No smoking law - interesting loophole chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: No smoking law - interesting loophole

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 35 (view)

No smoking law - interesting loophole Posted: 4/10/2009 9:26:28 PM
The car is basically a smoke chamber that entraps the smoke, forcing it into the children's lungs. smoke chamber?, like inside a BBQ? gimmie a break. forcing it into the children's lungs? what, like an inhailer for asthmatics? you must live in a strange dimension where all smoke from cigarettes are"forced into childrens lungs". Your argument is not that valid. Please be as so kind to inform the public as how pollution/chemicals/EMF/Radon/and other killers are not valid. Sounds like your trying to say that nothing harms children except smoke from cigaretts, because science is completely wrong when it says that micro asbestos particles from friction materials (brake pads and transmission components) dont float through vehicle ventilation systems and end up in ppls lungs (where they stay till you die, scar your lungs and lead to cancer), not to mention anything else that comes from outside the vehicle like other vehicle exhaust. Adults have that choice. Just adults huh, so no one under 19 (12-18) has a choice? Your not sexist/ageist/racist/discrimining/etc.. are you? Nazi's on your side huh, yea real mature and intelligent there buddy, the smiley face thing does'nt make your statement any better, I wont go further here. a smoke filled car is, in effect, a gas chamber then perhaps all vehicles should be banned right? First its a smoke chamber, now a gas chamber, perhaps even a stasis chamber. Listen, I dont personally agree with anyone confining a small child and harming them with any ype of smoke/chemical/pollution/etc.... Just to be clear on my side here. This law is silly, it seriously requires refinement, such as consent clauses of persons above a certain age. Fining this boy didn't stop him from actually smoking in the car, therefore this law protected no one in this situation. I say educate instead of taxate. Example, pull ppl over who smoke with minors in the vehicle, hand them a citation that requiers a madatory education from lets say health care workers, they pay for this class, learn something perhaps, and ppl are working. Maybe send CAS over to the house too. There is a lot of missleading propaganda out there, some of it from gov health web sites I saw earlier where most of the info provided was dispelled by profesionals, however, the false info still remains on the site. 1 ex: rolling down a car window does nothing. That is simply idiotic, of course it does something. 2 ex: second-hand smoke being more dangerous than first hand smoke, again it's silly. Interesting tidbit if you are a learned and understanding individual http://cancrime.com/2009/01/ontario-recruits-25000-smoking-police.html Oddly it's still perfectly legal for a 16 yr old driver to smoke in a car with minors, who does the law protect there? answer is no one. do a survey, lets put 2 smokers in a garage with the doors closed smoking, and lets put 2 people in the garage with the doors also closed and the car running lets see who walks out, I'am willing to be one of those smokers and I'm not a smoker. Education, education, education. How about all minors be place inside bubbles? who knows, might just get legislated. How much of a minors life is spent in a smoke filled car . How much of their life will be spent in a toxic environment earning enough money to make products for you to consume?

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 33 (view)

No smoking law - interesting loophole Posted: 4/10/2009 2:50:19 AM
This law is here supposedly to protect ppl from second hand contamination right? So how soon will it be made illegal that: -TTC vehicles be scrapped due to their "smoke"? -all cars for their "smoke"? -coal fired electric plants? -ppl who wear perfume/colgne/deoderant/cloths detergent/etc...? -VOC's (volitile organic compounds, known to be toxic and fatal) to be emitted for years on end from virtually every product made (carpets, car interiors, plastics, curtains, furniture, paint,) -cell phone users must be 25 feet from any other person due to microwave feilds? (I dont want yer brain cancer) -chlorine and IQ lowering floride removed from drinking water? -smoke from meat smoke factories? -smoke from restaurants? -particulate matter that falls from airplane exhaust onto us? -incinerators? -EMF's from monitors? -cell phone repeater towers? -any chemical that mimics or messes with human hormones or buggers up your DNA leading to mutations (found in soaps and shampoo's, etc...)? -chemicals the gov allows and insists is sprayed on your foods or the petrolium based fertilizer it grows in? -smoke from BBQ's ? need I go on? sounds like Big Gov hurts you more than smokers do who protects you from them? who protects non smoking adults who are passengers in cars driven and owned by "minors" who smoke in their own cars? one day the gov will make it illegal for the sun to shine. You want a law like this to work, tell children that every time they cal l the police on adults who smoke in their presence, take a picture of it and the will get candy/toys/allowance/etc..... from the Nazi's

sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 67 (view)

Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving Posted: 3/10/2008 7:14:43 PM
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764. That was 230 years ago. -Thomas Jefferson "The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property and freedom of the press." Thomas Jefferson The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson Bush wants to give amnesty to millions of illegals in the USA, wants them to join the army, Canada/Mexico/USA secretly forming the SPP + NAU + NAFTA SuperHIghway, creating a one north american government, DESTROYING Canadian sovergnty, as well as stripping away your rights under the charter. These illegals in the army will be used against the ppl of the USA and Canada (sinse we wont have borders). This is a good reason to keep arms at home, actually everyone should get a gun(s), to protect yourself from whats comming in the next couple years and what was started years ago. Disarm the ppl, no one should need a gun at home, sounds like Hitler to me. Do a search on: SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) North American Union NAFTA Super Highway 10's of millions of illegals taking your job, lowering the minimum wage to under $4hr, dissintigration of the OHIP/National Healthcare, loosing your civil rights, being forced to carry biometric RFID cards to be replaced with human chip implants OK, sounds a lil off topic and crazy conspiracy - then why is Harper doing this in secrecy?

