|
|
|
|
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 8:05:33 PM | All civil suits require a TRIAL.....Not the opinion of one officer
POSSESION of child porn is illegal..as you have commited the crime..This is possession of the computer where you MIGHT commit the crime but have not committed any crime.
Balance of probability that the kid will race.. .what if he is building it to go to Cayuga and race on a strip or simply drive around town cruising for chicks...As far as I know that is fully legal.. If not better bust those dangerous drivers at the exhibition every year..the molson Indy,,damn more scofflaws and bust anyone who waxes his car as he clearly is going to cruise the streets.
What if tires cost 400 a piece and are rated for 200 MPH , I clearly am going to do that speed and vehicle crushed its a a cts-v..Oh wait they are factory tires..
Whats a nissan Maxima have.....190 mph tires from factory..crush them...
No matter what , the state cannot penalize anyone for a crime they have not commited. Jews were executed as they were conspiring to overthrow the government.....SAME PRINCIPLE , SAME APPLICATION OF 'LAW" | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 8:17:45 PM | This new law is not only limited to 50 over.
My friend lost 2 points off of his drivers license for not stopping at a stop sign on his 15 speed bicycle. I myself was pulled over for going the wrong way on a one way street, cop asked me for ID, I had none, lucky me.
I've worked as a mechanic, a body man, fabricator, customiser and designer in the auto industry. Mechanics from your local Canadian Tire also "rip down streets" in clients cars after repair work to work out kinks and to validate repairs (do the brakes stop well at 100Kms, does the car accelerate cleanly or stutter, + more) its not limited to certain shops.
What about the other 24,600+ ppl who died this year from bad driving mistakes, those not covered by this law, not from 50 over, not from speeding, not from modified cars, etc.... Why are'nt those driving offences covered in this law??? Why cuz if it were, EVERYONE would freak out and those politicians would not have been re-elected Like one article in the star said - it targets kids with lil money and legal experience (aka the scourge of our streets - lil kids - allegedly, lol)
I agree that if you speed you get caught you pay the fine, but have yer day in court first like with every other offence OR sezie EVERY car that violates ANY law. Only fair dont you think???
Qualter Extra only got it part right - ya theres 300,000 + special interest owners, but there are also hundreds of thousands more who drive factory stock performance/luxury vehicles + hundreds of thousands of those who own non-modified cars that race (those you would never suspect, like those who race mini vans for instance). Realistically there are over half a million responsible law abiding special interest vehicle owners who this law affects.
500,000+ of these owners and only some are the ones that draw attention to them all, especially when an accident involving one such car or racing is involved and makes the papers. Out of them, less than 6 ppl die a year from such cars (Im not talking about those dumb ppl who race the family mini van and crash n kill). Therefore far less than 1% of the deaths and accidents result from these vehicles. So the balance of probabilities is that these ppl and their cars dont get into or cause accidents, the majority of deaths arise from bone stock cars driven by yer average person, so, maybe the balance of probabilities should mean that these cars get pulled off the road - well of course not cuz its all nonsence, all of it, including modified cars.
Just like bikers, 1% claim to be actual real criminals/those who do not follow or abide by laws, the other 99% are law abiding riders. A minority can quickly screw things up for everyone else. This same law applied to bikers means that Harleys and sports bikes everywhere would be taken off the roads just cuz they "look" like criminals/law breakers or race bikes.
I belong to SVAO which is the Specialty Vehicle Association of Ontario. They/we have been working with politicians and law makers for decades, helping and directing them on many issues relating to the roads and cars because realistically, these politicians and law makers are not auto industry ppl so they turn to and rely on us/the SVAO for help, major help. SVAO is comprised of major responsible car clubs and among our members are cops, the odd politician, MP's, lawyers, etc... Visit the SVAO site and you'll see the major issues we/they had with this law and still do. This time they listened but ignored suggestions, it was voting time and this law was passed under the guise of safety and rushed through. Laws have existed for a long time that covered these exact same issues. Why werent they enforcing/patrolling the roads then? Like someone said b4, when a politician speaks, look for the money.
This law says that other HTA laws are void - why?? - cuz if you modify yer car legally using the HTA guidlines, they are now supposedly considered illegal by this law. Well which is it?? - is it legal or illegal??? See, clarity is definatly needed, much needed - if you are in the industry - you would understand this.
Did you know that there is a legal way to install video monitors in yer car? baby seats? replacement hub caps? etc.... If you change ANYTHING that was not on yer car originally - you are a modifier.
Hence, it can be assumed that the race catr will "probably" take part in racing. by that logic, every stock ports car (camaro, corvette, mustang, honda civic, BMW, Mercedes, Porche, Viper, Saleen, Ferrari, Lambo, Subaru, Skyline, JDM, etc..) will take part in a race, but the stats show MOST so called street racers race in STOCK family cars, so what does that mean now????? start seizing family cars??? Confusing isnt it. Statistically AND percentage wise, you will most likely be killed by someone racing or speeding in a BONE STOCK OFF THE LOT FACTORY vehicle. I guess that means most everyone here is a racer, lol. See, silly law isnt it? It needs work, specifics written in, etc...
FACT - many modified cars are driven legally and carefully cuz they have every penny the owners have invested in them, they are used for show at shows to win trophies or legitimatly on race tracks only.
I've heard club members say their car + truck + trailer were removed off of the road simply cuz of the car ON the traler (not being street driven). And you will also hear ppl who own special interest cars tell you that they are targeted because of what they drive not how they drive, cuz when they're in their daily driver - they are NEVER stopped or harassed. They have mainly clean driving records. I guess its like wearing a suit to work then dressing as a gangster in the evening and beng profiled.
Yes its FACT that the OPP/MTO+ local police were stopping every car comming out of the Toronto Motor Sports Park. If they were at the track, they must be criminals right?
ONE MORE TIME - THIS LAW IS NOT JUST ABOUT SPEEDING/RACING/OR 50 OVER | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:09:33 PM |
Yes its FACT that the OPP/MTO+ local police were stopping every car comming out of the Toronto Motor Sports Park. If they were at the track, they must be criminals right?
