nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Speed Traps

[Deleted User]

Before I start, this isn't a rant at gardai, I'm just interested on garda opinion on the effectiveness of speed traps.

A few nights ago on that 4 lane road towards the roundabout by IBIS hotel in Galway, a few cars were pulled over for breaking 50k/hr limit.

This was at 11.30 at night with very little traffic on it and 5 members of the force were involved in the operation

Do Gardai feel this is going to prevent road deaths, catching people doing moderate speed on a quiet, wide open road

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

colly10

opti76 wrote: »

how could we use common sense.. its a speed limit not a speed suggestion....

5 mph makes a lot of difference its the difference between living a normal like and life as a vegetable...
maybe he should use his common sense and drive 5 miles an hour under the limit...

It's the odds of that 5kph causing an accident. If we built a 3 lane motorway and put a 60kph limit on it would you still say the same thing? If he did 120 kph in this situation id still think he was hard done by.
The limit is rediculous imo, notice that they are not checking for speed around black spots where speeding would likely cause an accident.
It's honestly been at least 2 years since i've see a speed check on a back road, yet I see alot of speed checks on open carrageways, it has noting to do with saving lives, it's all about revenue generation and catching people out

TheNog

colly10 wrote: »

It's honestly been at least 2 years since i've see a speed check on a back road, yet I see alot of speed checks on open carrageways, it has noting to do with saving lives, it's all about revenue generation and catching people out

I dont think you are looking the bigger picture here at all. Most back roads do not have a safe place for a patrol car to park up, the distance required to fix the speed of a car on the radar and no safe place for a car to pull over without putting the lives of the garda, the driver being stopped and other road users at risk. We also must consider volumes of traffic too. In the mornings or evening when people are going to or coming from work we have to think if we do clock a person speeding would we be able to catch that person safely without having to overtake cars wit other cars coming towards us. Stretches of straight road are much safer for all of the above actions that are needed to be done.

Anyway where there are safe places on back roads the speed check is not done all day but rather maybe 15-20 minutes and then we move onto another road in the district. People always say they never see checks on a particular road but tbh honest my district is 50km in circumference.

colly10

TheNog wrote: »

Anyway where there are safe places on back roads the speed check is not done all day but rather maybe 15-20 minutes and then we move onto another road in the district. People always say they never see checks on a particular road but tbh honest my district is 50km in circumference.

But I assume that your only spending 15 to 20 mins because of the lack of people using the road? If saving lives was a concern then is time not better spent there as speeding on a bad road is far more dangerous. Busy carrageways are checked as the limit is low (compared to the limit on some dangerous back roads), they get alot of users and many break the limit on them. Deaths on carrageways are rare when you consider the amount of cars that use them but they are checked because it's easy to catch people on them

Why do you not spend more time on dangerous roads (if there is a safe place to set up the equipment), if you go back to the station after catching very few people speeding (or noone) do they feel that your not doing your job right? If you catch one person taking the piss on a bad road thats equivelent to catching 10 people speeding on a motorway imo

Fyr.Fytr

TheNog wrote: »

I dont think you are looking the bigger picture here at all. Most back roads do not have a safe place for a patrol car to park up, the distance required to fix the speed of a car on the radar and no safe place for a car to pull over without putting the lives of the garda, the driver being stopped and other road users at risk. We also must consider volumes of traffic too. In the mornings or evening when people are going to or coming from work we have to think if we do clock a person speeding would we be able to catch that person safely without having to overtake cars wit other cars coming towards us. Stretches of straight road are much safer for all of the above actions that are needed to be done.

Anyway where there are safe places on back roads the speed check is not done all day but rather maybe 15-20 minutes and then we move onto another road in the district. People always say they never see checks on a particular road but tbh honest my district is 50km in circumference.

Yup exactly what i said a good few posts up

Copy cat

lol

TheNog

colly10 wrote: »

But I assume that your only spending 15 to 20 mins because of the lack of people using the road? If saving lives was a concern then is time not better spent there as speeding on a bad road is far more dangerous. Busy carrageways are checked as the limit is low (compared to the limit on some dangerous back roads), they get alot of users and many break the limit on them. Deaths on carrageways are rare when you consider the amount of cars that use them but they are checked because it's easy to catch people on them

