dangerous driving, which latter is what matters. I suspect that near enough 100% of drivers technically exceed speed limits at some point in their daily travels.

theguzman · 28-06-2021 01:02PM

I just drive with cruise control on as often as is practically safe, it has saved my ass at least half a dozen or more times over the last 3 years primarily in 60km/h and 50km/h zones where they are shooting fish in a barrel. I also notice less people flashing the headlights to warn you like before. If a Guard catches you fine they you are deserving of it because you will clearly be acting the clown and exceeding the speed limit excessively. A speedvan hitting you for 52km/h in a 50km/h zone is just down right disgraceful, especially in cars with analogue and MPH speedos where the margin of error is questionable. A guard won't likely hit you for 52km in a 50 and he will wait for the pillock coming through at 80-90km/h to make an example of them.

liamog · 28-06-2021 02:34PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

Well I think it's clear there's an issue on enforcement, and the lack of use of available technology. I do disagree with the penalties being too harsh - when points were introduced there was an immediate effect on driver behaviour. That waned only when it became obvious nothing had changed regarding enforcement.

I regularly drive down Chapel Hill in Lucan, it's one of those roads where a 30km/h was implemented at all times. I flip the cruise control on the car and let it handle itself. It's very rare that the car in front of me will do the speed limit, and there have been multiple occasions where professional drivers (taxi's and van's) will overtake.

I would much rather see a driver given a €10 fine there every week and enforcement becomes a given, than the current system where a Garda might show up once in 3 years and give everyone an €80 fine and 3 points. There is a reluctance to enforce our current traffic laws because the punishments do not fit the consequence of the action.

Macy0161 · 28-06-2021 02:39PM

theguzman wrote: »

A speedvan hitting you for 52km/h in a 50km/h zone is just down right disgraceful, especially in cars with analogue and MPH speedos where the margin of error is questionable. A guard won't likely hit you for 52km in a 50 and he will wait for the pillock coming through at 80-90km/h to make an example of them.

Anyone done for 52 in a 50 zone, the speedo was showing closer to 60. The margin of error is built into the cars.

liamog · 28-06-2021 02:41PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

Anyone done for 52 in a 50 zone, the speedo was showing closer to 60. The margin of error is built into the cars.

Depends on your car, when my digital speedo is showing 52km/h, the car is travelling at 50km/h. This is validated against GPS Speeds and the Scoreboards Fingal County Council like to install.

Macy0161 · 28-06-2021 02:44PM

liamog wrote: »

Depends on your car, when my digital speedo is showing 52km/h, the car is travelling at 50km/h. This is validated against GPS Speeds and the Scoreboards Fingal County Council like to install.

So the speedo is still showing over 50?

liamog wrote: »

I would much rather see a driver given a €10 fine there every week and enforcement becomes a given, than the current system where a Garda might show up once in 3 years and give everyone an €80 fine and 3 points. There is a reluctance to enforce our current traffic laws because the punishments do not fit the consequence of the action.

I think it's more the perception is that road traffic laws aren't as important, rather than the punishments being too severe. And that includes the gardaí. They're institutional opposed to the use (particularly the easy use) of dash and other camera footage for enforcement of road traffic laws. When they're investigating "real crime" they put out press releases looking for dashcam footage.

That's reflected in the courts system, where we can see the sentences where people are killed or seriously injured in Road Traffic incidents versus any other circumstances. Lives are valued less in our courts if it was a traffic incident.

magicbastarder · 28-06-2021 02:48PM

liamog wrote: »

Depends on your car, when my digital speedo is showing 52km/h, the car is travelling at 50km/h. This is validated against GPS Speeds and the Scoreboards Fingal County Council like to install.

your car is not allowed understate your speed, but can overstate it by 10% + 10km/h (according to this )

if you have a satnav, it should be easy enough to tell how accurate your speedo is.

liamog · 28-06-2021 02:52PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

I think it's more the perception is that road traffic laws aren't as important, rather than the punishments being too severe. And that includes the gardaí.

I don't disagree with you here, but the answer is more enforcement and less punishment. The system should be designed to correct behaviour not punish offenders. Under the current system if we had one week where every traffic law was enforced 100% there wouldn't be a single person in the country who wasn't banned from driving or facing charges for pedestrian and cycling offences.