You guys are forgetting one very important factor. Law enforcement arms of the government deal with this situation every day, all over the province. They know what is going on in the streets. They get ALL complaints forwarded to them. Whereas some of you only hear what you want to hear in order to defend your position.
If it wasn't a real problem... the law wouldn't have been enacted because there wouldn't have been complaints and incidents reported and investigated - simple fact.
As far as the race track incident... there are under cover police at those events. They smell the pot being smoked. They see the drinking that goes on. They watch as some people do mini burn outs while in the line up of vehicles entering/exiting the event. They see under the hoods of cars and listen to the vehicle owners brag about their "events" on the road as they exchange conversations.
As a LEGAL responsibility to protect public safety, they are well within their rights to search vehicles coming from that event. They are within their rights to have a drug sniffing dog at the site as well. They are within their rights to ensure the catalytic converter hasn't been removed from modified cars. They are within their rights to prevent drunks from getting onto the road.
The fact of the matter is... law enforcement agencies know the truth.... you don't care to hear the truth. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:10:14 PM | I agree with you completely Sunday
In addition most drivers of the sports cars , may be fast but take driving very very seriously and are usually way more considerate to other drivers. Yes thats right..we understand the keep right except to pass rule...we understand making space for merging .
I for one have a CTS-v, 400hp 6 speed, takes almost anything on the road under 200k, literally
I never speed in residential areas or any built up area,.. Have amazing situational awareness,( mirrors every 15 to 20 seconds) never use a cell in the car,.Never sit in the fast lane, Never tailgate, Have taken skid school and Bridgestone racing training.
Have equiped the car with 400 a tire ,summer and winter tires that grab like crazy so I have maximum control, My car is always at 100 % mechanically
With my car doing 150 KPH I have better handling, control..and stopping power then most cars doing half my speed.
I am a ex airline pilot ( retired) who has more discipline and respect for power and safety than anybody out there.
Now apparantly I am public enemy # 1 as I like to get up to speed on the highways ( actually only about half speed, Im happy at 140 to 150 kph cruise , car is good for 170 mph)
The one minor problem... I have Never had an accident, 27 years driving. Not a scratch, not a slight spin out in the snow, nothing.
How many souped up cars or sports cars do you actually see in crashes..Bugger all compared to non performance..even percapita the "race cars " and hot rods have way better safety .. Dont believe me .. Go insure a hemi cuda or a 69 camaro.. its dirt cheap because the owners drive with respect and professionalism. How can I insure my 80 k sports car for the same as my suburban??Clearly this CTS-V is a killing machine thats going to bring mayhem to the streets....
No the real killers are minivan drivers (or even worse, pick up truck drivers) with cell phones who sit in the fast lane and have no consideration for other cars and have no clue in regards to situational awareness..
In regards to the little kids who drive junker civics like idiots..the laws are already in place ..Its called careless driving..
My 1..Obviously you have never been to the track, these are car buffs, not pot or crack heads, The kids stick all the money into cars, not booze pot and crackThese kids are into reation times, not getting stoned,,..you havent a clue what you are talking about...not even same planet..I for one want my kid in a car club. way better then doing crack and drinking
| |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:51:30 PM | My 1..Obviously you have never been to the track
Read my previous posts rather than react to my posts..... I grew up with racing. I sat on beer boxes as I, a young boy, was on my way to the track with the driver of one of the race cars. Some do party afterwards (cocaine and pot)... don't bother trying to baffle me on that topic.
Again... you are blowing smoke out your ass.
In addition most drivers of the sports cars , may be fast but take driving very very seriously and are usually way more considerate to other drivers. Yes thats right..we understand the keep right except to pass rule...we understand making space for merging
You don't take public safety seriously.... that's obvious not only to me... but to the police who will confiscate your car..idiot.
You only understand others making space (merge)for you to speed..... nice try!
As i stated before... those who speed at those rates are usually repeat offenders - you just proved my point. Explain how you deserve lenieincy when you suggest that all other drivers should keep to the right for those who want to race... explain that one.
There are families on the road... you deserve no respect, leniency or equal treatment with your attitude. In fact, with your blatant disregard for speed limits, based on this post, maybe police should be made aware of your attitude.
I am a ex airline pilot ( retired) who has more discipline and respect for power and safety than anybody out there.
Yet, you have little respect for the rules of the road... no respect for the safekeeping of innocent people... no respect for anything except your ego.
Save your bullshit for the judge.
No the real killers are minivan drivers (or even worse, pick up truck drivers) with cell phones who sit in the fast lane and have no consideration for other cars
Hence the consideration for cell phone laws in the highway traffic act. And, yes... the cell phone laws will strictly focus on mini-van drivers (sarcasm - lol)
It's peculiar you should raise the issue regarding "no consideration for other cars". It's as if you are implying you have consideration for other cars as you race down the road....
| |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 10:27:36 PM | Haha Airline pilots have no consideration for the safe keeping of innocent people...hahaha yeah we got up there with 370 people in the back, get pissed and to play chicken with other airplanes while snorting coke and juggling hand grenades...Yeah we are known you be scofflaws and rebels ..get a grip
How does me doing 140 in a fast lane in anyway endanger you ...however you forcing cars to go around you as you sit in the fast lane doing 100 on your cell phone with some holier then thou , self riteous attitude DISPITE THE LAW..YES LAW..AGAIN KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS IS THE LAW, but apparantly that is a LAW which you seem to feel you are above as you are stopping us evil..even deadly killers.....I call BS on the grew up with racing , nobody who has been into any racing would take the position you have , and sure as Sh*t would know that the two right lanes are not just for" trucks and slow vehicles"
By the way doing 140 on the highway is far from racing..considering that is only one car...