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 56 (view)

Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving Posted: 3/8/2008 2:08:44 AM
Someone said - Hold the home owner of a party where ppl drink, leave, have an accident also responsible. Why? Bar owners already get sued by ppl who drink there then have accidents, many times ppl drink outside of the bar (have a few in the parking lot) then drive and have an accident , yet they still sue the bar owners. I've allways hated this crap. Why cant the drinker be totally responsible for them selves? Lets drag bar owners in cuz they seem to have $$$$ BTW - Im not a drinker, but I think there should be something (like free overnight car parking) for those who want to, as was said. Lady doesnt drive well in winter conditions, skids on ice and crashes, sues the gov, gets 6 Million, WHY ? She obviously wasnt driving according to conditions, has a single vehicle collision and gets $$$ Handguns - anyone can go online and learn how to make a handgun that does not actually qualify as a handgun (due to velocity of bullets or something - I know nada bout guns) and kill someone, or hair spray bombs, or surgical tubing spear guns, cross bows, etc.... Guns arnt the problem. You might say "you dont NEED them". Well we dont NEED a lot of things, so should we stip away all but the necessitities? Guns are for one thing only and thats killing ppl - WRONG - think self defense, think shooting without killing, use yer heads ppl. To the goof who cals anyone using a gun a pansy - well ya, maybe they are (too old, to small, to weak, physically diminished in some capacity, dont know how to fight, etc..) so what? Just cuz you might be a tuff guy and dont need one means nada, ppl have their own reasons. Im sure I could find something out about you and call you worse, so there , take those beans............ Just cuz YOU dont do something, doesnt mean you should try and remove things from ppl who DO (guns, cars, drinking, music, sports, art.....) I hate stinky food and think that ppl dont NEED to cook stinky food, therefore I think it should be illegal - grow up ppl, learn to accept others for their differences, being a tolerant person makes you a better person - if we were all intollerant, we'd all be dead. Let them have their guns.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 58 (view)

How much does a woman's financial situation mean to you? Posted: 11/26/2007 12:34:15 AM
I personally dont care how much someone makes, I care more that they are happy and healthy while at work, but, if they have huge debt then it matters more to me only in the fact that I would see them less due to them spending a lot of time paying it off. Dont let your possesions posess you.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 239 (view)

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.

sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 236 (view)

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.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 232 (view)

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)?

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 227 (view)

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

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 208 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 10/31/2007 12:14:50 AM
Some of you keep focusing only on speeding. Couple posts above we saw a guy doing 120 and fined for doing 139, and that is not uncommon. A guy in my club was accused of doing 166 when he was tavelling at 130 which was a lil bit slower than some of the others on the road. The cop wouldnt show him the radar gun because he lied about it. This guy was pulled over because of what he was driving and not because of how he was driving. I think it was a company lunch deal and 5 cars were all going to the same place travelling at the same speed, there are at least 8 witnesses to this guys driving. I think he was charged with "stunt" or "contest" when he was originally stopped for 50 over speeding but when the cop saw he had a bunch of witnesses, he changed why hwe stopped him and his car towed. All his co workers couldnt believe it. Another guy, 19 yrs old from another club I belong to was driving an exotic sports car. Like so many others, he has a video camera mounted in the cabin showing in one shot his driving, his RPM and his speed, among other things. A cop stopped him for speeding 50 over. He posted a 15 min vid. Heres what we saw. First 5 mins showed the last 5 mins of him driving, did nothing wrong, not even speeding. Next 10 mins you hear the cop telling this guy he's about to lose his car - call for a ride. Dude says he has a camera mounted in the car and it was on - screw off officer. Then dude calls his lawyer while in the car, dude wont get out. Lawyer said not to give up the camcorder or the laptop (simultaniously recorded to the laptop and the tape inside the vid cam) because the cop has no right to take it, not even as evidence. So dude eventually got out of the car and took the vid cam and filmed everything. You saw and heard the cop telling him to shut it off because he was interfeering with justice, dude kept filming, you saw his lawyer show up talking to the cop and saw the car get towed. Vid was taken down a couple days later. Dude said his lawyer recomended it come down for the time being. What can I tell you - dude is gonna win and sue the cop, his detachment, the city and who ever else he can. Dude is young but loaded rich. I hear stories like that from some of my clubs weekly, loads of vids for proof to. This law does not just revolve around going 50 over. Almost anything can fall under stunt/contest/racing. Its not just about speeding - I have to keep repeating that cuz no one listens. Example:- 1. at a light, light turns green but ppl leave late cuz they snooze (4 sec delay to move) at the lights, all but 2 ppl who pull away normally. From a cops perspective - it looks like these 2 drivers raced or contested each other. They both lose their cars. 2. yer on the highway and car behind you is tailgating you. bird flys low and you tap yer brakes so it doesnt hit yer windshild. A cop sees you light up yer tail lights but didnt see the bird deal. He seizes yer car under "stunt" because to him - it looked like you tried to freak out the tailgater and get them to back off. Tapping yer brakes/rapidly slowing down for no noticeable reason/and things like that are now considered aggresive/hazardous/dangerous stunts and contestments under the new law and you can loose yer car and you may even be charged criminally. 3. yer doing the speed limit, swerve on the road to avoid something that just fell of the truck infront of you (could be rocks, garbage, whatever) and to a cop who just happened to look over - lookes to him as tho you tried side swipping another car, or tried to cut someone off, etc... and have yer car seized. 4. possibilities are endless, esp if yer car looks modified. You could be totally obeying all the laws and still get fukked under this new law. Go around a corner and yer back end slides out unintentionally - well now yer a "drifter" and car seized under "stunt". All sorts of things IF they, the cops want to take yer car. My recomendations:- 1. give the accused their day in court, then if convicted, take their car OR 2. take the car on the spot, BUT, if they are found not guilty, they are fully compensated for all towing/impoundment/license fees/loss of their car/document clearing their driving record/etc... I think its only fair if you are declared innocent.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 139 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 10/15/2007 2:04:22 PM
Too many people are getting killed on the highways because of racers. What do you mean by this? OPP Cam Wooley said a few years back that there are an estimated 30,000 illegal street racers acording to them, add a couple thousand more to that number to update it. Of those 33,000 so called street racers, not a single one of them have been convicted or caught under the new law, not even in the old law. Stats say about 38 ppl have died since 1998, of those 38 dead, several have been removed from that list because they were in fact just regular collisions. The police will allways say that any bad accident involving speed was street racing when in fact most of those alledged street racing accidents were actually caused by regular cars, mini vans, and the like. Since 1998, only about 5 ppl died and it involved the racers in isolated areas who were racing [real street racing, not media hyped racing]. Just something to chew on. Too many people are getting killed on the highways because of bad drivers. This law came about because it was an election year, Mc Guinty, the AGO, Fantino and others were trying to divert your attention away from their faults by making it look as tho they were doing something. Crime, real crime actually went up in Toronto under Fantino because he was allways doing road blitzes, failed road blitzes, and even the cops under him dissliked him, and just one of the many reasons Toronto got rid of Fantino, just as London did. The laws always existed b the new laws, but why the heck wasnt there the same police presence and enforcement as there is now? Politics. I too have heard of drunk ppl speeding and only getting 12 hour suspensions and not the 1 week seizure and of ppl running.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 54 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 9/30/2007 8:06:04 AM
Sorry Dave, but the speed did not kill, it was the sudden deceleration/stop/impact that killed. It's very difficult to die while you are in high speed, meaning that I can drive forever at 250Kms and hour and never die, BUT, if I hit something/someone and suddenly stop, then yes I may die. Race car drivers never die from high speed, they die from hitting the wall. Health matters dont count, lol.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 52 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 9/30/2007 2:30:02 AM
Ok so the new laws are in effect Sunday Sept 30 midnight, and just like I said in a previous post, unsafe lane changes, tailgating, cutting someone off and a whole host more (of new definitions for "street race", "contest", and "stunt") fall under the so called "STREET RACING LAWS", which is now considered criminal. So get ready to have 5,000 new expected criminals from this law. Toronto Star story here --> http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/261778 Oh and CuriousAboutYou - even if you dont drive like an idiot, you can get nabbed. Examples:- 1. minding yer own business and unknowingly blocking someone from passing you - falls under the newly defined laws [ driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing] which is a definition of "stunt" under the new street racing law. 2. Like it was said by someone else - if you drive the speed limit BUT you are going slower than the flow of traffic - you can get nailed because you potentially become a hazard, - as in [ 8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care AND ATTENTION, without reasonable CONSIDERATION for other persons using the highway OR in a manner that may ENDANGER any person ] which is a definition of "race" + "contest" under the new street racing law. So watch out ppl. 3. When the guy behind you tailgates you and you "tap" yer brakes cuz yer afraid they may hit you or involve you in an accident further up the road and you want to put distance between you and them [ ii. stopping or slowing down a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates the driver’s sole intention in stopping or slowing down is to interfere with the movement of another vehicle by cutting off its passage on the highway or to cause another vehicle to stop or slow down in circumstances where the other vehicle would not ordinarily do so ] 4. and more non-idiotic driving that I wont waste my time listing. Left lane bandits are about to become criminals.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 46 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 9/22/2007 1:32:32 PM
The link I posted is basically just the "new" definitions that have been added to the updated/ new laws [ Bill 203 ]- I wanted ppl to see that section 21 of the Bill amends the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) to increase the scope of the existing offence of “racing” to include “stunts” and “contests” - therefore, everything I listed before may fall under the new street racing laws and carry the same street racing penalties + other amendments allow a police officer who believes a person is driving, or has driven, a motor vehicle on a highway in a “race”, “stunt” or “contest”, to suspend that person’s drivers licence for 7 days and impound the vehicle for 7 days and there is no right of appeal to either the suspension of the drivers licence or the vehicle impoundment, on any grounds - so tuff if you've been profiled or if it's mistaken identity + allows for the creation of regulations that will allow any or all of the Highway Traffic Act to apply to the off-highway operation of motor vehicles - so pretty soon it won't matter wherte you go. Well uneducated regular folk wanted a street raceing law, well here it is, we're all about to become criminals, no more border crossing, missed employment oportunities cuz of the record, etc... These are the same idiots who voted for newer air pollution regs and got Drive Clean Scam again Im focussing on the rare heavy side of the laws, but it needs doing for ppl to sit up and take notice. a lil more info --> http://www.corskan.on.ca/svao/pdfs/bill203-discussionpoints.pdf