There is little point in doing speed checks on roads that are rarely used as the impact on driver behaviour is extremely limited. I do checks usually 20 minutes long which at first are high visibility to show drivers that I am there and that I will prosecute those who speed excessively. After that first check I would 2-3 covert checks ( where I am not visible on different days ) again to hammer home the speed and safety end of it.
As for motorways or dual carraigeways I cannot really comment because until recently we had a very small part of a motorway in our district but now our district has grown so we will now do checks on that motorway too. The reason I will do a check on this motorway is not because there is a high risk of death as you mentioned but because there is a high risk of injury due to the increased speed. The safety mechanisms of a motorway prevent death to a great extent. I am not interested in catching people going just over the limit but those who massively exceed the limit on a particular road.

colly10 wrote: »

Why do you not spend more time on dangerous roads (if there is a safe place to set up the equipment), if you go back to the station after catching very few people speeding (or noone) do they feel that your not doing your job right? If you catch one person taking the piss on a bad road thats equivelent to catching 10 people speeding on a motorway imo

Most of my district consists of small back roads that are used by speeders and I rotate my speed checks on these roads as well as the roads we do not have a problem with.
There were many times I went back to my station especially after doing a covert speed check and caught no one. In these cases I would extend my time to 30 minutes and I feel good that I caught no one. At least I know then the roads are a little safer cos the drivers are getting the message. In my district alone we have had 2 fatalities in the last 12 months and in both of these cases there was nothing we could have done to prevent them.

1. cyclist in a road race crashed head first into a parked vehicle and died instantly
2. driver had a heart attack and died

So question is when I approach a driver I have just caught speeding, what am I thinking?

A) Brilliant more money for the government ( *and rubbing my hands in glee *)

or

I hope this driver gets the message not to speed so they are not putting themselves or another in danger.

Answer is B and the reason for that? Cos I was at a particularly bad crash involving a car and a lorry and I saw a woman who had no skin on her arm. I know its not the worst crash scene but it was for me. Now think of the guards, ambulance and fire brigade who attended to a fatal crash or one where kids are screaming in pain or those who are permanently disfigured and disabled. These people live with those injuries for the rest of their lives and carry the pain and suffering. People of the emergency services are not inhuman either and it affects them too but to a smaller degree than the injured.

So in general is speeding acceptable? It never can be cos you may be a competent enough driver to travel at 20-30kph or more over the limit but the next fella may not be. That is why people are being caught speeding and prosecuted for it and I for one will not apologise for it.

Capri

'Answer is B and the reason for that? Cos I was at a particularly bad crash involving a car and a lorry and I saw a woman who had no skin on her arm. I know its not the worst crash scene but it was for me. Now think of the guards, ambulance and fire brigade who attended to a fatal crash or one where kids are screaming in pain or those who are permanently disfigured and disabled. These people live with those injuries for the rest of their lives and carry the pain and suffering. People of the emergency services are not inhuman either and it affects them too but to a smaller degree than the injured.

So in general is speeding acceptable? It never can be cos you may be a competent enough driver to travel at 20-30kph or more over the limit but the next fella may not be. That is why people are being caught speeding and prosecuted for it and I for one will not apologise for it.'

1) Years ago in Australia, a motor magazine had a sealed section in it with a warning on it not to open if you were squeamish because it had pics. of road accident victims in it - the pics showed bodies with half their face missing, or gaping holes with intestines hanging out. Now i've never forgotten those pics , and maybe it's time for the Govt. to get tough about the facts / forensics of accidents. The Collision Investigation Unit should be given more prominence (though maybe some FACTS about road surfaces, speed limit signs etc might be unpalitable for our Councils ???)

2) I've got the IAM Advanced Driver cert, but I see 'young wans' with L-plates, in Micras, texting and passing me at 120kph - THEN they slow down to 60kph at 'known' speed trap zones, only to whack it up again after the trap area.
I think that more unmarked camera cars are the only way to go - people change behaviour when they see a marked car, but revert back once they've passed. Unmarked cars would have more 'quality' collars that the current 'quantity' ( for stats )policy ?

The majority of members seem to think that they get 'respect' while the reality is that the public just want to get past this 'intrusion' in their day, so "Yes Guard /No Guard" does that quickly.

TheNog

Capri wrote: »

1) Years ago in Australia, a motor magazine had a sealed section in it with a warning on it not to open if you were squeamish because it had pics. of road accident victims in it - the pics showed bodies with half their face missing, or gaping holes with intestines hanging out. Now i've never forgotten those pics , and maybe it's time for the Govt. to get tough about the facts / forensics of accidents. The Collision Investigation Unit should be given more prominence (though maybe some FACTS about road surfaces, speed limit signs etc might be unpalitable for our Councils ???)

