Time to disband the RSA?

dr.fuzzenstein · 20-07-2010 12:36PM

Gophur wrote: »

So, what would you propose? No Road Safety Authority?

Sexist Ads? Which ones, exactly? And is the message they contain, false?

It seems the target audience, the young f*ckwits who cannot drive without putting others' lives and health in danger, are upset about the messages being transmitted by the RSA.

The RSA are trying hard to promote road safety. Any road death is a road death too many. If it means slowing down young male drivers, then so be it. If it eventually means limiting young males drivers, then so be it.

You might not like the message but the facts are hard to ignore. Young male drivers are the single biggest danger on our roads. Young male drivers seem to fail to realise they actually have to share the roads with everyone else, they do not own a single cm of the roads.
Using them is a privilege, not a right.

As long as we have idiots causing mayhem, you will have the RSA messages.

He drives, She dies.
I'm 40 and when I hear that crap I usually get so annoyed I nearly crash, it's nothing but ignorant claptrap. And once I have cleaned the vomit of my dash I say to myself "next time put it on mute".
You really think some 17-25 year old guy will listen to that and go "Oh yeah, they're right, I really must slow down?"
It's seldom an ad is so bad I just put it on mute whenever it comes on, but I cannot physically listen to that sh*te.
If you're trying to get through to a target audience, this should be in the textbook as to how not to do it.
I mean, if you want someone to cooperate with you would you go over to him, grab him by the collar and go "hey you, arsehole, do this for me NOW!"
All you're going to get for that is a kick in the nuts.
The lesson here:
Don't shout at people or threaten them if you want them to work with you.
As for me, I will just keep ignoring the RSA, so far I have heard little that would ring a bell with me.

Gophur · 20-07-2010 12:39PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

.........
You really think some 17-25 year old guy will listen to that and go "Oh yeah, they're right, I really must slow down?"............

Have you ever listened to the ad? It's not aimed at the young male driver.

metzengerstein · 20-07-2010 12:48PM

yes do away with these b**tards

id rather see actual improvments in the roads ,proper saftey measures taken ,more police patroling roads and motorways ,then these ridiculous ads
telling us how to use roundabouts and motorways and blaming one sex for all the road accidents
if a propper system was put in f**king place like in in other euro countrys to teach people how to drive in the 1st place we wouldnt have this problem.
or lack of the problem .

rsa are a joke and the and the lazy hole government also :mad:

ShadowHearth · 20-07-2010 01:16PM

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Number of Staff in RSA 170

Wages and expenses for 2009 were 5,436000 and 351000 respectively

Average Wage of someone working for the RSA in 2009 was E31,976. Average expenses were E2064

They spent 1609000 on capital expenditure e.g. road signs etc

They spent 55,948,000 on current expenditure e.g. advertising.

Total expenditure for 2009 was 66,189,000.

There was a drop in deaths during this period of 59. So the question is what is the value of someone's life? Is it 1,121,847?

Here are the facts and the figures, took me a few min to break down from this document page 25 onwards

http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=12421&lang=ENG&loc=1512

If the value of someone's life is less than the figure above then the RSA should be abolished. If its above it should be kept. However let me point out the law of diminishing returns will set in incredibly quickly. For instance there is no way the number of road deaths will drop by 59 again in a year .

So is someone's life worth more than 2,3,4,5 million? Maybe the RSA was a great temporary organisation to have to instill safety in Irish people, and that now is should be brought back into the transport department with a much smaller team and budget. I don't know and i'd hate to be the person that can make the decision as to the value of someone's life.

The only thing i know is there is a value...

Savage m8. That figure per person should be way bigger. All 59 so called saved lifes were not just theyr job. I doubt if it would be atleast 50%. I newer ever lisined for those safety adds, but i newer ever drink drive. Now a fella who does drink drive, he wount give a **** about those adds. He will just have a lought. So i gyess money wasted?

I would actuolly love to see poeple who actually admitted that one of those adds changed theyr habbits. Any biardsies?

Gophur · 20-07-2010 01:33PM

The factorising of the RSA expenditure into the number of lives saved is pathetic, TBH. Without the Road Safety efforts, who knows how many people would have been killed or injured? Would it be 200 higher? If that's the case then the cost needs to be divided by 259, not just 59.

The RSA is absolutely necessary. As long as you have idiots on our roads, be they young dangerous drivers, old dangerous drivers, foreign dangerous drivers, or whatever, we need an RSA.