Ok Mr Safety..How many accidents have you had..I dont care if someone hit you ,,,Not like expect a real answer..But think about that next time you decide to exercise your power by "blocking the fast lane"
Then go read the drivers handbook . | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/2/2007 11:24:51 PM | LOL, now Im about to pick on MY I too - cops know very little about whats going on in the streets. Illegal underground racers outpower and have better information than the cops do. They know when they start and finish their shift, they know where they will be patrolling, they have shite loads of scanners in tow trucks monitoring police, have friends on the force who spread the word to stay out of certain areas on certain nights, etc... If cops knew everything, then they would have nabbed up those thousands of street racers long ago and this law would never have come into existance. They have almost never actually witnessed a real street race. Blows that theory out. Opps 1 mistake, cops have first hand witnessed street races, the ones they themself indulge in when off duty. Sorry to all my copper friends, you know why.
I hear it all, far far more than you do MY I. Dark Nights which attracted 40,000 spectators over the weekend was cancelled cuz every year they stop most everyone going in and comming out of the Markhan Fair Grounds, not for HTA violations, but to harass and detain for no real reason, basically sending the message out DONT COME TO THE SHOW. Same with the tracks, message is DONT GO TO THE TRACKS WE WILL HARASS YOU AND GIVE YOU TICKETS THAT WILL BE THROWN OUT IN COURT just to mess with you. A mandate was created before this new law came out - it was to keep ppl from going to the track and to force them to race on the streets (or to at least create that illusion), this made it look to the public like there is/was a real problem with racers, then cuz everyone is freaked out with the media propaganda, we will look great in the publics eye by comming out with a new law making it look like we've done something when all we did was write up a duplicate law. Next maybe they will write up a gun controll law cuz apparently there isnt one.
Rangerman 1998 - Lots of yer friends killed by lil kid street racers - funny, I've had lots of friends killed by tired truckers who fudge their log books. Real street racers block off roads not used in industrial areas and race far away from the public. The ppl you see "racing" ont he streets are not racers but speeders and bad drivers.
The law didnt need to be inacted cuz it already existed. Hey I can make a "SAFER SOCIETY LAW" too ya know - for your own safety - everyone will be locked up in a rubber room to protect them from everything - from eating spoiled food from their refrigerators, from having unprotected sex and catching HIV, from buying things they cant afford, etc.. Lets keep stripping citizens rights away, we'll call it National security, then we will make it look like we have terrorists and we will merge Mexio, Canada, and the USA and call it The North American Union, we'll have one single currency and your civl rights as you know it will be removed to make way for the single north american union government that will tell us all what to do, then we will micro chip everyone with RFID's and put everyones info on it. Sounds crazy right?? well its comming and you didnt eve have a clue , its something you'll never hear in the media - well apparantly its for your own good dont ya know. Many positions in our current government will be obsolete, Look it up, go ahead and Google "the north american union". This new law was also done to "test" the waters to see how we would react, the majority ate it up, oh look, theyre only 6 months behind schedule. Expect the new currency between 2008 and 2010. Then we all will have secret gps micro chips implanted in out passports like all the new american ones.
Oh ya, loads of 60 yr old guys in restored classic cars smokin pot at the shows, funny cuz many of the cruises are sponsored by the city and or cops, loads of events where the cops are invited to help teach newbies and show that not all cops are bad and out to get kids. Yea - so how do you know ppl smoke pot at the shows? and who says they get in a car and race and kill yer family right after too?.
Ppl brag about everything, cars not withstanding. Its heirsay. Its called bench racing and if you were an actual car enthusist - youd know that + know what bench racing is.
I absoloutly care to hear the truth, the whole truth.You cant convince me otherwise, I was born into the industry, I know it all, cops side, politicians side, kids side, racers side, all of it.
Proof in the pudding - its true - my premiums for a full yr on my classics and muscle cars are under $500 for all of them combined with full coverage, not each.
Cops, lawyers, politicions do cocaine, pot, alcohol, abuse hookers etc..too, hell, some of em are worse than gangsters cuz they're above the law.
Repeat offenders??? Ch8 news (I think) couple weeks ago did a story with the help of the OPP, said more than 1/4 of a million drivers drive with suspended licenses in Ontario, everything from being bad drivers to repeat offenders, then they said they are almost never caught unless they have an accident where a cop can run their license and check it. 264,000 ppl on Ontario roads without a license, not including those who drive without insurance. Yea, the cops are right on top of that. 2 mill later for planes and they still havnt caught a single legit race.
MY I - you sound like yer a politician to me, calling speeders racers, just like politicians who call global warming as climate change. I like yer effort, but there are some aspects of this law that you must admit put a bad taste in yer mouth. Lets go back to calling truckers "the monster killers of the freeways" again , create a new duplicate law for them and watch the public gobble it up.
I to agree with pfm1011 - I call BS on yer auto enthusiast former life MY I
MY I - Im not picking on you here - Im asking a serious question - you dont have to answer this but --> aside from 50 over and actual real racing on the streets, how do you feel about the rest of this law? Lets say this law was everything it is now MINUS the 50 over bit and the street racing bit (meaning it vaugly involves everything else)? | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 8:41:13 AM | Apparently the number of over 50 tickets issued is a little over 1,000 in the four plus weeks of it being law (Toronto Star this week). For some reason this was big news in the papers and telvision. However, when you consider that there are about a million licensed drivers in Ontario, visitors from the U.S. driving in Ontario and truckers from the U.S. working in Ontario and most people drive every day, the police have stopped and ticketed 0.1% of the total potenial drivers in Ontario. So does this mean that 99.9% of the drivers are actually driving below the "dangerous" thresshold of 50Kilometres over? Is this really a "good news" story or is it more of an indication that the law is wrong headed?
Did we just give up some of our basic fundamental rights such as the right to a fair trial and to be able to launch a defense against charges placed by the state? Did anyone else feel that the OPP Commisioner's statements that if he knew it was going to be so easy to get the 50 kilometre law in place, he would have either lowered the speed or raised the penalties, a little scary? All I can say is that we the general public need to be more aware and more proactive in stopping the "good intentions" of the government and its agencies to enforce sanctions without due process to reduce crime. There are basic fundamental rights that we have and we should not lose them or be willing to give them up so easily. Maybe less television for ratings, bumper sticker slogans from politicians and more open discussion from intellectual people to educate the masses prior to enacting laws would stop these sort of ideas that infringe on our rights before they are put into law.