A good idea but I wonder how long it would take us to become acclimatised to seeing such carnage on picture. Maybe we could go as far as recording the sounds at a RTA, you know the sound of the sirens, EMTs and firemen communicating and the screams and calls for help of the injured.

Capri wrote: »

2) I've got the IAM Advanced Driver cert, but I see 'young wans' with L-plates, in Micras, texting and passing me at 120kph - THEN they slow down to 60kph at 'known' speed trap zones, only to whack it up again after the trap area.
I think that more unmarked camera cars are the only way to go - people change behaviour when they see a marked car, but revert back once they've passed. Unmarked cars would have more 'quality' collars that the current 'quantity' ( for stats )policy ?

I believe that unmarked cars were used extensively by uniformed gardai pre-inspectorate times but due to public opinion that not enough visible Garda presence on the streets forced us back into the marked cars. Damned if you, damned if you dont.

One point I noticed you mentioned " unmarked camera cars". As far as I know we have no on-board cameras in any of our cars.

Capri wrote: »

2)The majority of members seem to think that they get 'respect' while the reality is that the public just want to get past this 'intrusion' in their day, so "Yes Guard /No Guard" does that quickly.

Getting respect from a motorist that I have stopped say for speeding is probably the last aim I have in mind when I speak to them. My priority is to explain the speed they were travelling at and the consequences of their actions should a collision occur. Tbh I couldnt care less what they think of me so long as they dont verbally abuse me at the roadside.

CO19

One thing I can never understand is why alot of Gards think they are ok to speed in either A;a police car or B; in their own cause I've a few family members and friends in the poice and they absolutely boot along I mean rocket down the road :mad: .
the other day I was off with my uncle who's a DS and was in his own car and we were tearing along the M50 it's ridiculous at why they do this most say they don't even notice :rolleyes: I'm like how'd you not notice you're car is about to take off

.
I've been in a car with another family member who's a Gard and we were pulled over and what a surprise as soon as the fella that stopped us found out my cousin was in the job it was jokes to the hilt and even threw in the comment "don't let me delay you anymore,back to what you were doin" :eek: :rolleyes: .

So when I hear of Gards killing people in crashes etc I always think did they not notice how fast they were going or think that they'd be ok speeding cause they're Gards and makes the outcome that is given from these crashes i.e. "it was an accident" hard to swallow seeing what I see on a regular basis,anyway I just can't understand why they'd do this

maybe it's just me

madser

salonfire wrote: »

That's just it, it wasn't a drink driving checkpoint.
Even when they stopped me, they didn't bag me. Although I must say their crackdown on drink driving is to be commended.

Now I have 2 more penalty points on my licence just for doing around 55mph on a wide, empty road with nothing in front of me. :mad:

I'm trying to look at the situation objectively here but I don't see how screwing people like that is going to prevent road deaths.

After all that is the garda's objective is isn't - reduce the number of accidents on the road?

Why then don't they target those who cause the majority of serious accidents

Thats ridiculous and a big wind up, the motorest is just a sitting duck for the gaurds to make money, why are they on the big safe roads when all the accidents are on the small roads, they spend millions expanding the m50 to a 3 lane carrigeway and bring the limit down to 100 its crazy:mad:

Sam Kade

I saw this lunatic driver today a woman about 50 driving a nissan micra, she came around the bend on the wrong side of the road speeding nearly hitting my car. She was driving so fast that her head was swaying from side to side, just up the road I saw an anmarked squad car catching them left right and center I only copped him when I was passing as he was checking the speed of a car comming towards me that idiot was also speeding. So I reckon that the woman in the micra will be getting a letter in the post in a couple of days, serves her right. This gard was on a straight stretch of road this woman was still speeding around a bend after the straight stretch who said that the gardai shouldn't have speed checks on straight stretches of road?

Eru

CO19 wrote: »

One thing I can never understand is why alot of Gards think they are ok to speed in either A;a police car or B; in their own cause I've a few family members and friends in the poice and they absolutely boot along I mean rocket down the road :mad: .
the other day I was off with my uncle who's a DS and was in his own car and we were tearing along the M50 it's ridiculous at why they do this most say they don't even notice :rolleyes: I'm like how'd you not notice you're car is about to take off .
I've been in a car with another family member who's a Gard and we were pulled over and what a surprise as soon as the fella that stopped us found out my cousin was in the job it was jokes to the hilt and even threw in the comment "don't let me delay you anymore,back to what you were doin" :eek: :rolleyes: .

