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

Ambulance behind, red light, what's your move?

12357

Comments

  • #122
    frankled
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 366 ✭✭frankled


    UDP wrote: »
    It might be worth looking at the video and street view link posted before you make an ignorant statement such as above. If the small car moved out any further its clear they would be on the lane for cars coming from the car's right side. That might be fine where someone knows the junction well thus knows the order of lights etc but maybe this car did not so you cannot blame them for not taking the risk in this instance if that is the case.

    Ignorant?? I've watched the video, I've looked at the links/diagrams posted. I live around the corner from the junction. Have YOU looked at the video? The only traffic with right of way in this video is that coming from Clondalkin- going either straight onto the Belgard Road towards Tallaght or right towards Naas. If in fact there was traffic coming from the car's right side like you claim, then yes, the car would have less space (although I still think some movement forwards would be possible). This post indicates to an extent the space allowed, as the cars are coming from the car's LEFT and towards Naas.


  • #123
    frankled
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 366 ✭✭frankled


    UDP wrote: »
    True but that doesn't help someone who ends up being liable for an accident because they were just trying to be practical. I would have broken the law and put my car in a position that could have caused an accident given certain circumstances for the sake of letting the ambulance get through but I can understand why someone else might not be comfortable doing so.

    Fair enough, so would I. But in this instance I think anybody with the required driving capability to be on the road in the firs place should be capable of letting that ambulance through cautiously and safely. They should have the practical ability to react to such a situation. If it were more dangerous I would of course understand but it is not in this case.


  • #124
    UDP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭UDP


    frankled wrote: »
    Ignorant?? I've watched the video, I've looked at the links/diagrams posted. I live around the corner from the junction. Have YOU looked at the video? The only traffic with right of way in this video is that coming from Clondalkin- going either straight onto the Belgard Road towards Tallaght or right towards Naas. If in fact there was traffic coming from the car's right side like you claim, then yes, the car would have less space (although I still think some movement forwards would be possible). This post indicates to an extent the space allowed, as the cars are coming from the car's LEFT and towards Naas.
    There was no traffic coming from the car's right in the video but the driver may not have known the order of the lights so may not have wanted to be stranded out when the lights went green for vehicles to the car's right. My point is that yes there was room while the cars were coming from the Clondalkin side and it would have been great if the driver had used that room but I can understand the reluctance at a busy junction in wet conditions if the driver did not know the junction/light order well.


  • #125
    frankled
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 366 ✭✭frankled


    UDP wrote: »
    There was no traffic coming from the car's right in the video but the driver may not have known the order of the lights so may not have wanted to be stranded out when the lights went green for vehicles to the car's right. My point is that yes there was room while the cars were coming from the Clondalkin side and it would have been great if the driver had used that room but I can understand the reluctance at a busy junction in wet conditions if the driver did not know the junction/light order well.

    I believe that reluctance is unnecessary given the room seen in the video. It is also worth noting that those turning right towards Naas initially ignore the filter light, seeing the ambulance and waiting for it to pass, thus giving even more room for the car. They only drive on when seeing that there is no movement.


  • #126
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    UDP wrote: »
    Now make that a wet day, a dark car and a driver coming from this side distracted by an amber light.

    You have too much faith in the quality of drivers around the place. There is no doubt that if this driver moved out any further that he/she would be across the lane and in front of the lane the flybus is in from the excellent link provided by Sean:
    http://goo.gl/maps/8ngK

    ok, look at 1:06 in the video to see where the car stood its ground. Have a look at the attached image and see if I'm wrong. What bothers me the most about this is this particular drivers lack of ability to gauge what is safe and what is not safe. Like so many others on our roads today.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    franksm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭franksm


    Pretty dumb of those guys not to move forward out of the way, there's plenty of room there fergawdssake.

    I have done it myself a few times, and once the ambulance has moved on and the light eventually turns green, the people behind have beenb gracious enough to let me move back into original position/lane.