I still cannot see any suggestion, on this forum, as to an alternative to the current RSA, whose efforts are paying dividends, whatever way you calculate them.

Viper_JB · 20-07-2010 01:39PM

Gophur wrote: »

The factorising of the RSA expenditure into the number of lives saved is pathetic, TBH. Without the Road Safety efforts, who knows how many people would have been killed or injured? Would it be 200 higher? If that's the case then the cost needs to be divided by 259, not just 59.

The RSA is absolutely necessary. As long as you have idiots on our roads, be they young dangerous drivers, old dangerous drivers, foreign dangerous drivers, or whatever, we need an RSA.

I still cannot see any suggestion, on this forum, as to an alternative to the current RSA, whose efforts are paying dividends, whatever way you calculate them.

do you work for the RSA?

dr.fuzzenstein · 20-07-2010 01:50PM

Gophur wrote: »

Have you ever listened to the ad? It's not aimed at the young male driver.

That's just twice as much reason not to listen to it.

Slidey · 20-07-2010 02:22PM

I have a bigger problem with the RSA.

They are the people who are charged with overseeing DoE testing in this country. These tests are performed on vehicles that can exceed 40 tonne or carry over 50 people, yet the testing in this country is rife with inaccuracies, inconsistency and down right crookedness.

Sickens my hole. Then when they do conduct an audit they pull on me for not filling out my daily report sheets. A load of cock

metzengerstein · 20-07-2010 02:23PM

{qoute}The RSA is absolutely necessary. As long as you have idiots on our roads, be they young dangerous drivers, old dangerous drivers, foreign dangerous drivers, or whatever, we need an RSA.{qoute}

whats the point in them being there ,just to make ridiculous ads and campaigns that dont do s**t .

it doesnt bring the death toll down ,these ads infuriate people .look at the two threads already about this, just p***ed off people and nobody saying .oh i better change my driving now .

like i said they need to actually get the finger out ,and stop sitting behind their desk thinking of f**king slogans for their next ad

Gophur · 20-07-2010 03:00PM

metzengerstein wrote: »

whats the point in them being there ,just to make ridiculous ads and campaigns that dont do s**t .

.................

That's not their sole purpose.

metzengerstein wrote: »

.....................
it doesnt bring the death toll down ,these ads infuriate people .look at the two threads already about this, just p***ed off people and nobody saying .oh i better change my driving now .
.............................

Well then, the results speak for themselves, the accidents/deaths/injuries numbers have fallen dramatically.

As for the "infuriated" people? They need to get a life and not be so easily annoyed.

metzengerstein wrote: »

...................
like i said they need to actually get the finger out ,and stop sitting behind their desk thinking of f**king slogans for their next ad

Go on then, since you obviously know so much more than the professionals. What should they do?

Not target the most dangerous section of drivers?

Not have anti-speeding campaigns?

What?

There's none so deaf as those who do not want to hear! - eh?

Mimikyu · 20-07-2010 03:30PM

This post has been deleted.

metzengerstein · 20-07-2010 03:33PM

Go on then, since you obviously know so much more than the professionals. What should they do? ansered below

Not target the most dangerous section of drivers? theyve always targeted males ,but i dont think we are any more dangerous then women i do alot of driving and i see alot

Not have anti-speeding campaigns? why have ad campaigns when you could have actually doing something about it campaigns

what should they do ,they should make our roads more safe to drive on ,put a proper level of driving education out there and have more police patroling the roads actually make people care and mind what there doing and enforce the rules of the road ,adverts dont make this happen .there are alot of people on our roads that never even got lessons just went got a provisional and hopped in a car and off they go.

so how am i deaf like you said 'gophur' because id like to see a solution to it ,rather than pathetic sexist ads ,why point the finger when they could do something practical about it.

dr.fuzzenstein · 20-07-2010 08:08PM

Gophur wrote: »

That's not their sole purpose.
Well then, the results speak for themselves, the accidents/deaths/injuries numbers have fallen dramatically.
As for the "infuriated" people? They need to get a life and not be so easily annoyed.
Go on then, since you obviously know so much more than the professionals. What should they do?
Not target the most dangerous section of drivers?
Not have anti-speeding campaigns?
What?
There's none so deaf as those who do not want to hear! - eh?