So when I hear of Gards killing people in crashes etc I always think did they not notice how fast they were going or think that they'd be ok speeding cause they're Gards and makes the outcome that is given from these crashes i.e. "it was an accident" hard to swallow seeing what I see on a regular basis,anyway I just can't understand why they'd do this maybe it's just me

A, Because its hard to catch criminals without speeding up and
B, I am not aware of Gardai driving or running around killing people. Can you provide some evidence?

oh and please, if you know so many Gardai or Guards, please ask them how to spell it.

madser wrote: »

Thats ridiculous and a big wind up, the motorest is just a sitting duck for the gaurds to make money, why are they on the big safe roads when all the accidents are on the small roads, they spend millions expanding the m50 to a 3 lane carrigeway and bring the limit down to 100 its crazy:mad:

Another person that doesnt read and seems to believe Gardai actually keep the fines

dredre

madser wrote: »

Thats ridiculous and a big wind up, the motorest is just a sitting duck for the gaurds to make money, why are they on the big safe roads when all the accidents are on the small roads, they spend millions expanding the m50 to a 3 lane carrigeway and bring the limit down to 100 its crazy:mad:

1. The gardai didn't expand the M50.
2. Why do you need to drive more than 100kph on the M50?

Fyr.Fytr

When do you get the chance to drive more then 100km on the m50?

Y2J_MUFC

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

If the speed check was on a corner you would run into the Garda killing him, yourself and whoever was unlucky enough to be behind you!

Woah, woah, woah....So you're telling me there is not one single corner in the country where a speed check could safely be set up?

TBH, I don't see a point some Gardai parking up in a 50km zone where there has been no recorded accidents in years. That defies all logic. I mean, at my house has been changed to a 50km zone, from a 60mph zone about 10 years ago. There has never been a recorded accident in this zone, but yet it is amongst the 5 most profitable roads in the country. At one point we basically had a Garda car camped in front of our house for the best part of a week, night and day.

Tackle the known danger spots, tackle where the accidents happen, tackle the open roads. Going to work on a dual carriage way where the speed limit is 100, every morning and evening people are doing speeds of 120, 130+. Amount of times I've been checked for speed in 8 months on that road with the 100km zone: 1. In the 60KM zone, I've been checked about 7/8 times. I mean, there's something fundamentally wrong with that.

Checking speed should be about keeping people safe on dangerous stretches of road, not making a quick buck by parking up in a nice easy zone. Every weekend I see one act of absolute insanity on the roads on a 2 hour trip home and back, but yet they invariably get off scot-free and people in their suits and high powered BMW's and Mercs flying by me when I'm on the speed limit in a 100km zone, when Joe Bloggs doing 55 in a 50KM zone gets caught with an open road and nobody in front or behind him. Thats why people get frustrated

I mean, as regards drink driving... they are on the ball, as regards checking for tax, insurance, nct, on the ball...but speeding.....different story. Nobody is asking for miracles, just a bit of common sense.

TheNog

Y2J_MUFC wrote: »

Woah, woah, woah....So you're telling me there is not one single corner in the country where a speed check could safely be set up?

Here is the perfect spot for a speed check so try to picture this, a safe place to park the patrol car (front of the car facing to the road), a minimum distance of 150m either side to get a good lock on the speed gun, at least one good straight stretch of road on either side in order to chase the offending driver and pull them over on that straight part. Remember we do want to pull over a driver just after a bend (for obvious reasons) or to have force other drivers to overtake us at a series of bends. We do not want to cause an accident.

Y2J_MUFC wrote: »

TBH, I don't see a point some Gardai parking up in a 50km zone where there has been no recorded accidents in years. That defies all logic. I mean, at my house has been changed to a 50km zone, from a 60mph zone about 10 years ago. There has never been a recorded accident in this zone, but yet it is amongst the 5 most profitable roads in the country. At one point we basically had a Garda car camped in front of our house for the best part of a week, night and day.

Well I think the logic is fairly apparent. Speed checks = no accidents!!!!!!!!!!

You should be jumping for joy that people are not speeding up and down the road outside your house.

Can we have some evidence that your road is in the top 5 most profitable in the country? I would also like to see where are the other 4 are.

Y2J_MUFC wrote: »

Tackle the known danger spots, tackle where the accidents happen, tackle the open roads. Going to work on a dual carriage way where the speed limit is 100, every morning and evening people are doing speeds of 120, 130+. Amount of times I've been checked for speed in 8 months on that road with the 100km zone: 1. In the 60KM zone, I've been checked about 7/8 times. I mean, there's something fundamentally wrong with that.