    OP's vid shows some common sense is lacking...


  • #128
    UDP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭UDP


    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    ok, look at 1:06 in the video to see where the car stood its ground. Have a look at the attached image and see if I'm wrong. What bothers me the most about this is this particular drivers lack of ability to gauge what is safe and what is not safe. Like so many others on our roads today.
    You mark a green area as if nobody every goes into that area - also you image is flawed in that the angle of the yellow lines appear to come together when they should be diverging as they come closer to the camera position. I would be doubtful if that was always the case. If someone is not comfortable taking a risk breaking a red light and driving into a junction where traffic might be coming their direction very soon then I would rather they did not put others at risk and not take the risk.


  • #129
    UDP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭UDP


    franksm wrote: »
    I have done it myself a few times, and once the ambulance has moved on and the light eventually turns green, the people behind have beenb gracious enough to let me move back into original position/lane.
    and if they weren't so gracious?


  • #130
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    Solair wrote: »
    You don't sit blocking an emergency vehicle. There's really no grey area about it. If a fire truck, ambulance or police vehicle with flashing lights on is coming you get out of the way.

    ...
    If you can and if in your opinion it is safe to do so. Note: not if it some randomer's opinion on a website that it's safe and right or stupid not to. If the driver deems it unsafe, that's all that counts.
    Solair wrote: »
    ... Drivers also need a legal assurance that they're not doing anything wrong by facilitating an ambulance should any other muppet claim against them or something too. ...
    Drivers of private vehicles already have the rules the must obey. Nothing in them indicates that they are entitled to decide to make risky or illegal manoeuvres even in an emergency decision.

    Drivers of emergency vehicles have their guidelines, emergency exemptions and training to guide their decision-making and behaviour. Nothing in the entitles them to put civilian drivers at risk.
    Solair wrote: »
    ... Life saving emergency traffic has to take priority over minor traffic laws...
    And, within their professional guidelines, the drivers of emergency vehicles are protected from prosecution in that regard.; civilian drivers are not.
    Solair wrote: »
    ... All that driver had to do was move a meter or so forward. They could even reverse back again afte it passed if they were worried about being beyond the lights!
    Cudda, shudda, wudda. We can all appear to be experts after the event. The civilian driver in the clip was not legally obliged to move, assuming s/he could.


  • #131
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,701 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    I would not have broken the lights, seems a busy corner and getting out and smashing the lights to bits would not help
    I would have moved the **** out of the way though,
    Turns out the lil kid died, had only they had gotten there 30 seconds earlier,


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Jame Gumb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 802 ✭✭✭Jame Gumb


    Shouldn't the drivers heading up / down the Belgard Road have been slowing / stopping when they saw / heard the ambulance, thus letting the "offending" driver out?


  • #133
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    Turns out the lil kid died, had only they had gotten there 30 seconds earlier,

    How do you know that?

    But anyway, if someone did die due to delays, at least the driver blocking the way is safe, and is never at risk while driving.


  • #134
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,701 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    How do you know that?

    But anyway, if someone did die due to delays, at least the driver blocking the way is safe, and is never at risk while driving.

    jk


  • #135
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Jame Gumb wrote: »
    Shouldn't the drivers heading up / down the Belgard Road have been slowing / stopping when they saw / heard the ambulance, thus letting the "offending" driver out?

    There was nobody stopping the offending driver. Do you not see that the lane in front of him/her was empty? Plenty of room to drive a couple of meters. They did not know what to do. Old maybe, or just one of them drivers that wont ever become competent.

    Others here seem to think then that the cars stopped at red lights would just blindly drive into them if their lights go green. The risk of that happening is no higher than an accident in a few miles of a drive anywhere. But its ireland, where an average driver is actually brilliant, when the stupid ones are factored into the overall driving standard.

    They could of been elderly or something. Not much can be done then.