Just for laughs, next time you travel on a 400 series highway (401, 400, 427 etc) set your cruise to 120 kilometres and count the number of cars that pass you versus what you pass. I bet you will be surprised that you pass more than pass you... I was... So is over 20 a better law? And why 50 and not 10 or 20 kilometres over? This law I do not believe will reduce anything noticeable, because, it is not that large a problem and it has been around for hundreds of years whether on horses or motorized vehicles, racing and contest of strength and power have been around.
Nice try Liberal government and thanks for the opportunity to add my voice POF. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 8:49:27 AM | the number of over 50 tickets issued is a little over 1,000 in the four plus weeks of it being law
Do the math..two thousand min, ten max 2 to 10 million in the coffers....That doesnt include the thousand upon thousands of 49 and below tickets
Always FOLLOW THE MONEY
I expect you will see a class action on this under violation of our constitutional rights
United Nations Universal declaration of rights and freedoms 1948 .. Canada a signatory
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed
Seems to apply here does it not..
Mr Fantino and his Nazis are going down a slippery slope , They have Sh*t on your rights using the public good as an excuse...Worked for Hitler and the Japanese , the US patriot act etc ,Protecting us from the "enemy ", If you let him do this, wait to see what they do next.... | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 3:00:33 PM |
How does me doing 140 in a fast lane in anyway endanger you
Let's suppose you are going 140 in the "passing lane"..... by the way, it's funny you should call it the "fast lane" when it is a "passing lane"
But you know... semantics.... right?
As I said, you're clocking along at 140. I have my cruise set at 110. A truck is in the curb lane and a vehicle travelling in the centre lane is driving 100k's.
Now... I have the right to enter the passing lane to pass. As I pass this vehicle, there is a string of cars in front of him/her. I keep my cruise on and stay in the passing lane as I am progressively passing the string of cars.
I look in my rear view mirror. I see an ***hole fast approaching me. He's doing 140 - 150 k's. He wants to make his point that this is no longer a "Passing" lane but, it is a "Fast" lane. He proceeds to approach and gets right on my ass... he is no more than five feet off my bumper. he's flasjhing his lights... he waving his arms and it appears he is cursing me for "passing" in the "passing" lane. He fails to realise that because, in his mind, it's the "fast" lane.
What should I do? Speed to 150 k's to keep him happy?
Should I remain at my cruise speed because, I am still making progress when passing and I have nowhere to accomodate this ***hole?
If you answer that I should increase my speed for the speeder's benefit?
I say....eat shit.
This tailgaiting in respects to what I just posted, happens very often. ... it's not hypothetical and/or an isolated incident, or two.
If you think tailgating in order to push drivers aside is not a risk; if you think the passing lane is used as your speeding lane... you'll never understand the reason this law was made.
It may not be a perfect law but... I'm sure there will be a lot more drivers staying below 150.
As far as the purpose of this law. Well... I see many angles. Knowing what i do about the way some people in power think... I'd venture to say their reasoning (off the record) would be, "Well... if they are that stupid to drive like that... let's make them pay.... maybe they will think twice before they do it again."
However, given the attitudes of some... you would rather pay as opposed to following a very simple rule.
As for those doubting my experience around a track... again... you display a certain heir of ignorance and arrogance. Just because you don't believe it, it doesn't mean it's not true.
As for the Pilot "status". Well... it's not like we haven't heard about drunk Pilots commandeering passenger jets. Check your ass... it's still blowing smoke. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 3:42:04 PM | Outdoorguy001 - there are a shite load more than a million licensed drivers in Ontario.
I think it's safe to say its closer to 5 million or maybe even 7 million.
Fantino did not retire as cheif from Toronto. He was fired from London, then fired from Toronto
and is about to get canned from the OPP too.
If you change lanes for any reason (like in yer example to pass another motorist) you should do so ONLY when
and if it is safe to do so, otherwise it is a lane change not in safety charge or one of the
catch all charges of hazardous/dangerous/careless driving offences. For all you know, the speeding car in
the fast/passing lane doing 140/150 is an unmarked police vehicle. This is how and why soo many
of these accidents occur, when ppl take a split second only to see if antone is in their blind spot
but fail to look up and down the road to judge the speed of approaching vehicles, no ones there, oh
lets change lanes and to hell with anyone who's quickly approaching me. HAZARDOUS DRIVING. Why dont
you just use this same thought to turn left or right into oncomming traffic.
If you answer that I should increase my speed for the speeder's benefit?
I say....eat shit. That attitude right there is just one of the many problems that add to creating accident. What if this
speeding vehicle has malfunctioning brakes and cant slow down and entered the leftmost lane to try to scrub off speed?
what if it is someone who is having a heart attack or stroke and isnt thinking properly? Could be thousands of reasons why someone
is doing 140+ in the leftest lane - the thing is that YOU took it upon yourself to enforce the law, endanger yourself and other
motorists, and under this law YOU, yes YOU would be the one to have yer car + license seized.
Tailgating is a risk - agreed, but why put yerself in harms way???
Politics is politics and is not allways in the best interest of society, example, it is a CRIMINAL offence to startle the Queen. That
does not benifit society, so cough or sneeze around her and startle her and yer now a CRIMINAL.
MY I - heres another question id like you to answer. How can you support this law when it not only violates yer rights but also
penalizes and vivtomises victums? What do I mean - 20-30 of the seized cars were stolen by theives but the owners
of the cars have to pay the towing + impound fee's just like a rental company or anyone who lent out their car does. Under this law, the
victums of theft will dish out approx $1,000 just to get their cars back. Id like to see you go before these victums and
plead yer case supporting this law. How would you feel if this happened to you? You didnt lend out yer car, it was stolen,
caught, then seized and YOU pay for the impoundment and time wasted. Dont tell me you'll be reimburst cuz this law
wont allow it and the criminal theif sure as hell wont pay you. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 4:15:10 PM |
the thing is that YOU took it upon yourself to enforce the law, endanger yourself and other
motorists, and under this law YOU, yes YOU would be the one to have yer car + license seized.
