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

Motorway - M1 Mass Stop and Checks

2

Comments

  • #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RustyNut wrote: »
    Which is directly proportional to Irelands sh1te road policing standards.

    We'll you're probably familiar with what the chairman of the RSA has been saying recently.


  • #33
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    lighterman wrote: »
    Stationed in ........

    store street?

    Do you understand the different roles different sections do or are you looking to troll?


  • #34
    bravestar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭bravestar


    lighterman wrote: »
    Stationed in ........

    store street?

    Who cares where they are stationed. They are traffic, not mules on a regular unit, so the policing of store street with regard to regular crime remains unchanged.


  • #35
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    I think this photo shows clearly how safe the operation was carried out, in line with best practice.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gardasiochana/11351410894/


  • #36
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    It's necessary to counter the thinking in people's minds that some roads are immune to checkpoints.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    lighterman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭lighterman


    lighterman wrote: »
    Charlie members were also present. There's more to traffic than regional
    foreign wrote: »
    Do you understand the different roles different sections do or are you looking to troll?
    foreign wrote: »
    Have you evidence that the collisions were caused by the checkpoint? How far past the M50 was the checkpoint? Even if it did occur near the checkpoint it still falls down to driver error not leaving enough room to react.

    Cameras in vans can't detect if a vehicle with no NCT is not road worthy, likewise it can't take a car off the road for no insurance.

    And the checkpoint was mannd by Traffic Corp members, not Store Street members so the poor victim would still have been stabbed if the checkpoint didn't take place    .
    bravestar wrote: »
    Who cares where they are stationed. They are traffic, not mules on a regular unit, so the policing of store street with regard to regular crime remains unchanged.
    just making a counter point to a statement made


  • #38
    Mr.Fred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭Mr.Fred


    Just curious but does anybody know if the driver who blew over the limit was actually over the limit when tested at the station and if so was he charged.

    I think it was all a PR stunt but it also created a hazard on a major traffic route. I'd say smaller local check points are more effective if they're targeting drink drivers. They were obviously targeting tax dodgers and media considering the time of the check point.


  • #39
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Just curious but does anybody know if the driver who blew over the limit was actually over the limit when tested at the station and if so was he charged.

    I think it was all a PR stunt but it also created a hazard on a major traffic route. I'd say smaller local check points are more effective if they're targeting drink drivers. They were obviously targeting tax dodgers and media considering the time of the check point.

    If it gets the message out what's the harm.

    If you can't stop for a clearly set up checkpoint you should not be on the road.


  • #40
    Mr.Fred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭Mr.Fred


    Zambia wrote: »
    If you can't stop for a clearly set up checkpoint you should not be on the road.

    Lets not be stupid now.

    Yes a clearly set up check point is one thing. How far back behind the first sign did the tail backs stretch. Generally you wouldn't expect stationary traffic on a motorway outside of peak hours.


  • #41
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Lets not be stupid now.

    Yes a clearly set up check point is one thing. How far back behind the first sign did the tail backs stretch. Generally you wouldn't expect stationary traffic on a motorway outside of peak hours.

    There is nothing stupid about it as cars approach a hazard they should slow and come to a stop if required. Nobody should be coming to a sudden stop.

    Sure it's preferable to let traffic flow but theses checks have to happen. Just like road works delay traffic in order to keep the road safe in future.

    If the resulting media lets people know they could find a checkpoint on the motorway the end result is worth the risk.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Just curious but does anybody know if the driver who blew over the limit was actually over the limit when tested at the station and if so was he charged.

    I think it was all a PR stunt but it also created a hazard on a major traffic route. I'd say smaller local check points are more effective if they're targeting drink drivers. They were obviously targeting tax dodgers and media considering the time of the check point.

    Could have done Blood/Urine in the station so could take a few weeks to find that one out.

    Regards the PR, what's the harm in informing the public that the Gardaí are now going to be carrying out checkpoints on motorways? If it deters more people from drink driving then is that not a good thing?

    And re local checkpoints being more effective, if that was the case we'd never get drink drivers on them as people should be wary of them by now.

    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Lets not be stupid now.

    Yes a clearly set up check point is one thing. How far back behind the first sign did the tail backs stretch. Generally you wouldn't expect stationary traffic on a motorway outside of peak hours.

    Looks like the tailback only went back to J4. And while a tailback may not be expected you should still be able to react to what you see in front.

    https://twitter.com/aaroadwatch/status/410776972462002176

    @ listermint, I've had a look at the AA Roadwatch Twitter feed and no reports of collisions on the M50 at the time of the checkpoint. So, would you care to present evidence of these collisions and if they did occur then explain how the checkpoint caused them?