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 43 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 9/22/2007 4:36:39 AM
couple more additions 1. speed does NOT kill, the sudden stop does, NO ONE has ever died from going fast cuz if that were true, ppl who fly would die. 2. governing a vehicles speed is dangerous. What happens in an emergency shituation when you need to go faster, to pass another vehicle, need to avaoid something, etc... haveing a governor will screw you. Also a governor governed at 100 would not stop you from doing 90 in a 50 zone. Just recently some cop who got an award from MADD got caught by other cops doing 90 in a 40 school zone while drunk - go fig bottom line is get stupid ppl off the road, but that wont happen cuz the gov makes way too much money keeping ppl in their cars.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 42 (view)

new speeding penalties good or bad? Posted: 9/22/2007 4:26:41 AM
I havnt read all the posts here but wanted to let ppl know some shtuff. It's not just the suspension and up to $10,000 fine , but if convicted you get a criminal record and it's not just for street raceing or 50Kh over the limit, there are many new additional things taking effect sept 30, 2007. A guy did research and found that police officers cause more car accidents killing almost 4 times more ppl than "street racers" - fatigued driver kill far more ppl than drunk drivers. 80% of these so called street racers that cause accidents are done by ppl driving mini vans and high end expensive european sedans and not modified cars. These new definitions and laws basically make every single one of us a criminal. See source material here --> http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2007/elaws_src_regs_r07455_e.htm One part says --> Definition, “race” and “contest” (3) Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person is considered to be a "stunt" and is now considered criminal + $10,00 fine + car seized. This could be anything. Definition, “stunt” 3. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to spin it or cause it to circle, without maintaining control over it. So if you take a corner too fast trying to make a left turn during a red light and a tire spins = considered criminal + $10,00 fine + car seized also under stunt is this i. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing. So if yer pissed at someone, or are trying to keep someone from passing , or blocking drivers behind you by driving side by side with any car on the road - you are in violation - this happens thousands of times a day. so 2 cars driving the legal limit on a 2 lane road side by side are now considered criminal iv. making a left turn where, (A) the driver is stopped at an intersection controlled by a traffic control signal system in response to a circular red indication; [means being in an intersection when the light is red] NOTE: legally there is only to be one car in an intersection turning at one time and ony if the driver believes they can execute a turn safely and before the light turns red. (B) at least one vehicle facing the opposite direction is similarly stopped in response to a circular red indication; and (C) the driver executes the left turn immediately before or after the system shows only a circular green indication in both directions and in a manner that indicates an intention to complete or attempt to complete the left turn before the vehicle facing the opposite direction is able to proceed straight through the intersection in response to the circular green indication facing that vehicle. and it goes on. these laws now turn you moms and dads, brothers and sisters, sons and daughets, freinds and neighbours into criminals/street racers/etc.. I know Im stating worst case scenario's and harshest penalties - but it's now law in a few days and its to be considered CRIMINAL to cut someone off, block someone in, spinning yer tires around a corner, not paying due care and attention (looking in rear seat at baby in it's child seat" - reaching for your coffee,- etc..) So much for living in the land of the free. Oh and one more thing - once ppl start realizing that they are facing criminal charges/records, having their cars seized, and faceing $10,000 in fines and jail - ppl will start to run from police and avade them cuz its a big deal now. I've heard many many ppl say this all over the net and in public, with soo much to loose, whats one more lil thing like running from cops especially since they are not to chase if it gets dangerous.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 4 (view)