Tailgating is a risk - agreed, but why put yerself in harms way???
What dumb ass reasoning is that?
If i am in the lane and this car approaches me, from a distance, as i am in the midst of passing a string of cars... how am I at fault? Are you suggesting I cut others off in order to acomodate an excessive speeder?
Again... I would say....eat shit..... I did nothing wrong and i am not going to increase my speed, risk getting demerit points on my record for the sake of a speeder... no way. that's the dumbest request/suggestion, ever.
If I did that... the judge would increase my fine for being so stupid.
How can you support this law when it not only violates yer rights
it doesn't violate any of my rights. it will never be an issue of my rights because I wonb't break that law... I know the consequences aren't worth it.
If you break the law... you inherently concede many of your rights.
You didnt lend out yer car, it was stolen,
caught, then seized and YOU pay for the impoundment and time wasted
I would rent the most expensive car available... put on the miles... enjoy the luxury and then take the thief to small claims court for all costs. I would also seek punitive damages for the imposition my family and I dealt with.... that's how. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 4:15:27 PM | My 1 Agree on the 5 feet behind you, I never tailgate..as per the headlight flash....Sorry back to the handbook...You really do need to spend 10 dollars. Flash headlights to indicate to car ahead your intention to pass....havent you wondered why the high beam switch is on one way..temp the other on some cars???That would be to FLASH them
While you are in the fast lane you are to accelerate and make the pass as quickly as possible within reason...Leaving your cruise on at 110 where it now takes minutes to overtake and therby blocking the lane from the smooth flow of traffic......unacceptable
You forget there is two laws..Keep right except to pass....and...Slower traffic keep right...
B: If you had checked you mirror properly you would have seen this vehicle approaching and should not have even entered the lane since clearly you were interferring with the smooth flow of traffic
But you have your cruise at 110 in violation of the law,Who are you to decide what is acceptable breach of the the law. The law is the Law . It has no room for an extra 10.
So are you saying you now have right to break this law , but you have the right to decide the limit of such violation. So all this blustering and you too are a criminal.
I would rent the most expensive car available... put on the miles... enjoy the luxury and then take the thief to small claims court for all costs. I would also seek punitive damages for the imposition my family and I dealt with.... that's how
Thats the funniest thing I have ever read.....good luck getting a penny as judges never order restitution in Ontario..., and no punitive in small claims | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 6:49:20 PM | If you were in the laft lane a bare minimum of 5 seconds before the car travelling 140 got to yer spot, then ok, the guy behind you should slow down. Anything less - and a cop will get you for unsafe lane change or careless driving because you basically cut off another motorist, ask a cop about that one. Again - why would you put yerself in danger like that, not to mention putting others at risk cuz this guy can eat yer shit. Yer sounding worse than the careless speeders. If the guy behind you was 10 seconds behind, then you should manouver back one lane to yer right to let them pass, regardless if they were speeding - leave it to the cops to get them for speeding. This action you describe is the same thing that David Virgo and that girl witness did, and he died because of it.
LOL
Judge: why did you change lanes knowing a car was quickly comming up on you? Or did you not know?
MY I: yes I knew + because I have the right and the guy was speeding so he can eat shit
Judge: GUILTY of charge, reason is wreckless endangerment, failing to yeild to faster moving traffic.
OR
MY I: no I was not aware of the other motorist
Judge:GUILTY of charge, reason is lane change not in safety + failing to drive safely
MY I, a guy steals yer car, goes to jail, spends money if he has it for a lawyer, gets convicted, has no money, spends who knows how long in jail and yer gonna rent the most expensive car and sue him BWAHAHAHA, now I know for sure you are inded a moron/idiot like you've been called. $50+ to file for small claims court, hope the theif shows (ya right), then explain to the judge why you rented the most expensive car, get laughed at. Best case senario is the judge will rule in yer fav. Now go spend more money to hire a company to try and collect from this their.
Ok this thread is dead and Imma outta here. MY I refuses to justify everything asked that is not speeding related (as in coruption, abuse, stolen cars, etc..). He is the only one left fighting for this bogus law cuz everyone else finally understood it, felt stupid and wont show their faces here no more, but MY I still fails to "get it" hence being called a fool. Politicians lie 70%+ of the time, cops are not angels, shite happens, ppl drive bad and refuse to see that they do, then they are speachless when they get charged under the HTA.
So boyals and ghools, this is my last post here.
Nice to see there are some intelligent ppl still left out there fighting for their rights. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/3/2007 9:02:13 PM | For those who want to complain about the new laws... keep in mind... the fines were already in place.
From gov't site:
The maximum fine increases from $1,000 to $10,000 upon conviction for street racing, making it the highest penalty in Canada. The minimum fine increases from $200 to $2,000.
And for those who complain about your rights... if you recall, I asked, "What rights did you give up?"
Nobody answered. So, I will answer my own question:
You did not give up any rights that were already in place. As you notice in the above text the term "conviction". Police "charge drivers"..... A judge "Convicts drivers". So, your argument regarding your right to be "innocent" is moot because the law does not change your right to appear in court.
As well:
Police can issue an immediate seven-day driver’s licence suspension and seven-day vehicle impoundment for street racing, participating in a driving contest or stunt driving.
Courts can impose a driver licence suspension of up to 10 years for a second conviction, if the second conviction occurs within 10 years of the first. For a first conviction, the maximum licence suspension period remains at 2 years.
You'll notice what "Police" can do as opposed to the enforcement "Courts" can do. Again... you get your day in court.
Police have the right to impound a car... they always had that right.
Police always had that right to impose a temporary license suspension... ask drunk drivers. (go ahead, argue you aren't drunk. However, you're a risk irrespective if you want to acknowledge it, or not)
The Act also bans driving a motor vehicle on a highway with a connected nitrous oxide system. Some street racers use nitrous oxide to enhance the acceleration capabilities of their vehicles.
^^^ argue the rught to use nitrous... I'm sure you have some sort of spin for that.