  • #136
    xperi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29 ✭xperi


    Ambulances & other emergency vehicles ramming vehicles at red lights, luv it


  • #137
    TestTransmission
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,106 ✭✭✭✭TestTransmission


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    Turns out the lil kid died, had only they had gotten there 30 seconds earlier,

    Please don't post crap like that in here.


  • #138
    Jame Gumb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 802 ✭✭✭Jame Gumb


    xperi wrote: »
    Ambulances & other emergency vehicles ramming vehicles at red lights, luv it

    Grand Theft Auto: Anna Liffia Stories


  • #139
    dodderangler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,203 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    I've often broken red light when ambulance or Garda is behind me in an emergency
    No Garda in the world could do you for it
    It'd Be encouraged to get out of the way if a emergency service vehicle is coming behind you
    That video is a joke


  • #140
    Bigus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,957 ✭✭✭Bigus


    New lands costs is probably one junction where ambulances should approach with no sirens on.

    I was sitting in traffic another time coming from the left of that video when an ambulance came down from belgard fire station and I duly let it through the traffic.

    However as it barged its way out to cross the Nass road traffic very dangerously which I thought was mad.

    I was proven right when across the far side a lady panicked at 40 to 50 mph and came to a stop in her lane with her havin the green light ......only to be rear ended by a 40 ft truck which push the back wheel of her little Hyundai up to almost her head rest.
    Unbelievably the ambulance carried on across the junction having witnessed the serious crash and drove away on its original call.

    Whole affair was a disgrace from the ambulance point of view ,

    I contacted t he local fire chief to complain,but he also seemed like the crew to run away from blame. Belgard fire station should have a button to prioritise lights in their favour....

    THAT junction is ludicrous to approach With sirens on and is asking for fatalities. I nearly witnessed one .


  • #141
    keithclancy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,208 ✭✭✭keithclancy


    What a clown.

    I bet if you could see the driver their either freaking out or completely oblivious to the big yellow flashing thing behind them


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime


    Bigus wrote: »
    New lands costs is probably one junction where ambulances should approach with no sirens on.

    I was sitting in traffic another time coming from the left of that video when an ambulance came down from belgard fire station and I duly let it through the traffic.

    However as it barged its way out to cross the Nass road traffic very dangerously which I thought was mad.

    I was proven right when across the far side a lady panicked at 40 to 50 mph and came to a stop in her lane with her havin the green light ......only to be rear ended by a 40 ft truck which push the back wheel of her little Hyundai up to almost her head rest.
    Unbelievably the ambulance carried on across the junction having witnessed the serious crash and drove away on its original call.

    Whole affair was a disgrace from the ambulance point of view ,

    I contacted t he local fire chief to complain,but he also seemed like the crew to run away from blame. Belgard fire station should have a button to prioritise lights in their favour....

    THAT junction is ludicrous to approach With sirens on and is asking for fatalities. I nearly witnessed one .

    I agree with you here on this one.

    the naas road is very comman for large trucks and large coaches and buses that cant stop as good as a car.

    also depending on the situation up the other end of the belgard road theres the luas line.

    i've seen it before where the luas would just go on ahead and leave the ambulance sitting there at the lights.

    madness


  • #143
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    UDP wrote: »
    What if someone got to the junction after the ambulance is gone this doesn't realize what happened.
    Well we would assume the car that moved out of the way of the ambulance, would be seen by the first cars to now proceed, which are stopped at red lights only a few yards away, and the car blocking the ambulance would not just park there for the day.
    It doesn't matter anyway since there are drivers out there with a sense if entitlement/bad unaware drivers that see an amber light and plough through without looking to make sure the path is clear.
    Car moves forward, ambulance gets past. Now where does a car flying to beat the amber light come from? The path the car is now in(but would not have had to move that far anyway), is for traffic from their right, which is traffic stopped at the red lights on belgard road since the beginning of the video.
    Happened to me where a driver who shouldn't have missed that I was there ploughed into me as he was distracted by the amber light.
    Again, people make connections with other accidents. This could happen, that could happen. The reality is, it was not difficult to let that ambulance through. Not difficult at all.