Yes we do tackle these known zones for speeders just as much as we target other zones to force drivers to comply with speed restriction across the board. If you think about it, what do you not have much of on the open road?

KIDS playing and more pediastrians.

Y2J_MUFC wrote: »

Checking speed should be about keeping people safe on dangerous stretches of road, not making a quick buck by parking up in a nice easy zone. Every weekend I see one act of absolute insanity on the roads on a 2 hour trip home and back, but yet they invariably get off scot-free and people in their suits and high powered BMW's and Mercs flying by me when I'm on the speed limit in a 100km zone, when Joe Bloggs doing 55 in a 50KM zone gets caught with an open road and nobody in front or behind him. Thats why people get frustrated

People like you tend to forget that in a 50-60kph the hazards do not just come from in front or behind you. They also come from the side and from behind parked cars, vans, trucks etc.

Y2J_MUFC wrote: »

I mean, as regards drink driving... they are on the ball, as regards checking for tax, insurance, nct, on the ball...but speeding.....different story. Nobody is asking for miracles, just a bit of common sense.

If common sense did prevail people would not be killing themselves or others. We do the best we can with what we have.

Sully

Im all for speed checks, tho im not 100% sure about the slightly going over the speed. I think a lot of Guards take this into consideration when spotting a driver going over the limit.

But, is there any need for speed checks to be in ditches? As in, Guards hiting in a ditch to try catch out a driver? Iv rarley seen it, but I know the gf said she spotted a female guard doing it the other day but there was no guarda car (no car at all for that matter) in sight so it didnt make any sense anyway.

Sam Kade

Sully wrote: »

Im all for speed checks, tho im not 100% sure about the slightly going over the speed. I think a lot of Guards take this into consideration when spotting a driver going over the limit.

But, is there any need for speed checks to be in ditches? As in, Guards hiting in a ditch to try catch out a driver? Iv rarley seen it, but I know the gf said she spotted a female guard doing it the other day but there was no guarda car (no car at all for that matter) in sight so it didnt make any sense anyway.

Would it be better if they stood in the middle of the road and put up signs a mile in each direction saying warning speed checks :rolleyes: If you are driving at the correct speed you don't worry about speed checks.

TheNog

Sully wrote: »

Im all for speed checks, tho im not 100% sure about the slightly going over the speed. I think a lot of Guards take this into consideration when spotting a driver going over the limit.

+1

I havent met but have heard of guards doing people going just over the limit which is a disgrace I think. Quantity over quality.

Sully wrote: »

But, is there any need for speed checks to be in ditches? As in, Guards hiting in a ditch to try catch out a driver? Iv rarley seen it, but I know the gf said she spotted a female guard doing it the other day but there was no guarda car (no car at all for that matter) in sight so it didnt make any sense anyway.

Id rather not be in a ditch but I do some covert speed checks. Again sense has to prevail so I only prosecute those who I feel are excessively over the limit.

Maybe that banner was a probbie and is looking to get her numbers up??

Sully

TheNog wrote: »

+1

I havent met but have heard of guards doing people going just over the limit which is a disgrace I think. Quantity over quality.

Might be contested in court mind you. Probably be let of, Judges probably dont want that type of thing clogging up the courts.

Id rather not be in a ditch but I do some covert speed checks. Again sense has to prevail so I only prosecute those who I feel are excessively over the limit.

Maybe that banner was a probbie and is looking to get her numbers up??

Covert in what way? The thing is, if I drove past this lady at 100+km/hr (the stretch is 60km/hr and is widely critisiced by locals and councillors, and very rarley monitored by guards) she has no way of catching my reg or pulling me over unless the system she has takes the picture. In a ditch, I cant imagine its that good of a system.

Sully

Sam Kade wrote: »

Would it be better if they stood in the middle of the road and put up signs a mile in each direction saying warning speed checks :rolleyes: If you are driving at the correct speed you don't worry about speed checks.

No, thats not what im saying. As I have already said: Im all for speed checks. I think each case needs to be reviewed on a case by case basis. I do not agree with Guards hidding in ditches to catch its "prey". Its stupid and silly. All you need is a squad car (marked or unmarked) at the top of the road or in on the side. Iv seen this done plenty of times, and its very sucesfull. Iv seen them in closed petrol stations behind a tree, I dont mind that at all. Its in the ditch I think is OTT.