Increases fines for street racers and aggressive drivers, including those who drive 50 km/h or more over the posted speed limit
As you see... there is a total crackdown on agressive and assertive behaviour on the roads..... repet offenders of D.U.I. are also included in these fines, suspensions, etc.:
Allows drivers who are suspended for drinking and driving to get their licences back early if they install an ignition interlock device in their vehicle
Keep in mind... it's not your basic human right to own a driver's license. It's a privilege. Priviliges have rules as well as rules for discipline.
Each year, about 16,000 people are convicted of drinking and driving with a blood alcohol concentration above 0.08 in Ontario – about two people each hour. About a quarter of the province’s annual road fatalities are alcohol-related. The new legislation targets impaired driving
One thing I find disturbing about some of your attitudes is that you feel speeders are entitled to a "Fast lane".... that's ridiculous. You believe that all traffic should yield to speeders and let them pass through like a Knight in shining armour. Well... you're not heroes or brave and courageous souls... your jerks and you're too immature to be on the roads.... hence the laws being ammended.
Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino warns that OPP
officers continue to be unrelenting in their pursuit of aggressive and
irresponsible drivers. "Crashes are often caused by aggressive driving, which
includes street racing, unsafe lane changes and, the leading cause of criminal
death in Canada, impaired driving," Fantino said. "The OPP is patrolling the
highways 24 hours a day, seven days a week watching for these drivers in our
all-out effort to put an end to the senseless carnage."
"This is a time for Ontarians to enjoy a safe holiday weekend. Our
message to all drivers is simple - drive responsibly and keep Ontario's roads
safe," said Cansfield
Have your day in court... feel proud being in front of that judge, suggesting your rights have been violated and therefore, you have the right to speed in the "fast lane"... which does not exist, outside of your mind and in a legal sense.
Bottom line... if you break the law.....you did not loose rights,,,, you lost privileges.
Stop crying. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/4/2007 6:07:30 AM |
MY 1, you yourself have avoided soo many questions because you know you have no answer
Why should I answer questions when you can't prove your own argument that "your rights" have been violated?
Afterall... that is the crux of your contempt for this law.
Its right there MY 1, Section 3, paragraph 8, and sub part "i" + "ii" The law you soo eagerly support says if you intend to prevent another car from passing you, you have just broken the law and have pulled a STUNT. You might as well just turn in yer car and license right now
Read it for what it is, jackass. Where does that section mention that a passing lane has a minimum speed limit? That law is there for the ***holes who deliberately block traffic. That law is not insinuating that I must drive 140 km/h to appease the wants of excessive speeders.
I bet I would win my argument in front of a judge by stating, "I was making progress at 110 k's. The faster driver wanted me to accomodate his rate of speed - 140 k's. I don't feel it is safe or wise to drive at 140 just to make an excessive speeder happy. The bottom line... I was not deliberately slowing you down... I was passing vehicles and when the traffic became safe enough for me to pull over, I did.
So, as you put it.... I can interpret your belief that a person travelling 140 km/h and higher, in a passing lane, must be accomodated.... all other vehicles are breaking the law by not allowing you to pass.
That's bullshit.... that's why you guys are being focussed on... you honestly believe the entire bulk of traffic on the highways must accomodate excessive speeding - no wonder the government took the position they did - YOU JUST DON'T CARE ABOUT SAFE DRIVING PRACTISES.
You deserve what you get.
Still support this law??? Like its been said b4 - you obviously havnt read the new law, your Joe Blow Public and you eat the crap fed to you by politicians and the media. You are the dumb being led by the dumb
yes... I support it.
Again, your igniorance and arrogance is showing. I read the laws and I read the news releases. You should learn to decipher language rather than biotch about it. You have not shown me any laws that a passing lane is meant for vehicles travelling at excessive speeds. A passing lane is for passing... not for speeding...... I don't need to access lawyer's to determine that.
Passing a car while driving 105 k's, in the passing lane IS LEGAL. Driving at 150 k's in "any lane" on the highway IS NOT LEGAL therefore you are not granted the "right of way".... you have to slow down (words not in your vocabulary)... I don't have to speed up.
So say what you want MY 1 because your talking to yourself, well its the only one who would listen to your crap, you
Yet you respond with insults.
(Your thinking process is unique - to say the least)
Bottom line is that this law is intended to make roads safer. Speeders do not care about safety therefore, this law is wrong.
Go ahead, fvck up your driving record and tell the judge you did it because Fantino is a liar and your rights to drive at 140+ have been infringed upon..... you'll do well. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/4/2007 7:46:50 AM | This is becoming redundant..It is targeting the speeding..Plain and simple you keep right except to pass, and slower traffic keep right is the law...nothing to debate Thats the law....get the hell out of the left lane except when passing..LAW LAW LAW
If I want to speed on an empty highway , it has no effect on you, If I want to drive 120 on the 401 it has no effect on you, you want to drive 100 and stay in the middle lane fine, JUST KEEP RIGHT
The big problem everyone has with the law is the fantino wanting to "crush cars" that "may possible be used for racing" . Or seizure for stunting..read the law. If you chirp a tire..yes chirp they can seize your car for a week.
50 over and they can seize you car, suspend my license for a week without trial is tough and conviction without trial is a violation of constitution of Canada and United Nations...See several post back , but to make my wife and kid walk and me lose my job because I cant get to work is Just NAZI. And please dont tell me certain cops wont abuse this. ..
Is 50 over insane..I got busted doing a 100 in a 50 ..The rd went from 90 to 50 , without a warning sign and the cops had a radar trap . He lazared me .when I was still in the 90 . Good luck proving it , go to court, 200 miles north and sit in front of a judge who hangs out with the same cop..small town and expect to have a chance in hell of winning. Under this law I would be out 10k and my car for a week..
So this is the seizure and destruction of private property with any evidence of criminal intent or actual crime being commited and without a trial...If you support that Im coming to seize your car and crush it as you have already admitted to setting your cruise control at 110 and therefore are a danger to society
No one supports kids racing around the residential streets, But man has been racing since the caveman, And many kids race responsibly..Dead end rds, industrial areas etc
If they dont..bust them for dangerous.. and let them have a trial.
