Both in France and Australia, practice shows that if you start controlling speed and effectively punishing people for it with fines and points penalties, they slow down.
Great raods as a result of 70 years of infrastructure investment (some using slave labour), access to very cheap migrant labour and high taxes.How do you explain the low death rates on german autobahns most of which have no speed limits?
Great roads as a result of 70 years of infrastructure investment (some using slave labour), access to very cheap migrant labour and high taxes.
It does not follow that a motorway built by Martin Cullen should be inherently more or less dangerous than one built by Hitler or Willy Brandt.
The point is that Germany had a head on us when is comes to building roads. They were at it first and didn’t have to worry about planning appeals or safe pass or human rights or paying people or even feeding them in some cases. To ask why they have such good roads and we don’t and ignore the above is absurd.The origin of the roads is hardly the issue. As I understand it, a motorway is only classed as a motorway if it meets designated EU standards, so on that basis an Irish motorway should be no different than a German motorway. It does not follow that a motorway built by Martin Cullen should be inherently more or less dangerous than one built by Hitler or Willy Brandt.
and probably a higher number of safer cars. once you cross the border into northern ireland you will notice large yellow gantries across the roads with cameras on them. one every few miles. continuous filming. and your speed is calculated between the cameras. so no point in slowing down before the camera as diarmuidc says happens in france. I though the french had dramatically reduced road deaths in recent years.
This is an arguement I hear often from friends of mine who work in the civil service. Fact is, it's a damn poor excuse.The point is that Germany had a head on us when is comes to building roads.
I think anything built by Martin Cullen is likely to be more dangerous than anything built by almost anyone else.
The point is that Germany had a head on us when is comes to building roads. They were at it first and didn’t have to worry about planning appeals or safe pass or human rights or paying people or even feeding them in some cases. To ask why they have such good roads and we don’t and ignore the above is absurd.
Willy Brandt was Chancellor between 1969 and 1974 so most of the infrastructure was built by then. He was mayor of Berlin in the late 50’s to the mid 60’s (can’t remember the dates) but I don’t think he built many roads then either.
Hitler on the other hand did build many, many roads, using the methods outlined above.
Both of these arguments entirely miss my point.
I will repeat it:
A road (in Ireland or any other EU country) is only designated as a motorway if it meets certain safety and other criteria.
If the road does not meet the relevant criteria it is not classed as something else, ie "dual carriageway" but not as a motorway.
If an Irish road, a German road and an Italian road all qualify for designation as motorways, then it follows that each should be equally safe or dangerous.
Therefore if a "no speed limits" policy is appropriate on German autobahns, there is no reason why it should not be appropriate on equivalent Irish and Italian motorways.
For that reason I support the OPs argument that a blitz on bad driving and bad roads will be a lot more effective in reducing casualties than a blitz on speeding, at least on motorways and other major roads.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?