Teenage Suicide Posted: 4/11/2007 11:30:27 PM
She needs to spend a lot of time with someone who is positive, intelligent, and cares (not just about her, but cares about many things in general), problem is - there really arnt that many ppl like that. Someone like a mentor, and someone she doesnt yet really know. This way, by spending a lot of time with someone like that, she begins to learn )vicariously like) that there are many reasons to live, that other ppls opinions mean squat, experiences life with this person. She will be able to learn from this persons life experiences to see for herself what is actually important. You cannot force anyone like that, they simply need to see "well" ppl doing things and she will eventually figure things out for herself, leading by example and not force. If she likes animals - then maybe getting her one to be responsible for and take care of will give her an attachment to it and a reason to stick around day to day. Right now, her schooling isnt as important as reviving her life, so basically she needs a "vacation" from her life, ppl she knows, current daily surroundings (doesnt mean going away - just going on day trip type things). She could use exposure to new places, do some ppl watching, get out in nature (she will learn that nature doesnt care what ppl think of it, it simply exists and deserves a place on this planet), excercise is very important (too many mental benifits to list), and things of that nature. I don't really like to make this widly known, but, I've life coached many ppl for many diff reasons, (illness, mental health, social, work, stress, fears, etc..) and still do it if required. It is extreamly time consuming on my end cuz I make myself avail and make ppl apart of my life untill they can stand stronger on their own. So I speak from some experience Anyhow, without more info about her, thats all i can offer for now.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 1 (view)

Between B.C. and A.D. ??? Posted: 4/11/2007 11:04:53 PM
BC generally stands for before Christ correct, and AD stands for after death (or close to). So what do we call the time between Jesus's birth and death, those 33 or so years? between 1 bc and 1 ad is an aproximate 35 yr gap.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 64 (view)

An Inconvenient Truth: A Global Crisis Posted: 3/18/2007 10:16:27 PM
Yes indeed the government is at least partially to blame. Ex:- yrs ago I built several electrick bikes, some were pedal assist and some were outright for speed/acceleration and could beat most cars up to the first 60kms (lots of wind sheer and unstableness at 60kms +). Then one day back around 2001/2002 or so, the Ontario government outright banned elect bikes and electric assist pedal bicycles. No other province has a law making such a thing illegal. Only recently has the government lifed that law, but has instead placed very strict and crappy legislation governing top speed, gears, power, etc... but why? electric bikes are way better than a gas powered moped/scooter and far more enviro (especially if you generate the power yerself), but they wont allow the electric bikes to have the same top speed or power as a moped/scooter Ex:- there are less polluting fuels that exist, some are even zero polluting or very close to it but the government will NOT allow then for sale in this country - why not? There are farmers in Ontario who grow 2 extra acres of corn and then ferment and distill the corn oil into alcohol called ethanol (yes the same stuff that is found at local pumps up to 10%). They run their tracters off of it and also put it in their cars. Ethanol is 50% water by volume. Slightly larger injectors are needed to run yer car properly on this fuel. Its also a renewable energy source and the American Corn Growers Ass says that they can supply enough corn for fuel for everyone who wants it - basically they could replace all petrol based fuels - wheres the government there?. Ethanol also cleans the inside of yer engine, yer motor will last longer too. And its far cheaper to make than gasoline, is a powerfull fuel, and theres no weird chemical by-products that are "dumped" into the environment, keeps yer fuel lines from freezing too (it has many uses). You can make yer own corn distilling device for about $50.00 (copper tubing, oil drum, and some other "junk" items). Hell - you can also make renewable fuel from sugar cane as well as hemp. So why bother with costly unstable liquid hydrogen? Ex;- it was shown in a car show in Europe many yrs ago that a car company built a zero/near zero polutting car. When the polution meter was pulled out of the exhaust pipe - the meter went up. What does this mean? It means that the air exiting the exhaust pipe was cleaner than the air in the room. It also meant that the air in the room was being cleaned up by this motor. I believe that Honda, Volvo, as well as other companys have built such vehicles (prototypes n such). Now what was soo special about that car that cleaned the air - it simply had an extra catalytic converter on it. Now if you go for a drive clean test and fail, you can put on a new second catalytic converter onto the car and if the engine isnt super high mileage or in poor working order, the second converter will work wonders. Wait a minute - does it mean that if every car got a second catalytic converter on it that all those cars could [could] be zero or near zero polluting? YES IT DOES and the gov knows this, but guess what - if yer caught with "extra" converters - you can [can] be fined for emmisions equipment tampering and be fined for it. So tell me then - why doesnt the government simply legislate it that every car should get a second converter added to it, or at least make it legal for anyone to add a second one and not be fined for it. Let it be known that actually getting caught for having extra converters is highly unlikely, and getting a fine for it is even less likly. Extra converters start at about $40 and go up plus instalation. Would you like to tell me why much of our recycling from the blue/green/grey boxes are thrown into landfills? - it's cuz we simply cannot seem to be able to deal with all that recycled matter, but the gov doesnt want you to know that cuz they want to keep the habit of recycling within us and I agree with that, however the recycled matter should at least be stored for future use and not thrown in with the rest of the garbage. Ex:- In many places - you need a permit in order to put up a wind mill tower, much like you need a permit to put up a big antenna, this is where the gov could step in and offer permits or at least lower the permit fee OR make putting up such devices legal in any area regardless of permit. Ex:- when you build yer house - you are for the most part forced to hook up water consuming toilets, its difficult to build a new house/ get a permit for enviro toilets like composters, incinerators, etc... You need to get special permission from yer local board of health or the health minister before proceeding. I could go on and on about how the government could do a lot to help out. Its not just the individuals "fault", but it's kinda hard to change yer habbits when many things are illegal - kinda seems like it's illegal to go green - who's to blame for that? Oh ya - the gov. Make it legal for me to make, ride an all electric bike - and I will Make it legal for me to do soo many other enviro benifitting things - and I will