Yes, you need to raise awareness about speeding and drink driving. For that we have some nice, shiny ads on telly
You will also need to train people to drive properly in the first place. Driver training must include motorway, night and adverser weather condition. Keeping learners of the safest roads in the country is FCUKING INSANE! Not happening
Get rid of slow, insane, drugged up (painkillers), deaf, blind and incapable drivers. Not happening
Have the Gards stop people for stupid and slow driving instead of just (Tax, Insurance, Graaaand), not happening
So far for the RSA 1 out of 4, fail.
Everyone says the RSA is paying for themselves by preventing 2-3 deaths, why don't they really make an effort and save dozens more?
I say they're not saving lives, they're killing people by inaction!

bmw535d · 20-07-2010 08:30PM

all cars in Ireland should be limited to 120kph. they should not pass the nct unless the limiter is in place, meaning all cars would have it in 4 years.

dr.fuzzenstein · 20-07-2010 09:11PM

bmw535d wrote: »

all cars in Ireland should be limited to 120kph. they should not pass the nct unless the limiter is in place, meaning all cars would have it in 4 years.

Well thank God there's a crackpot idea that will never see the light of day.

jayok · 20-07-2010 10:14PM

bmw535d wrote: »

all cars in Ireland should be limited to 120kph. they should not pass the nct unless the limiter is in place, meaning all cars would have it in 4 years.

You need to think about this some more. Limiting to 120 kph doesn't physically prevent someone from speeding through a 50 kph zone at the said 120. Equally taking a sharp bend at 120 would still be a possibility.

You see, speed itself, isn't an issue, its inappropriate speed for the road, conditions, environment, etc is.

paddydriver · 20-07-2010 10:55PM

At least if their disbanded it might free up some youtube bandwidth - they seem to spend a lot of time on there looking for yung fella's doing stupid things in their glanza's....:rolleyes:

eoinl4529 · 20-07-2010 11:00PM

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Number of Staff in RSA 170

Wages and expenses for 2009 were 5,436000 and 351000 respectively

Average Wage of someone working for the RSA in 2009 was E31,976. Average expenses were E2064

They spent 1609000 on capital expenditure e.g. road signs etc

They spent 55,948,000 on current expenditure e.g. advertising.

Total expenditure for 2009 was 66,189,000.

There was a drop in deaths during this period of 59. So the question is what is the value of someone's life? Is it 1,121,847?

Here are the facts and the figures, took me a few min to break down from this document page 25 onwards

http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=12421&lang=ENG&loc=1512

If the value of someone's life is less than the figure above then the RSA should be abolished. If its above it should be kept. However let me point out the law of diminishing returns will set in incredibly quickly. For instance there is no way the number of road deaths will drop by 59 again in a year .

So is someone's life worth more than 2,3,4,5 million? Maybe the RSA was a great temporary organisation to have to instill safety in Irish people, and that now is should be brought back into the transport department with a much smaller team and budget. I don't know and i'd hate to be the person that can make the decision as to the value of someone's life.

The only thing i know is there is a value...

we can all agree there has been a drop in deaths but isnt there a drop in the ammount of people on the roads these days??
since the recession there have been way fewer trucks on the roads than during the recession. many people lost theyre jobs so they do not travel to work in the mornings and evenings. there are very few cars on the roads during the day and afternoon.
this also leads to a fewer ammount of crashes and fewer road deaths.

limklad · 21-07-2010 12:28AM

eoinl4529 wrote: »

we can all agree there has been a drop in deaths but isnt there a drop in the ammount of people on the roads these days??
since the recession there have been way fewer trucks on the roads than during the recession. many people lost theyre jobs so they do not travel to work in the mornings and evenings. there are very few cars on the roads during the day and afternoon.
this also leads to a fewer ammount of crashes and fewer road deaths.

Not only that, but people are travelling less, less of a hurry to get places and watching their pockets, buying more fuel efficient and safer cars with the scrappage scheme by removing more older vehicles from the road.

Conor_M1990 · 21-07-2010 04:02PM

biko wrote: »

. Alternative restrict the power of cars for the first 5 years to 1 litre or 40kW.

More Garda on duty at night around pubs. Also on duty early Saturdays and Sundays to prevent second day drunks.

Just read that there most 1 litre cars are death traps imo there made of tin the power of the car has nothing to do with it road safety imo its to do with attitude.

I agree there but then knowing this country the rural publicans and Fianna fail will kick up a big huff and puff about it

Time to disband the RSA?

Comments