    But some drivers see difficulty in many situations, difficulty that is not there. And once they see this difficulty, they will believe there is no way around it.

    As I mentioned earlier about a roundabout, many drivers think its unsafe to move if a car is visible anywhere near the roundabout. And my point about that was not comparing roundabouts to the newlands cross junction, but that different drivers have wildly varying concepts about the danger level of the same situation.

    There is no way it was overly dangerous to move forward to let that ambulance through. Some think it is. In my opinion, it was simple to do so. But they may have been an elderly driver, or someone that was simply clueless and unaware.

    If you think being in the lane for the belgard road traffic (which is stopped at red light) would be life threatening, then how come we often see people entering such junctions without being able to exit due to traffic backing up (they shouldn`t enter of course if going to block other road), and so are blocking the other road when the other road gets the green light? We dont see people flying through amber lights into them, simply because the other road is already stopped at a red light, and will only get to move a few yards before reaching the blocking car. They can see them there before they get the green light.


  • #144
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    ... There is no way it was overly dangerous to move forward to let that ambulance through. Some think it is. In my opinion, it was simple to do so. ...
    You and other posters are missing the key issue here which is that your opinion doesn't matter. You weren't driving the car on the day and don't have the driver's perspective at the time. Thus, as I have said repeatedly, it seems the driver in line with the ROTR, made the correct decision for him/her on the day and that was not to move.

    Why is it so difficult to understand or do people just like typing to inflate their self-importance?
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    ... But they may have been an elderly driver, or someone that was simply clueless and unaware. ...
    I'm not sure about elderly, but the clueless and unaware appear to be driving keyboards in this thread.


  • #145
    UDP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭UDP


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Well we would assume the car that moved out of the way of the ambulance, would be seen by the first cars to now proceed, which are stopped at red lights only a few yards away, and the car blocking the ambulance would not just park there for the day.
    Nice to make that assumption.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Car moves forward, ambulance gets past. Now where does a car flying to beat the amber light come from? The path the car is now in(but would not have had to move that far anyway), is for traffic from their right, which is traffic stopped at the red lights on belgard road since the beginning of the video.
    Yes, who is to say that they are not the next to go green. Remember the driver may not know this busy junction including the light order/timings.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Again, people make connections with other accidents. This could happen, that could happen. The reality is, it was not difficult to let that ambulance through. Not difficult at all.
    Not making a connection just pointing out that it is not that rare for people to plough through junctions on amber lights - even if its the end of the amber light period. Pointed out it even happened to me along where the driver pulled out in front of me due to getting distracted by an amber light. Have heard other cases too and witnessed people chancing it plenty of times. i.e. it does happen so there is a risk in putting yourself in the position of blocking another drivers lane.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    But some drivers see difficulty in many situations, difficulty that is not there. And once they see this difficulty, they will believe there is no way around it.

    As I mentioned earlier about a roundabout, many drivers think its unsafe to move if a car is visible anywhere near the roundabout. And my point about that was not comparing roundabouts to the newlands cross junction, but that different drivers have wildly varying concepts about the danger level of the same situation.

    There is no way it was overly dangerous to move forward to let that ambulance through. Some think it is. In my opinion, it was simple to do so. But they may have been an elderly driver, or someone that was simply clueless and unaware.
    There is a massive difference between legally entering a roundabout that operates to a yield and illegally breaking a red light and moving your car into a junction where you have absolutely no right of way. Silly comparison imo.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    If you think being in the lane for the belgard road traffic (which is stopped at red light) would be life threatening, then how come we often see people entering such junctions without being able to exit due to traffic backing up (they shouldn`t enter of course if going to block other road), and so are blocking the other road when the other road gets the green light? We dont see people flying through amber lights into them, simply because the other road is already stopped at a red light, and will only get to move a few yards before reaching the blocking car. They can see them there before they get the green light.
    Ok, I guess accidents don't happen in those situations ever. Still there is a difference between one car moved a half length forward on a wet day and traffic backed up.