Macy0161 · 28-06-2021 03:18PM

liamog wrote: »

Under the current system if we had one week where every traffic law was enforced 100% there wouldn't be a single person in the country who wasn't banned from driving or facing charges for pedestrian and cycling offences.

I'd be pretty sure on the pedestrian bit to be honest - I'm not sure what law you think every pedestrian is breaking every week! Majority of cyclists would be fine too. About the only thing would be the ancient light laws that mention lens size.

liamog · 28-06-2021 03:28PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'd be pretty sure on the pedestrian bit to be honest - I'm not sure what law you think every pedestrian is breaking every week! Majority of cyclists would be fine too. About the only thing would be the ancient light laws that mention lens size.

I know I'd be regularly guilty of crossing the road within 15m of pedestrian crossing without using the crossing, and of failing to only start to cross when the green man is showing. Similarly when I'm on the bike, it's almost a given that cyclists will pass the stop line when reaching a junction, you end up in a much safer position in front of the stopped cars, but technically you've breached the red light. I also regularly dismount the bike on the footpath outside my house instead of the 1m further away where it's still the road.

Strumms · 28-06-2021 03:29PM

Vestiapx wrote: »

Increase the limits, they are based on cars from the 60s.

They are also to be fair based on absolute fractions of traffic on our roads compared to now..

magicbastarder · 28-06-2021 04:21PM

also, road deaths in the 60s peaked at 462 in 1969; which as you mention, probably was a small fraction of traffic.

nj27 · 28-06-2021 04:39PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Great argument for speed limiters on cars.

Fair point, but you could also argue you don’t have to use all of the power all of the time. Speed is also an issue of responsibility IMO.

Macy0161 · 28-06-2021 04:45PM

liamog wrote: »

I know I'd be regularly guilty of crossing the road within 15m of pedestrian crossing without using the crossing, and of failing to only start to cross when the green man is showing. Similarly when I'm on the bike, it's almost a given that cyclists will pass the stop line when reaching a junction, you end up in a much safer position in front of the stopped cars, but technically you've breached the red light. I also regularly dismount the bike on the footpath outside my house instead of the 1m further away where it's still the road.

In a rural location, there would be much less opportunity for either to be fair. The only reason I have to walk on the road when there is a pavement available is due to lazy motorists blocking the pavement opposite the centra (on double yellows).

liamog · 28-06-2021 05:55PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

In a rural location, there would be much less opportunity for either to be fair. The only reason I have to walk on the road when there is a pavement available is due to lazy motorists blocking the pavement opposite the centra (on double yellows).

Having lived in rural areas, I'd of been guilty of using the road without due consideration when crossing the road to walk on the outside of a bend instead of sticking to walking towards traffic.
Again an example of doing something that makes it safer for everyone but would be against the "rules"

Uncle Pierre · 28-06-2021 06:33PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You did notice the bit of my statement that you didn't highlight in bold?

Yes thank you, I did notice that bit, as I read your post properly. I don't think however that you read my post properly, since you don't seem to have grasped its core point.

There's no real issue with the bit I didn't put in bold, because if you are indeed commenting on those RSA stats, it's reasonably valid to say there are "large percentages of drivers speeding on all categories of roads".

I say "no real issue" and "reasonably valid" because the proportions speeding (according to those stats) on certain types of roads were as low as 5%, 9%, 13%, 21% and 23%. "Large" is obviously as subjective term - I wouldn't consider 13%, for example, to be large. But maybe you do. That's your perogative.

But it remains wholly incorrect to use those stats to state (as you did) that there are "98% of drivers speeding on urban roads", when that 98% figure applies only to urban national roads with a 30 km/h limit, and when there were four other types of urban roads surveyed too.

Simple maths shows a total of 3,640 vehicles surveyed on urban roads, and 2,353 of them deemed to be speeding. That's 65%.

I repeat: still a significant proportion, but far short of 98%.

Podge_irl · 28-06-2021 08:05PM

liamog wrote: »

Having lived in rural areas, I'd of been guilty of using the road without due consideration when crossing the road to walk on the outside of a bend instead of sticking to walking towards traffic.
Again an example of doing something that makes it safer for everyone but would be against the "rules"

That is very obviously not illegal. Speeding is. Conflating the two is ridiculous.