Im done as the stupid responses are overwhelming | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/4/2007 9:20:25 AM |
Plain and simple you keep right except to pass, and slower traffic keep right is the law...nothing to debate Thats the law....get the hell out of the left lane except when passing..LAW LAW LAW
Speeders will always be in the passing lane because they are always passing. So, in effect, you are claiming the "passing lane" is for speeding - not for passing vehicles who are not going with the flow - and all others (including those going with the flow) should "Get the hell out of your way"
your blowing smoke
The big problem everyone has with the law is the fantino wanting to "crush cars" that "may possible be used for racing" . Or seizure for stunting..read the law. If you chirp a tire..yes chirp they can seize your car for a week
So what! Big deal! You feel your manhood is threatened just you can't handle those who challenge your illegal behaviour.
By the way.... chirping the tires has been an illegal act for decades..... it's nothing new.
See several post back , but to make my wife and kid walk and me lose my job because I cant get to work is Just NAZI
In order to havre them seize your car, you would have broken the law... you are not the victim... you are the perpetrator of an offence. Your wife and kids woes are the casualities of your illegal behaviour...... put blame where it belongs. You weren't thinking about your wife and kids as you broke the law. I always fail to appreciate those who use their family life as emotional blackmail after they commit an offense. Amazingly, they totally ignore their family situation as they commit the offenses... who is the real ***hole here?
Why should we worry about your family..... you obviously didn't?
Is 50 over insane..I got busted doing a 100 in a 50 ..The rd went from 90 to 50
Maybe due to the fact you were speeding in a 90k zone may have something to do with it. Either way... you were speeding in both speed zones. It wasn't a trap... you fvcked yourself.
Stop playing victim... again.
So this is the seizure and destruction of private property with any evidence of criminal intent or actual crime being commited and without a trial
Under many conditions an officer has the right to seize your vehicle when committing an offense. You are not excused..... just as a drunk driver is not excused; A person with drugs in their vehicle also gets their car seized when it's not proven the owner is traffiking the drug. An unsafe car can also be seized and removed from the road.
This "seizure" is nothting new. It's pissing you off because it now includes your behaviour as the cause for seizure... you have to be accountable and you don't like it.
No one supports kids racing around the residential streets, But man has been racing since the caveman, And many kids race responsibly..Dead end rds, industrial areas etc
It's funny you think that's ok. However, if a mother lost her child, or a wife lost her spouse due to an accident during these events you describe, I'm sure these women would sue the local authorities for negligence because the law was "fully aware" of the racing and did nothing to prevent/stop it.
So, ya see.... you aren't looking at the"big picture".... you are thinkning about yourself. And thinkers like you have no regard for public safety.You're a risk....
nothing to debate Thats the law......LAW LAW LAW | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/19/2007 3:26:47 PM | Well that shut up My I pretty good proving my thoughts about him.
http://www.wheels.ca/reviews/article/32975#
A hard look at the `street racing' law
Recent passage of Bill 203 will only be a lucrative source of revenue for the government
Tim Chisholm
Special to the Star
Nov 17, 2007
Ontario Bill 203 was supposed to be a proposal to combat street racing, but it's just politics at its worst.
A private member's bill was proposed in the spring of 2006 and was pretty much shot down. The bill has always included the controversial issue of "officer discretion" on whether the driver was "racing" or not.
About the only well-thought issue that 203 contained was making it illegal to run nitrous on the street. As hard as it is to imagine, before 203, it was not illegal to have a fully operational nitrous system on your street car.
With 203, the system can be in place, without the bottle connected, but if the bottle is connected, you are in trouble. Good on 203 for this: nitrous is for the drag strip, and that's where it should stay. There was no 50 km/h-over issue on the Bill 203 proposal.
The elected official who conceived many parts of 203 is Newmarket MP Frank Klees. Mr. Klees was the minister of transportation in the early part of this century.
I had an argument over the phone with Klees in the spring of 2006 when a "safer roads" bill was initially proposed. My argument was simple: the new law could sink a car enthusiast who is doing nothing wrong, other than simply driving his or her modified car.
It's because the bill negatively profiles the modified car enthusiast and gives the officer full discretion, with no due process for the accused. Pretty simple, a copper having a bad day can screw a car enthusiast simply because he chooses to. When I suggested that this will happen often if 203 becomes law, Klees told me he "could live with that."
I was relieved that the proposed bill got shot down.
But then in May 2006, the accident that killed Rob and Lisa Manchester, and which left their 8-year-old daughter an orphan, hit the headlines. This accident took place in Klees' riding. The accident was blamed on "street racers," reportedly travelling 150 km/h in an 80 km/h zone when Manchester made a left-hand turn into the path of the two "racers."
With the Manchester deaths, there was no way the government could continue to brush off 203 and Klees, and understandably so. Street racing killed two members of Klees' own riding and he was the man already pushing the proposal.
By the spring of this year, you'd have to be on another planet to not realize that 203 was going through. The media wheel was turning at full speed – every accident headline involving "speed" was replaced with "street racing."
We had Prime Minister Stephen Harper spewing the term, Premier Dalton McGuinty following suit, and (now former) attorney-general Michael Bryant was threatening to crush cars. Then OPP chief Julian Fantino chimed in with "50 km/h over is street racing," in his opinion, and he wants a plane.
By June 2007, those of us in the enthusiast community were pointing out that only 0.12 per cent of traffic deaths are related to "street racing," and "What the hell is the inspiration for these draconian proposals?" And then whammo, Bill 203 gets royal assent. And funny, just before it received assent, the 50 km/h-over penalties were added.
In an interesting feat of timing, the boys charged in the influential accident that killed the Manchesters were due for sentencing right around the time that Bill 203's provisions were to become official.
Then a few facts started coming out. The boys were not doing 150 km/h, but actually 112 km/h. Manchester was drunk, twice over the limit. The judge ruled that the boys were not street racing, and that Manchester's alcohol level was a factor.