  • #43
    Mr.Fred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭Mr.Fred


    Zambia wrote: »
    There is nothing stupid about it as cars approach a hazard they should slow and come to a stop if required. Nobody should be coming to a sudden stop.

    Remind me again then. How then how it is so many accidents/rear enders happen..

    Oh yeah perhaps it was something about them not expecting a sudden stop or hazard on a MOTORWAY!!

    Zambia wrote: »
    Sure it's preferable to let traffic flow but theses checks have to happen. Just like road works delay traffic in order to keep the road safe in future.

    I'd accept that but for the fact that it wasn't very effective. I'd like to see what would happen if they put one of these checkpoints on the M1 (north) or M7 (south) on a Fri evening.

    I'm all for check points and I abhor drink drivers. There's a time and place for these though and there'd also be more effective places to set these up if they're looking to take drink drivers off the road.


  • #44
    POGAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 979 ✭✭✭POGAN


    Here the reason for checkpoint they lead to a lot more than tax & insurance this was check on the motorway too


    A man and woman are currently in police custody after Gardai seized €40,000 worth of cannabis on a motorway checkpoint.

    At approximately 8pm last night, a vehicle search was conducted on the N7 led to the marijuana discovery.

    The man, in his late 30s and woman, in her mid-20s, were arrested at the scene by members of the traffic unit at Blanchardstown.

    They are being detained at Ballyfermot Garda Station under of Section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-seize-40k-worth-of-cannabis-during-routine-checkpoint-29838362.html


  • #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Remind me again then. How then how it is so many accidents/rear enders happen..

    Oh yeah perhaps it was something about them not expecting a sudden stop or hazard on a MOTORWAY!!

    Or driving too close to the car in front to react to a change in traffic. I have still to see evidence of any collision caused by this checkpoint.

    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    I'd accept that but for the fact that it wasn't very effective. I'd like to see what would happen if they put one of these checkpoints on the M1 (north) or M7 (south) on a Fri evening.

    I'm all for check points and I abhor drink drivers. There's a time and place for these though and there'd also be more effective places to set these up if they're looking to take drink drivers off the road.

    So, where and when should they be carried out? Remember, a drink driver was taken off the road from this one.


  • #46
    stoneill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,609 ✭✭✭stoneill


    Here's my thoughts.
    Garda in general do a fantastic job.

    But this was a publicity stunt, (as per their fackbook page) and from all the negative feedback, not a great success either.
    A motorway is not a place for checkpoints such as this, there are plenty of feeder roads, dual carriage ways, main roads, R roads and main streets around that would have been better to place a checkpoint.
    All that money, and all those resources and they got 1 person over the limit?
    If they really really want to catch drink drivers, just go to any pub car park - if they really really want to catch tax dodgers just go to any major retail car park, if they really really want to catch speeders, just go to any stretch of straight road and hang about for 10 mins.


  • #47
    Hootanany
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,479 ✭✭✭Hootanany


    I would do a random drug test on who thought of this scheme?


  • #48
    lighterman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭lighterman


    POGAN wrote: »
    Here the reason for checkpoint they lead to a lot more than tax & insurance this was check on the motorway too


    A man and woman are currently in police custody after Gardai seized €40,000 worth of cannabis on a motorway checkpoint.

    At approximately 8pm last night, a vehicle search was conducted on the N7 led to the marijuana discovery.

    The man, in his late 30s and woman, in her mid-20s, were arrested at the scene by members of the traffic unit at Blanchardstown.

    They are being detained at Ballyfermot Garda Station under of Section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-seize-40k-worth-of-cannabis-during-routine-checkpoint-29838362.html

    Im fairly sure there is no motorway on the N7 within the DMR so I cant see how blanch traffic were on a motorway


  • #49
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Hootanany wrote: »
    I would do a random drug test on who thought of this scheme?

    Then it isn't a random drug test.


  • #50
    Mr.Fred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭Mr.Fred


    foreign wrote: »
    So, where and when should they be carried out? Remember, a drink driver was taken off the road from this one.

    They could be easily carried out at the off ramps where traffic would be expecting to slow down or seeing as how it was on the M1 why not at the toll plaza(perhaps this was to far for the media to be expected to travel?). It was entirely ridiculous placing a check point on a motorway.


  • #51
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Remind me again then. How then how it is so many accidents/rear enders happen..

    Oh yeah perhaps it was something about them not expecting a sudden stop or hazard on a MOTORWAY!!

    So many rear enders happen due to lack of attention and failure to leave a sufficient distance between the vehicle in front.

    Only a fool breaks the three second rule.

    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    I'd accept that but for the fact that it wasn't very effective. I'd like to see what would happen if they put one of these checkpoints on the M1 (north) or M7 (south) on a Fri evening.
    It is effective this very thread proves it, there has been pages of discussion on it.

