Hwy 400 wheelies 3 riders arrested

Status
Not open for further replies.
Forum Sponsor
Paul said:
Uhmmm...the witness that gave him up??
Click to expand...

Paul
View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message Visit Homepage Add as Contact Send Email

Administrator



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join Date:Nov 2006
Location:Brampton
Posts:753 Re: Hwy 400 wheelies 3 riders arrested
Originally Posted by Low rider




Even if his buddies gives him up, what evidence do the police have to prove that he was there.
Uhmmm...the witness that gave him up??


/////////////////////////////////

It's still hearsay.
 
"The Assassin" mentioned that if the cop loses sight of you, then it is likely that charges wont stick? Do I have that right?
 
awyala said:
"The Assassin" mentioned that if the cop loses sight of you, then it is likely that charges wont stick? Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

ya however they'll never actually admit that they lost sight of you. on the contrary, most cops will actually exagerrate to try and look like inspector gadget in court
 
Paul1000RR said:
ya however they'll never actually admit that they lost sight of you. on the contrary, most cops will actually exagerrate to try and look like inspector gadget in court
Click to expand...

And god help you if you say "But when I did a shoulder check I couldn't see you anymore"
 
GentlemanRacer said:
It was moral panic after that cab driver was killed on mount pleasant by a couple of kids racing. Were the kids going too fast, certainly. Do cab drivers roll into intersections, a lot. The prosecutors framed it as a rich justice vs. poor justice thing, and the AG saw it as the moment to hop on the soap box and promote the street racing legislation while doing a huge favour for Il Duce Fantino (the Duke of Woodbridge), politically it was win-win. Same guy behind the pit bull ban. He's been in the news lately over an altercation in which a courier was killed.

It's like there is a bed-wetters lobby or something.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point, which is that there is a void in the law which is filled by 172, the implementation was not well thought out, but its meant to address that one thing, the exact catalyst is completly unimportant.
 
I dont want to waste my time reading the whole thread, because knowing this site its allot of back and forth of "good for them" "throw the book at them" "they never hurt anyone" blablablablabla


Just my .02 If your doing highway wheelies, be prepared to 1) loose your licence 2) possibly die or 3) (my personal choice) ****ING RUN! TAKE THE HELL OFF! your bike goes allot faster than a car, and if your doing wheelies on the highway, you have a few possible outcomes

1) pull over, Result- You loose your licence, your bike is impounded, you go to court and most likely get stuck with the whole lot of it and you never find insurance in **** **** hole provence again.
2) you run, Result- a) you get away, You keep your mouth shut and dont speak about it to anyone as not to implicate your self.
b) You dont get away and you get the same result as scenario 1, just get an evading ticket/charge as well.


Am I a badass and have I run from the police? no, Ive never had to Its never come up, but if I'm doing highway wheelies (Im not saying I do them..... But im not saying I dont.) Im pretty sure anyone else whos doing highway wheelies has the same mentality as I have here. Better to try and get away and keep your record clean, then guarantee a loss of everything.



Either that or take it to a private lot where you wont get pinned for stunting....
 
awyala said:
"The Assassin" mentioned that if the cop loses sight of you, then it is likely that charges wont stick? Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

It can be used to raise reasonable doubt at trial, but it's not a panacea.

OpenGambit said:
one of the most misunderstood words on this forum.
Click to expand...

Though not the only one, by a long shot.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
... because dangerous operation of a vehicle, a charge under the Criminal Code, doesn't just apply to roads.
Click to expand...

I thought they can't charge you if you're on private property unless the owner calls in?
 
油井緋色;1883007 said:
I thought they can't charge you if you're on private property unless the owner calls in?
Click to expand...

Not true. If the property is separated from the roads by a physical barrier (ie gate or chain) with no access to roads without opening the gate, things may be different, but in a typical parking lot where anyone is free to come or go, they can come in and get you.
 
油井緋色;1883007 said:
I thought they can't charge you if you're on private property unless the owner calls in?
Click to expand...

Dangerous Driving isn't an HTA offence. It's a CC (Criminal Code of Canada) offence. As such, it can be laid anywhere, just like an Impaired charge. It doesn't matter gate, fence, etc.
 
油井緋色;1883007 said:
I thought they can't charge you if you're on private property unless the owner calls in?
Click to expand...

Definitely not so. The same section of the Criminal Code is used to charge people for using boats and aircraft for dangerous operation and last time that I checked, no one had drawn property lines in the sky or Lake Ontario.
 