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 12 (view)

Your own language... Posted: 3/18/2007 8:12:02 PM
Fitsnoodleshtook = aww shite, Im screwd/yer screwed I.N.C.R.E.A.T.M. = acronym for Im Not Currently Recalling/Remembering Everything At The Moment Exsisimilariation = this one I tell only ppl I know Yer Mezexen = alter ego, alter personality and loads more - usually to describe something that does not yet have a proper word for it

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 13 (view)

If we didn't have car Insurance? Posted: 3/18/2007 8:01:40 PM
I thought it was still possible to sue someone, example:- you have an "accident" and require medical care that will exceed your insurance coverage (say you need care for the rest of yer life and it costs $100k/yr and the person who hit you - their 1mill liability is eaten up after 10 yrs). Don't you have the right to sue the person who hit you for anything beyond that first million - whatever the costs will be beyond the initial 10 yrs? I thought you could.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 5 (view)

Burning Yourself OUT !! Posted: 2/25/2007 10:02:58 AM
I go without sleep all the time but it's normal for me, been like that since childhood, I just don't need much sleep 3-6 hours, anything longer than 8 hrs keeps me going for 2+ days, and I would have to dissagree that going without sleep kicks down the immune system as I get a lil cold once every 2-3 yrs. Some ppl just are built differently than others. Add to that - that Im an insomniac, lol

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 47 (view)

lots of lonely people here Posted: 2/17/2007 1:03:33 AM
I just took a boo at the OP's profile and pulled this from it male 42 6ft 215 and well built looking for a special lady...start as friends and c what happens... start as friends first - um, does this mean that he's lonely or alone???? lol

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 46 (view)

lots of lonely people here Posted: 2/17/2007 12:48:43 AM
OP I think you may have some part of that backwards. For some, finding dates is easy but finding friends (especially ones you get along with well) is a lil more difficult. PPl on here looking for friends does not mean they are lonely, perhaps thier dateing lives are just fine but want more friends, just moved to the area, have changed vocations and are looking for????. Im not boasting in what Im about to say next, but - I go camping with 50+ friends regularly, get together with loads of friends for fun + games (sometimes ppl in the hundreds), dinner with 15+, see movies with dozens, and the list goes on and it's regular for me. I am always looking for more friends, but more specifically Im looking for ppl who share more of the same interests as I do, more specifically than that Im looking for ppl who have the free time and finances required to get together and do anything at any time. I am always up for meeting new and awesome ppl - simple as that. I think ppl must remember that this is NOT just a dating site. Many ppl are here just for the forums, to hang out, look for activity partners, etc... Now to me, getting a date off the net is a shpooky endeavour (ppl lie bout all sorts of things) - Im not saying it's bad or anything, it's just not something I do, Im on here just looking to meet some ppl who can keep up with me (hopefully) tells alot about the people on here in the friends category what does it tell - that they got their shite together??? Maybe you should wonder what the ppl in the "friends" category think about those using the net to find dates ------ think about that -------- perhaps it means they dont have time to find dates in the real world, maybe they are shift workers, maybe they lack social skills, maybe it just means nothing

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 2 (view)

It'a a crime (it f'n well should be)- selling of conservation area. Posted: 2/8/2007 10:52:00 PM
As far as I know - conservation areas only hava a limited lifespan on being a conservation area (something like 20 - 80 yrs), much like cemetaries - when the last plot is used, the cemetary can stay there for 100yrs, after which it can be sold to developers (or whoever) and the bodies are then relocated or cremated - now that should be against the law. Now Im not 100% on those facts. I know of some conservation areas in the GTA that will eventually be turned into freeways/industrial complexes/residential areas. I agree that once a conservation area, always a conservation area.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 57 (view)

An Inconvenient Truth: A Global Crisis Posted: 1/4/2007 4:29:52 PM
I disagree with some of the posts where it is generally stated that enviornmental change does'nt come about because it is NOT economically feasable. This is just plain B.S., I think it has something to do more with human nature (which I just don't understand at all cuz Im a logical/rational person) than money. The average vehicle driver spends at least $2,000 a year in gas, yet farmers grow a couple acres of corn every year to be turned into ethanol fuel to run their tractors and cars. Ethanol is 50% water by volume, cleans the engine better than any available industrial cleaner and makes the engine last many times longer than it would if it were run on gasoline (much like propane engines last much longer), you turn the corn into corn oil and then use about $50 of tubing/drums/off the shelf items to make a distillery (like a moon shine distiller) to turn the corn oil into ethanol). Basically the only adjustment to yer vehicle is slightly larger "jets/nozzels" on carberated engines, or slightly larger fuel injectors on fuel injected engines (usually need to be replaced every 110,000 kms anyways) So now instead of your petrolium based gas costing you $2,000+ you could have a fuel that costs approximatly half of that and is better for your car (saving yet more money cuz theres a lot less maintence), way better for the enviornment (basically non-polluting at all, no emmisions test required saving more money), oil changes can then also be spread much further apart cus gasoline contamination is non existant, and the benifits go on. At the end you save almost enough to have the ethanol (corn oil) basically for free - (you save on less oil changes, maintenence, labour, parts, things required to pass the car for emmisions, etc...). Another thing you we could all do to make gasoline engines produce near zero emmisions is add on another catalytic converter onto our vehicles (you can buy a cat for about $80 + labour), I don't know why we are forced by the government to for these pointless emmission tests every couple of years, when that testing money could be used to add an extra cat onto cars (actually yes I know why the gov'nt does this = cash cow and B.S. politics). So right there it IS economically feasable to switch over to Ethanol fuel, or to at least keep using gasoline and add an extra catalytic converted. Large industry vehicles are exempt from emissions standards/pollution standards, well they should be forced to. The same type of point could be made for how we heat/power our individual homes. How much does it cost you to heat/power yer house in a year? Now if we all threw on solar panels on our roofs (which would drive down the cost for everyone making it more econimically freindly) and other electrical generating hardware - how much would you save over your current costs? You can lease to own these things instead of outright buying them. So with this idea you would in the long term save money as well as not polluting the enviornment with coal fired electricity. Our cities could/should impliment a new building code or building permit that states that all newly constructed homes MUST be built with some sort of solar panel device (regardless of size). Again this would spawn a new industry, ppl would invest in solor panel companies, prices would come way down (a developer buying up 5,000 panels for 5,000 new homes would get a huge discount, and the benifits continue) Another thing we could do is use radiant heating to melt snow from our walkways, driveways, and roads. Every house basically lets a shite' load of heat escape from our roofs - wasted heat comming from our furnaces. Well we could all just wrap some tubing safely around these exhaust pipes, flow some water/enviro friendly antifreeze through them and burry them under the roads. You hook these hoses up to a pump that flows the water, the pump only costs a few cents a month to power. Well I really much prefer this method over wasting time shovelling, wasting gas or electricity on snow blowers, wasting money on a snowthrower, the city could save untold ammounts by no longer needing those expensive, polluting giant snow plow trucks. Yes some ppl would be out of some seasonal work but they could be re-employed in the solar panel factory/radiant heat tubing factory/labourers installing the radiant heating systems. But NO, the citys are fukked up and wont (I know cuz Ive talked to them) Well Im super serious about making a change, and YES one individual can make a HUGE difference in this world. So if you would like to know more bout my ideas, or whatever, send me a private message and I'll give ya a link to my site, you could join up with me to make a change. I love this thread.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 16 (view)