    The Police can not be everywhere they are the chance of of penalty not the assurance. If one checkpoint catches 10 drink drivers and no one knows about it then only those 10 people learn the lesson.

    If you catch 1 person and 1000's hear about it the benefit is far greater.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    They could be easily carried out at the off ramps where traffic would be expecting to slow down or seeing as how it was on the M1 why not at the toll plaza(perhaps this was to far for the media to be expected to travel?). It was entirely ridiculous placing a check point on a motorway.

    No safe place on an off ramp to pull cars over and you would have cars backing down onto the motorway. Also easily skipped by someone who wants to avoid it.


  • #53
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    lighterman wrote: »
    Im fairly sure there is no motorway on the N7 within the DMR so I cant see how blanch traffic were on a motorway

    The N7 covered by blanch would mostly be three lane 100k limit.


  • #54
    Mr.Fred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭Mr.Fred


    Zambia wrote: »
    So many rear enders happen due to lack of attention and failure to leave a sufficient distance between the vehicle in front.

    Only a fool breaks the three second rule.

    Yes and there are plenty of fools out there. The thoughts of someone being rear ended by some fool going 120+ are scary enough.

    It may never happen but they created a scenario that increased the potential of it happening and imo that's incompetent.
    Zambia wrote: »
    It is effective this very thread proves it, there has been pages of discussion on it.

    The Police can not be everywhere they are the chance of of penalty not the assurance. If one checkpoint catches 10 drink drivers and no one knows about it then only those 10 people learn the lesson.

    If you catch 1 person and 1000's hear about it the benefit is far greater.

    Yes as a publicity stunt I'm not denying it was a success but as a check point I bet they'd have caught more individuals breaking the law outside a primary school on any given afternoon.

    As for the drink driver does anybody know if he was actually over the limit on the more accurate machine at the station? who's to say it wasn't an elaborate part of their PR stunt to high light drink driving over the christmas period. There certainly seemed to be a large number of cameras on hand to take his photo.


  • #55
    lighterman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭lighterman


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Yes and there are plenty of fools out there. The thoughts of someone being rear ended by some fool going 120+ are scary enough.

    It may never happen but they created a scenario that increased the potential of it happening and imo that's incompetent.



    Yes as a publicity stunt I'm not denying it was a success but as a check point I bet they'd have caught more individuals breaking the law outside a primary school on any given afternoon.

    As for the drink driver does anybody know if he was actually over the limit on the more accurate machine at the station? who's to say it wasn't an elaborate part of their PR stunt to high light drink driving over the christmas period. There certainly seemed to be a large number of cameras on hand to take his photo.
    We are arguing for the same team here but I don't think the drivers photo was taken. There was a photo of a random motorist that was breathalysed


  • #56
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    lighterman wrote: »
    We are arguing for the same team here but I don't think the drivers photo was taken. There was a photo of a random motorist that was breathalysed

    Who cares if no one was caught :confused:

    Just because there is a checkpoint is does not mean there will be a drink driver to drive into it


  • #57
    lighterman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭lighterman


    Zambia wrote: »
    Who cares if no one was caught :confused:

    Just because there is a checkpoint is does not mean there will be a drink driver to drive into it

    If you could highlight where I stated where no one was caught.
    If your going to debate my comments please read them first.


  • #58
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    lighterman wrote: »
    If you could highlight where I stated where no one was caught.
    If your going to debate my comments please read them first.

    I said it makes no difference if no one was caught


  • #59
    bravestar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭bravestar


    It's always a good laugh to see people, with no clue about policing, offer their ill informed opinions and then try to defend them.

    I wonder, do these same people tell their surgeon, dentist, doctor, plumber, electrician, bin man, teacher or driving instructor how to do their jobs.


  • #60
    lighterman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭lighterman


    bravestar wrote: »
    It's always a good laugh to see people, with no clue about policing, offer their ill informed opinions and then try to defend them.

    I wonder, do these same people tell their surgeon, dentist, doctor, plumber, electrician, bin man, teacher or driving instructor how to do their jobs.

    I'm sure they would if they are doing it wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Mr Jinx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 434 ✭✭Mr Jinx


    Mr.Fred wrote: »
    Remind me again then. How then how it is so many accidents/rear enders happen..

    Oh yeah perhaps it was something about them not expecting a sudden stop or hazard on a MOTORWAY!!




    I'd accept that but for the fact that it wasn't very effective. I'd like to see what would happen if they put one of these checkpoints on the M1 (north) or M7 (south) on a Fri evening.

    I'm all for check points and I abhor drink drivers. There's a time and place for these though and there'd also be more effective places to set these up if they're looking to take drink drivers off the road.

    If there was a time and a place, then they could be easily avoided.


Advertisement