    People here said why couldn't it have just moved forward another length - there was loads of room. Turns out they were all wrong - the car had moved as far forward as was possible without entering the junction.

    It really comes down to the driver making a safety call as to whether it would be dangerous for them and for others if they enter a junction possibly not knowing the junction, light order nor timings thus not fully knowing the risks involved. I would rather people stayed on the side of safety than taking risks if they are not comfortable doing so since they are the *only* ones responsible for taking that risk.

    As pointed out already emergency services are indemnified for taking such risks - private drivers are not.

    No point further arguing with you here since we fundamentally disagree on the above points.


  • #146
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    mathepac wrote: »
    You and other posters are missing the key issue here which is that your opinion doesn't matter.
    Thankfully, you did not miss it.
    You weren't driving the car on the day and don't have the driver's perspective at the time. Thus, as I have said repeatedly, it seems the driver in line with the ROTR, made the correct decision for him/her on the day and that was not to move.
    Were you there at the time? Will that junction shape be different tomorrow?
    Why is it so difficult to understand or do people just like typing to inflate their self-importance?
    No, a car blocked an ambulance. You believe that`s fine because you say the ROTR say it is.
    I'm not sure about elderly, but the clueless and unaware appear to be driving keyboards in this thread.
    So then, you are confirming that car could do nothing more?


  • #147
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    UDP wrote: »
    People here said why couldn't it have just moved forward another length - there was loads of room. Turns out they were all wrong - the car had moved as far forward as was possible without entering the junction.

    Ok. You could not have done anything either. Fair enough.


  • #148
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    UDP wrote: »

    There is a massive difference between legally entering a roundabout that operates to a yield and illegally breaking a red light and moving your car into a junction where you have absolutely no right of way. Silly comparison imo.

    I explain the comparison, and you still missed the point though. Here it is again. Study the bold parts.
    I mentioned earlier about a roundabout, many drivers think its unsafe to move if a car is visible anywhere near the roundabout. And my point about that was not comparing roundabouts to the newlands cross junction, but that different drivers have wildly varying concepts about the danger level of the same situation

    The point was, if the same situation is so widely different to different drivers, then drivers that see the OP drivers actions as unavoidable, can not see any other option. That does not mean there are none.


  • #149
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,620 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    I don't care what anyone says, the driver was frozen or unaware.
    Anyone who says he/she acted correctly is just trolling at this stage, all he/she had to do was move another inch.
    Anyone who says that the driver acted completely correctly by just sitting there and not moving that extra inch, bravo give that guy driver of the year medal, i would do exactly the same:
    You're defending the indefensible and simply taking up a contrary position to the majority of right thinking people to annoy and inflame. In other words, trolling


  • #150
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    I don't care what anyone says, the driver was frozen or unaware.
    Anyone who says he/she acted correctly is just trolling at this stage, all he/she had to do was move another inch.
    Anyone who says that the driver acted completely correctly by just sitting there and not moving that extra inch, bravo give that guy driver of the year medal, i would do exactly the same:
    You're defending the indefensible and simply taking up a contrary position to the majority of right thinking people to annoy and inflame. In other words, trolling

    I genuinely dont think its trolling. They would have just sat there like the OP driver. And in that, would believe there was no other option.

    I cant do anything else, so neither can anyone else, is the belief.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    UDP wrote: »

    No point further arguing with you here since we fundamentally disagree on the above points.

    Yes, because you are argueing over red lights, ROTR and wet roads.

    I am saying it was possible to clear the way. Just because you could not have, you believe others could not have.


Advertisement