Things you find out when you have boys... Posted: 1/1/2007 4:06:14 AM
23.) Cats throw up twice their body weight when dizzy. this does not compute, how it it possible to throw up anything more that yer body weight let alone double it? however the rest was funny thats a new use for brake fluid, I know that commercial/industrial dry cleaning chemicals are essentially brake fluid (same derivitive). Never, I mean NEVER add water to chlorine as it could ignite/explode instantly, always mix chlorine to water, but not sure about chlorine bleach. So now I to am curious about the brake fluid and chlorox and scientifically why it produces smoke - do you add equal parts or what? P.S. I am assuming that chlorox is something akin to chlorine bleach good post, thanks

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 59 (view)

metrosexual is it more the a southpark script? Posted: 1/1/2007 3:47:54 AM
Funny how ppl keep saying that "they" are trendy - define trendy - cuz as I see it, there are lots of diff trendy looks around today "they" have refined taste in clothing - so anything not on a metrosexual hanger is in lesser taste? "they" like the finer things in life - define finer I know some guys that have the metrosexual look - they told me they do it primarily cuz "dumb chicks really fall for a pampered looking guy thinking if they score one, their life will be all roses, and they can parade him round like a trophy, meanwhile I do it to bag and dump these byotches, its really easy to manipulate and con ppl when you look this way and you get a higher quality looking chick" I veiw some (not all) metrosexuals as peacocks, sprouting their over groomed feathers and showing them off cuz thats all they can do/ have to offer - they try to give the appearance of something they are not, or to redirect attention away from lacking qualities in hopes of possibly fooling someone for their own bennifits. I view some other metrosexuals as good decent ppl who just happen to like wearing suits and GQ style up their hair. For the most part however - they seem to me to be a kin to a lil carried chiwawa dog Now apparently there is another term floating around cuz I've been called this a few times over the last couple of years, and the term is MachoSexual - the sterotypical macho, tuff, brave, take action, scruffy/bearded, ass kicking super hero type, WWE wrestling looking guy, muscle car Harly riding, etc... who is still alive and well and is found extremly sexually attractive due to these attributes by many women who find everyone else lacking true manlyness. Either way labelling ppl sux, please don't ever call me a machosexual cuz I think it just sounds rediculos and out right shtoooopid

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 35 (view)

Random acts of kindness........ Posted: 12/31/2006 3:27:11 PM
I do random acts of kindness all the time, some times they are big, some times small. What I disslike is when you do something nice and then get shite' on for doing it, example:- when i go through ppl's profiles and come across a persons immage that is sideways/upside down/ to dark to really see/ etc... I take a few seconds to put them right side up/ brighten them so its viewable/ and so forth. Most of the time I dont get a thank you (which is fine cuz its not why I do it), the odd time ppl say their appreciations, but now and then like today - someones goes and gives me grief for helping out adding , well here's the message thanks for fixing my pic, like i taqke this sh*tseriously, like you obviously do. I know i'm just too pretty for you. You know what, you suck bucko, so buzz off and I think "what the hell did I do to get this type of response?" So when I get this type of feedback from a$$holes, er um, people, it discourages me from being nice but I realize it's just me to "be nice" Too bad.

sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 63 (view)

Toronto judge has ordered a Christmas tree out of a downtown provincial courthouse lobby Posted: 12/18/2006 12:37:41 PM
Im half way through reading this thread and couldnt wait to finish reading all the posts to comment So our courts are christian then, and should favor christians? If not, then why make it appear as though they do? the courts are NOT Christian - when the pope says "love one another, respect each other" does this mean that loving each other is a Christian only thing? - NO. The courts are not the church and don't dish out pennance and prayers for your sins/crimes as the church does - it simply started based on morals of Christianity [once upon a time churches/temples/etc.. dictated everything, including Kings + Queens as well as government], it does not mean to treat or favor Christians over other faiths, it means that all before the courts are treated equally (similarly to assuming that everyone who enters the doors are Christian and for the courts to treat every individual as Christ would - as far as I know -Jesus Christ "Christ-ian" was a super nice, just, and fair guy - forgiving everyone for their sins/crimes)

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 8 (view)

Do stupid questions exist? Posted: 11/29/2006 6:59:59 PM
I think you can definatly learn without asking questions, such as in the case of observation. See im looking to prove or dissprove wheather or not dumb questions exist - personal opinions cannot count as they differ from person to person, therefore some sort of factualness is required (as in math/science/linguistics/psycology/etc...) now some would argue that this is a stupid question - if a person who is not colour blind witnesses a red coloured wall and asks "is that wall red?" OR if a person asks "is there air in Antartica?" would these be stupid questions, questions asked by stupid/ignorant ppl/????? I think the first is stupid, and the second is ignorant

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 10 (view)