Timing belt · 28-06-2021 08:16PM

Tyrone212 wrote: »

I think eventually cars will be fitted with a device that prevents them from exceeding the speed limit depending on what road they are on and the speed limit for said road. In cases of emergency this can be overridden but it will be followed up with to make sure an actual emergency was underway.

Until then I don't think much of a dent can happen.

Restricting the ability to accelerate out of a potential accident will only lead to more deaths. Two weeks on the M7 a artic truck driver fell asleep at the wheel and wondered onto the fast lane and nearly crushed me. I broke but could see a pile up happening as cars behind got closer to my rear view mirror. In the end I accelerated and drove on the grass verge an inch away from the barrier to get out of being crushed or causing a pile up. Speed on the motorway is not the issue it is stupid drivers pulled no in on hard shoulder, not keeping to the left lane and driving to close to the car infront that cause accidents. Rather than reduce last speed limits it might be more worth while enforcing the rules of the road

AndrewJRenko · 28-06-2021 08:28PM

Timing belt wrote: »

Restricting the ability to accelerate out of a potential accident will only lead to more deaths. Two weeks on the M7 a artic truck driver fell asleep at the wheel and wondered onto the fast lane and nearly crushed me. I broke but could see a pile up happening as cars behind got closer to my rear view mirror. In the end I accelerated and drove on the grass verge an inch away from the barrier to get out of being crushed or causing a pile up. Speed on the motorway is not the issue it is stupid drivers pulled no in on hard shoulder, not keeping to the left lane and driving to close to the car infront that cause accidents. Rather than reduce last speed limits it might be more worth while enforcing the rules of the road

Seems to work all right with HGVs and coaches that have operated with speed limiters for years. They don't seem to get into loads of accidents collisions as a result of their limiters. Once they're fitted to all cars, the lads behind you won't be tearing around either.

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

Yes thank you, I did notice that bit, as I read your post properly. I don't think however that you read my post properly, since you don't seem to have grasped its core point.

There's no real issue with the bit I didn't put in bold, because if you are indeed commenting on those RSA stats, it's reasonably valid to say there are "large percentages of drivers speeding on all categories of roads".

I say "no real issue" and "reasonably valid" because the proportions speeding (according to those stats) on certain types of roads were as low as 5%, 9%, 13%, 21% and 23%. "Large" is obviously as subjective term - I wouldn't consider 13%, for example, to be large. But maybe you do. That's your perogative.

But it remains wholly incorrect to use those stats to state (as you did) that there are "98% of drivers speeding on urban roads", when that 98% figure applies only to urban national roads with a 30 km/h limit, and when there were four other types of urban roads surveyed too.

Simple maths shows a total of 3,640 vehicles surveyed on urban roads, and 2,353 of them deemed to be speeding. That's 65%.

I repeat: still a significant proportion, but far short of 98%.

Look a the the table in the Appendix.
https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Speed/RRD_Res_20190204_FreeSpeedSurvey2018FINAL.pdf
There's a lot more %s over 50% than under 50% un the results. As you've shown yourself, 2 out of every 3 drivers surveyed was speeding.

That's a very, very serious problem.

knucklehead6 · 28-06-2021 08:32PM

I’ll say this for Jezza. She sure does get a lot of traction in her threads.

Chris_5339762 · 28-06-2021 08:48PM

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

The ones that do annoy me are roadworks.

Around the Dunkettle roadworks, the limits are 80 and 60. I drive at roughly those speeds. No-one, and I mean almost no-one else does.

Yes they are stupid speeds, but now I'm the hazard because I'm going half the speed of everyone else. Including lorries, buses, everything. Its honestly dangerous. However, on the one day that I do go faster you can guarantee the speed van will be somewhere.

Just to follow this up.

Pottering along at the 60kmh speed limit in the works this morning with traffic passing me at 90 - 100. See a tractor in the distance going at about 50kmh, so I speed up to about 80kmh to not take the piss but get past him at a decent speed. Car flies up behind me and lays on the horn, gesturing wildly.

I gestured rudely back when he tore past me afterwards.

Timing belt · 28-06-2021 09:58PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Seems to work all right with HGVs and coaches that have operated with speed limiters for years. They don't seem to get into loads of accidents collisions as a result of their limiters. Once they're fitted to all cars, the lads behind you won't be tearing around either.