You have to wonder how Manchester's condition was overlooked, considering his death was exploited as a result of "street racers" for 14 months. When the fact is, had Manchester lived, he would have been facing serious DUI charges. I'm sure everyone involved will claim they didn't know, but I will always be convinced that it was nothing more than politics at its worst.
I understand that, as of last week, more than 1,300 vehicles have been seized under the new legislation. I'm not sure how many were "street racing" versus driving 50 km/h-over, but at $2,000 a judgment, it seems that Fantino might have just paid for that plane he wanted. And we will all be reminded how much safer our roads are now.
Those who express shock and outrage at people brushing off 130-140-150 km/h as not being that fast in today's machinery will find that the new "street racing" legislation will morph as time goes by.
And they may express more shock and outrage when they nonchalantly coast down an 80 km/h back road on a Sunday drive, inadvertently speed up to 100 km/h as they coast down a hill and get dinged for 50 km/h over as they enter a 50 km/h zone where the OPP are hiding. They'll then get a life-altering financial burden under legislation designed to combat street racers and make roads safer.
The car enthusiast community will continue to fight this new legislation. The law leaving the officer to be judge and jury on the side of the road and levy these types of punishments violates our Charter of Rights.
Similar laws are in place in Florida, and recently a judge there ruled in a case that the "street racing" charges made at the discretion of the officer were "unconstitutional."
So it's only a matter of time before our new visionless law gets scrapped.
It's a real shame when politicians lack vision and common sense and make knee-jerk decisions based on their heart strings. It's even worse when they let law enforcement swoop in and capitalize on a potential cash cow.
It's not about making our roads safer and ridding the roads of street racers. The ERASE (Eliminate Racing Activities on Streets Everywhere) project was designed to do that.
When ERASE ran out of applicable fines for the 0.12 per cent of trouble on the road, police started hanging out at the racetrack entrances to hassle and fine drivers who were taking it to the track. Yep, the program encouraging you to take it to the track was trying to bust you when you took it to the track.
For what it's worth, along with being a car freak, I'm a 40-year-old business professional, husband and homeowner.
And I haven't had a traffic violation charge in more than 20 years. And I am mad as hell that this legislation was passed.
My late father (also an enthusiast) taught me that the roads are a dangerous place. The highways are even more dangerous. The cars I was raised around were dangerous – they could kill you in a second.
No crumple zones, no ABS, no traction control, no airbags, some had no seatbelts, and none of them had eight cupholders or GPS. I was also informed early on that I would be learning to drive with a manual gearbox.
Maybe it's time to take a step back in what we promote. I've heard some suggest that head injuries in professional hockey today could be improved if helmets were not mandatory. Pretty simple theory: you give much more respect for others' safety when you're not wrapped up in a suit of armour.
Today's roads are seriously dangerous and will not become safer. And no matter what the manufacturers tell you, the car will not save you.
Deal with it responsibly or stay off the road.
AGO replaced, gee wonder why? | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/20/2007 6:06:34 AM | Andthe "debate" still goes on. Its the law of the land. Get over it or get elected and change it. All the whining and flawed logic here won't change a thing.
If it were up to me, the Police would be armed with RPG's to knock excessive speeders right off the road. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/20/2007 1:37:02 PM |
Well that shut up My I pretty good proving my thoughts about him
It didn't shut me up... I'm still waiting for a reason a person should be presumed innocent when they knowingly break the law (driving at excessive speed)?
You're breaching my right to expect other drivers to drive safely. Once you break the law who cares about your rights and innocence (except defense lawyers lol) - you didn't care about your rights and responsibilities before you broke the law... you only cared about your rights and responsibilities once you are caught breaking the law. Therefore, the penalty should be high. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/20/2007 5:27:26 PM | How many times have you yourself said that they can get you solely based on probabilities, meaning thay can take your car before you ever break the law? That right there means that innocent ppl can fall victum to this. Like Qualter said, let him know and he'll make a call and you'll see first hand how YOU can lose your car and fall victum to this without YOU even breaking a law, maybe I'll let him know you still dont believe it, then maybe you'll see an innocent person (like you presume to be) can wind up in a mess not deserving.
I think most ppl here agree mostly with excessive speeding, outside of that it's crap.
Again, like its been said ppl who had thier cars stolen are victums of this law, as are ppl who actually race on the track and not the street, the father who was teaching his son driving in an empty parking lot lost thier car, OPP nailing ppl doing 100 in a 80/90 zone but they sit in a 50 zone and say you did 50 over in the 50 zone [when you were actually in the 80/90 zone], and the list of abuse and false charges goes on. Its been happening to INNOCENT ppl and there is nothing you can do because the law deems you guilty under this act.
Like its been said to you before, WHAT DONT YOU UNDERSTAND?
I think you need to call a lawyer and have them verify to you the faults. | |
|
| new speeding penalties good or bad?
Posted: 11/21/2007 4:04:26 PM |
Like its been said to you before, WHAT DONT YOU UNDERSTAND?
Well...before you decide to bust my balls and insult me any more, I would sugest that people such as yourself, should stop complaining about people's rights. I agree people's rights should be protected. However, I also believe that some people break rules with arrogance and then fall back to their "rights" as a means to supercede the laws/rules.
For example:
There are very basic rules within this site that forbid two profiles for one member. If a person has two profiles on this site, should they be presumed innocent? Should their rights be protected?
I say "No".... the odds are against them being innocent.
To prove my case, I'm going to bet against the odds that you have an evil twin on this site. "Have no Fear" and "southtampaguy" are two different profiles. However... they possess the same photos.
I think it's a safe bet that someone is breaking the rules within this site.
Now, if I go along with your presumption of innocense... both of you are telling the ttruth and neither of you should face the judgement of the moderators. With your argument, it is unfair for a moderator to assume that one of the profiles is a fraud. As you wish to claim... "we are all innocent until proven guilty"
So... do you live in Tampa or do you live in Toronto?
Are you a vet or are you into marketing/advertising?
So.... the government, to this point. is going to assume muscle car owners do not supe up their car simply to race at a track... if it were to strictly race at a track... why would you bother plating the vehicle? | |
|
| |
| |
|
| Page 10 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