Need help to colour hair white Posted: 11/29/2006 6:52:45 PM
I should have meantioned this b4, I tried some stage stuff, it works nicely, the problem is that even after leaving it in for an hour - it still easily rubbed off on clothing. Maybe I had the cheap stuff but it was given to my by a performer. Using cotton balls or a Santa wig just won't do it. How about some sort of spray, does anyone know if that window decorating x-mass frost lookiking spray will stick to hair? Thanks again - Ive only got till friday afternoon to fig something out.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 1 (view)

Do stupid questions exist? Posted: 11/29/2006 6:36:09 PM
We've all heard people say "no such thing as a stupid question, the only stupid question is a question not asked", and this was mearly a tactic used by teachers so that students would feel more comfortable asking questions. Now have they helped to propogate a untruth? So the question beckons - do stupid questions exist? Lets remove the human factor (ignorant people, children asking questions to learn, etc...) Also give an example of a true stupid question - use math, science, or whatever you want to explain wheather or not stupid questions exist or not.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 4 (view)

Need help to colour hair white Posted: 11/29/2006 6:11:33 PM
Im not too worried about my beard cuz I'll shave it off the next day if its permanent wont bleach burn the hair off my face and or give me a rash or something?

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 1 (view)

Need help to colour hair white Posted: 11/29/2006 5:48:41 PM
I want to temporarily (and safely) colour my hair + beard white so I can kinda dress up as a young Santa Clause. Does anyone know something I can use that is relativly cheap (under $20), and that won't rub off on clothing or on people. Thanks in advance.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 64 (view)

Prayers for our miss allison Posted: 11/19/2006 9:26:22 PM
You are a total sweety. You were very polite and helpfull in helping me with something on POF here and I remember all the effort that you put into that. So I thank you and truly wish you well - you deserve it. Always fight, always believe that anything is possible (which it is), and keep your rocking spirit in motion.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 9 (view)

Rules are meant to evolve Posted: 11/9/2006 4:06:06 PM
I also agree, plus ya made some good site suggestions (where ya can avoid reading a particular posters posts) I used to come out here, then noticed the forums died (hmmm wonder why) so I dont come out much myself no mo. Plus it is the same ppl over n over (nothing really wrong with that) im just saying. I too have started a couple threads only to have them deleted for some strange technicality, go fig.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 43 (view)

New Testemonials Function! Posted: 9/1/2006 11:12:20 AM
I saw the new feature about the testimonials, seems a bit much to write for each person in the fav's (especially if you have a lot of ppl in em). I suggest having something much easier to fill out and understand - something like a questionaire with 0-10 rating and the list has only positive things in it, so the worst someone can give you is a zero, something like th rate my photo thing, but this works only with ppl you have sent messages to and from, or something. ex:- rate this person a. funny = 6 b. intelligent = 4 c. honest = 7 d. is as their profile says = 6 e. friendly = 8 f. loyal = 6 g. behaves nicely = 4 h. etc... then you can also have a small comment box then maybe have a final rating by each user who fills out the questionaire, and then an overall rating average by all users who respond (shows up in the search features also, much like yer age/location does so ppl know if they should click or skip) or shows up much like the new current testimonials feature only you see numbers which is much easier to read (stats) just ideas

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 33 (view)

legal street racing? Posted: 7/13/2006 11:36:25 PM
K, I didnt get a chance to read all the posts but heres my bit. I was part of a group that tried to get downsview converted, even temporarily, into a track. Mel Lastman said "noise, pollution, danger" in turn we said that the 401 is right there, its a military airport planes are much louder than cars and pollute more, these are same cars that are on the 401, the 401 claims more lives than racers will ever. He said NO. We went up north a bit, found some land: 3Mil to purchase, another 3Mil to develop, the only company that provides track insurance is american and they are brutal premiums in the hundreds of thousands to and into the millions just for a few months of raceing. I know others that have also tried within toronto including some cops. Downsview has been and is still used by BMW and Austin Mini to race their cars around a course set up there as a method to get ppl to by those Mini's - total BS and hippocrates. ambulances, cops running reds, emergency vehicles, tow trucks kill more ppl in the GTA than street racing - FACT. OPP stated numerous times that it estimates there are over 30,000 illegal street racers in the GTA and only 33 ppl died in last few years, however there cars in the millions travelling the 401 and GTA roads killing ppl in the dozens everyday but you never hear it cuz its not the hot media topic. So do we close all freeways cuz they are noisey and they pollute and kill?????? you are many more times likely to be hit or killed by a bad driver/drunk driver/emergency vehicle than you will ever be with racers. a street race takes less than 15 seconds, driving to cayuga abd back takes 3+hours. no one wants to do that for a lil race, its a huge waste, plus the MTO, insurance investigators, police sit there and ticket you to hell, even if you pull a trailer with yer car on it they give you tickets - that sends a message to racers to stay as far away from a track as you can. Im not agreeing with racing on a public street, but an outlet is obviously required. we build skate parks for kids to go skateboarding in and it works, a track is needed and run 7 days a week 24 hrs a day. as far as I know, the legal limit for horsepower for the street is 500HP, yet as stated the LS engines are underated-rated at 502-505HP by the factory, this makes the Z06 corvette and many other factory stock vehicles like ferraris illegal for street use but the government alows it bottom line - its a huge cash cow for the Gov't

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 31 (view)

why do guys on here always do this? Posted: 7/4/2006 11:39:35 PM
hey home depot girl, Im a person who focuses mainly on someones character/personality/nature/warmth/intelligence - honstly this is the truth - I really don't care what you look like cuz I think yer a little loopy and could use a good shrink and want nothing to do with you - so I dont care how you look This is not to be mean in any way, Im being blunt and honest - hope you can handle it, seriously tho, go get a check up for yer mind as I think you may have some sort of dismorphic issue attached to some ingram/mental trauma regarding apperances

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 24 (view)

Why do men stare at womens boobs & think we don't notice ??? Posted: 7/4/2006 11:16:59 PM
starring is definatly a rude thing, admiring on the other hand is a compliment of sorts as in admiring artwork/sculpture No I dont think it's ok to talk to breasts - my opinion Glances happen what goes through a gilrs mind if a guy never looks at them, does she worry? I think men are diff about that tho, if a girl wants to stare at any part of me, then go ahead, if we're talking and they stare at a part of me other than my face - well I just find it funny and start saying stupid silly stuff for shite's n giggles, but I can see that getting to be annoying if its an "all the time" thing debstar - how would you feel if a guy stared at yer face while talking to you not cuz hes being a gentleman or respectfull but because he thought you have a pretty/cute/goregeous face? maybe when a guy stares at yer chest you should make faces at them, or freak them out a little - when their heads are looking down say "oh, when did that happen, I think you might be loosing some hair there", this may give them a lil trauma around you and they'll think before looking downwards at you again - exposing thier scalps, lol - sorry guy's