Look a the the table in the Appendix.
https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Speed/RRD_Res_20190204_FreeSpeedSurvey2018FINAL.pdf
There's a lot more %s over 50% than under 50% un the results. As you've shown yourself, 2 out of every 3 drivers surveyed was speeding.

That's a very, very serious problem.

You assume cars were breaking the speed limit none of the cars were but the ability to accelerate out of trouble saved a serious incident.

liamog · 28-06-2021 10:16PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

That is very obviously not illegal. Speeding is. Conflating the two is ridiculous.

Can you cite a reason for why this would not be illegal, the only thing I can find is the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997
Which has a section rules for pedestrians

(4) Subject to sub-article (5), save when crossing the roadway, a pedestrian shall use a footway if one is provided, and if one is not provided, shall keep as near as possible to the right edge of the roadway.

It's the same regulation that confirms two cyclists can cycle alongside each other, and one can overtake the pair. I'm not sure why you are allowed to pick and choose which part of the regulation you think is valid.

My point is not to justify speeding, my argument is that nobody would benefit from a 100% crackdown on all traffic regulations.

magicbastarder · 28-06-2021 10:41PM

that just states you walk along the road so as to face oncoming traffic - it doesn't state that you pick your side on a bend so as to maximise visibility.

in fact the law is blind (pun intended) as to whether you walk on the inside or outside of a blind bend. it says you walk on the right.

liamog · 28-06-2021 10:42PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

that just states you walk along the road so as to face oncoming traffic - it doesn't state that you pick your side on a bend so as to maximise visibility.

in fact the law is blind (pun intended) as to whether you walk on the inside or outside of a blind bend. it says you walk on the right.

Exactly, in practice, I will not walk on the inside of a blind bend, instead I will cross the road and walk on the left until such time as the visibility has improved.
I would much rather be alive than be legally correct.

magicbastarder · 28-06-2021 10:45PM

i do like the fact that the rules of the road state you shouldn't cross the road near a parked car. that'd render large parts of dublin uncrossable.

liamog · 28-06-2021 11:02PM

Don't get me started on this one, I'd never be allowed to date anyone I'd given a lift.

(4) A driver shall not give simultaneous contradictory signals.

Uncle Pierre · 28-06-2021 11:43PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Look a the the table in the Appendix.
https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Speed/RRD_Res_20190204_FreeSpeedSurvey2018FINAL.pdf

Which table, in which appendix? There are six appendices with a total of 23 tables.

But let's presume you mean the one to which we've been referring already:

Peregrine wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There's a lot more %s over 50% than under 50% un the results.

Incorrect. Of the 16 types of road surveyed, only six have a "% speeding" figure of over 50%.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

As you've shown yourself, 2 out of every 3 drivers surveyed was speeding.

Incorrect on two counts:
1 - It's incorrect to say I showed myself that two out every three drivers surveyed was speeding. What I showed was that 65% of drivers surveyed on urban roads was speeding.

However, I now see that even this 65% figure actually overstates the extent of speeding in urban areas. if you add in the number surveyed in residential areas - as Appendix 2 of the full report that you helpfully provided the link for points out these residential areas are themselves located within urban areas - then the total figures become 2,750 deemed speeding out of a total of 5,268. This equates to 52%.

2 - It's incorrect in itself to claim that two out of every three drivers surveyed was speeding. The total number of drivers was surveyed was 12,240 and the total number deemed to be speeding was 4,623. That's 38% overall.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's a very, very serious problem.

Back to subjectivity, and you may very well deem it a very, very serious problem if 52% of drivers in urban areas are over the speed limit, and 38% of drivers overall, in the very specific conditions in which the survey was conducted (see "methodology" on page 3 of the full report). But it's still a long way from your original claim that 98% of drivers are speeding.

With all due respect, your posts on this subject are a perfect example of how statistics are so often misinterpreted or misrepresented, or both.

nj27 · 29-06-2021 01:16AM

I would like to race at Le Mans. Would bloody love to. Until such a point in time, however, I am limited to the public roads. I'd never speed, but I would love to absolutely tear around Dublin and its environs in my M3. It would excite me to no end. I am destined for Le Mans perhaps.

Speeding is endemic in this country, what can be done about it?

Comments