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 18 (view)

What would happen if we all won a million dollars ? Posted: 7/2/2006 8:37:02 PM
I didnt read all the posts so please forgive me if someone already posted similar. Ok if everyone got equal shares of $$$$ or won a winfall then the ppl who have all the $$$ now would end up in controll of all the $$$ again, why, cuz foolish ppl would spend everything and the smarter ones would save and sell stuff collecting even more money, in a short period of time we would have a similar financial class system as we currently do cuz the shtoopid ppl would have spent most/all of thier $$$, things would cost way more than normal, and the smart ppl would have all the $$$ and controll more than they started off with. sorry for repeating myself in this post.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 16 (view)

What does everyone do when there friends start losing touch Posted: 6/25/2006 8:56:22 PM
I think that there is no reason at all to loose touch, if they are/were yer friends then you and they should make the effort. I make the effort all the time and get bugger all back so my old friends are now only aquantinces. I have come across alot (I mean dozens) of ppl in the last couple of years who feel that ppl in general have started to suck big time and that their so called friends have followed suit, as far as Im concerned friends just dont act like that. It seems that "friends" have become so busy/brainwashed/possesed by thier posessions that they cannot even call to wish ppl a happy b-day let alone make an effort to come out to a party - thats not a friend its a stranger. I am the type of guy who wont see anyone for years and then one day you come across them again and pick right up where things left off untill they get "caught up" in B.S. again. This seems to all be some crappy fact of our modern lives as this sort of thing rarely happened in decades past. People back then knew that friends and family were tops and treated them as priority and now most ppl treat $$$ or jobs as priority, move far away to some cheaper living place, spend hours in traffic for that better paying job, then they have no connection to "true friends", they get stressed, sick, sit at home alone, go throgh the motions of life without actually living untill one day it hits them how badly their life sucks but are too conditioned by that time to change for the better, and or use the poor excuse of "I have a family now" - so what, so does everyone, are yer fingers broken or is the phone broken. I know that good friends are more important than any job or posession, too bad most ppl dont see it this way. So what do I do when my friends start loosing touch - I TRY to stay in touch, call/e-mail/leave messages/pop by their place, but if Im the only one making the effort for months on end - I simply tell my friends flat out what Im thinking and leave it to them to call me, if they dont then what good are they as human beings let alone as friends, so I just carry on as usual. And yes, this seems to be happening to everyone unfortuneatly and I think its shtoooopid and un-neccessary.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 73 (view)

enter your nic on google and tell us how u feel about what u find. Posted: 6/21/2006 10:26:14 PM
Yewowwwzzza - me got 725,000,000, Im in books, businesseseeesesessssss's, on TV and radio, wow, and it's also my real nickname and not just my POF nicm but i dont think much of it.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 10 (view)

Special Interest Vehicles Posted: 6/12/2006 7:42:14 PM
well Im holding one on tuesday June 27, starting in Brampton, going south into mississauga, then west into Hamilton, anyone interested?

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 65 (view)

What is the biggest age difference you would date? Posted: 6/9/2006 3:34:23 PM
Im 32 and my range is usually 26-34, many times I would have liked to go as young as 22 but I just feel like girls that young (22-25) think Im a kreep or a perv or an old bugger or thier parents/friend dont approve or influence them, etc..and I've usually just passed up on trying to talk to girls I think are under 24 cuz I think/ thought that they wouldn't want anything to do with me. It's just dumb crap I've had pounded into my brain over time, but Im really glad to see that a lot of the girls here really do prefer an older guy, so maybe I'll be a lil more relaxed when faced with those opportunities. The major factor for me is maturity, if I come across a girl thats in her low 20's and she's an idiot - I immediatly get turned off, but when I come across a girl in her low 20's who seems intelligent and mature - I just feel wierd approching them if I take a liking to them cuz of their age. But I have no problem talking to anyone of any age if I believe that it will lead nowhere (meaning Im not taken by them in any way)

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 6 (view)

Special Interest Vehicles Posted: 6/7/2006 2:24:49 PM
I forgot to mention that the car cruises will be based out of the GTA, I am having several of these throughout 2006 summer season, they will end up at places like, Hamilton, Barrie, Downtown T.O. Core, Niagra Falls, Klienburg, etc... always a diff route and day (some will be based around other car shows). I got a site where I host the info but Im not supposed to have links here (thread gets deleted) - if yer interested in the site send me a private message. That neon hearse - were you at Philthy McNastys in Burlington a couple years back - I think I've seen it around. If your RIDE is not running, yer welcome to bring yer daily driver, my Camaro sits motorless at the moment, so I'll be in my 95 Chrysler. What happens is that there are usually several pick up points, then we go for a cruise 30-60 mins, then end up at a restaurant/bar/billiard hall/etc... and talk cars

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 1 (view)

Special Interest Vehicles Posted: 6/7/2006 10:41:48 AM
Does anyone here own a special interest vehicle like a classic car, sports car, euro, 4x4, import, muscle car, hot rod, race car, custom, lowrider, etc...? If so, what kind? Would you be interested in getting together for a POF like party only that its a cruise party? I own a 1981 Custom factory T-top Camaro slightly customized and am transforming it into a wild custom.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 17 (view)

Stunt Driving Posted: 6/6/2006 9:36:17 AM
if all ya wanna do is zoom around a track, they have lapping days at shannonville speedway.

Sunday

Joined: 4/15/2006

Msg: 8 (view)

Stunt Driving Posted: 6/5/2006 11:57:45 AM
I know that there are schools in Ontario that teach you performance driving, not so sure about stunt schools. as far as having threads deleted - I've also posted a thread about special interest vehicles and getting some ppl together for cruises I put on and it too was deleted. I was warned that re-posting a deleted thread could get ya kicked out of the forums or worse.

Show ALL Forums