Kyle said:
I dont want to waste my time reading the whole thread, because knowing this site its allot of back and forth of "good for them" "throw the book at them" "they never hurt anyone" blablablablabla


Just my .02 If your doing highway wheelies, be prepared to 1) loose your licence 2) possibly die or 3) (my personal choice) ****ING RUN! TAKE THE HELL OFF! your bike goes allot faster than a car, and if your doing wheelies on the highway, you have a few possible outcomes

1) pull over, Result- You loose your licence, your bike is impounded, you go to court and most likely get stuck with the whole lot of it and you never find insurance in **** **** hole provence again.
2) you run, Result- a) you get away, You keep your mouth shut and dont speak about it to anyone as not to implicate your self.
b) You dont get away and you get the same result as scenario 1, just get an evading ticket/charge as well.


Am I a badass and have I run from the police? no, Ive never had to Its never come up, but if I'm doing highway wheelies (Im not saying I do them..... But im not saying I dont.) Im pretty sure anyone else whos doing highway wheelies has the same mentality as I have here. Better to try and get away and keep your record clean, then guarantee a loss of everything.



Either that or take it to a private lot where you wont get pinned for stunting....
Click to expand...

Conviction of Stunting is 1 year loss of License Conviction of Flight Police 3 year Loss and a Criminal Record. Try that at the US boarder or any insurance company for that matter!
 
darryle said:
,speed limits on highways out of the city should be raised.Motorists should be ticketed for not pulling right or impeding traffic flow.
Click to expand...

hrmmmm, this sounds suspiciously like uhmmm EVERYwhere else in the ****ing world...

ontario really needs to stop this nanny state crap. its effecting everything. hold on i gotta go get some tofu "peanut" butter for my kids lunch...brb
 
mmmnaked said:
We already had speeding fines. And if it wasn't enough, there was careless driving. And if that wasn't enough, there was dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

HTA172 was an opportunistic cash-grab by politicians colluding with police forces to get yet another way to squeeze us by the balls.

What do cops do now? They wait for the 'big fish'... the 172 offenders. Nobody gives a damn about distracted (and truly dangerous) drivers. Get caught with a cellphone and its a measly fine. Do 150 on a massive perfectly paved 6-lane highway? You're basically a criminal. Talk about ****ed priorities.
Click to expand...

exactly what i was typing...can you please go run for the province? ill pay you, and im sure alot of others would chip in lol
 
ViperZ said:
Professor Baher Abdulhai, director of the Intelligent Transportation Systems Centre at the University of Toronto

Intelligent Transportation Systems? Really?! Really??? In Toronto??? Our traffic lights work like crap, there is no system behind them. Even small towns in Europe have proper green lanes (i.e. you drive given speed, say 60, you will always hit green light). Here in Toronto, you get green, and the light 200m down the road (for the condo, which just got built) turns red in your face. Same for next 4-5 lights. I wonder what they do at that Intelligent Centre. What a joke.
Click to expand...

from what i hear with traffic light synchronization, they think it will annoy motorists enough to take public transit...so again its all just a scam to get more money...i think they make way more from public transit than motorists.

also why is toronto like the only city in the world without synchronized lights? there is no down side to it...its proven traffic flows faster and smoother. So why not do it? again, like everywhere else in the world?
( not syre about the whole world but, QC, USA many states, UK, italy)
 
Last edited:
smurfz said:
Conviction of Stunting is 1 year loss of License Conviction of Flight Police 3 year Loss and a Criminal Record. Try that at the US boarder or any insurance company for that matter!
Click to expand...

Although there is a Criminal Code for flight from police, there is also a provincial HTA offence for this (below). And it's changed too from when I was a young driver. It used to be a 3 year suspension and no automatic jail time.

Power of police officer to stop vehicle
216. (1) A police officer, in the lawful execution of his or her duties and responsibilities, may require the driver of a motor vehicle to stop and the driver of a motor vehicle, when signalled or requested to stop by a police officer who is readily identifiable as such, shall immediately come to a safe stop. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 216 (1).
Offence
(2) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable, subject to subsection (3),
(a) to a fine of not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000;
(b) to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months; or
(c) to both a fine and imprisonment. 1999, c. 13, s. 1 (1).
Escape by flight
(3) If a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (2) and the court is satisfied on the evidence that the person wilfully continued to avoid police when a police officer gave pursuit,
(a) the person is liable to a fine of not less than $5,000 and not more than $25,000, instead of the fine described in clause (2) (a);
(b) the court shall make an order imprisoning the person for a term of not less than 14 days and not more than six months, instead of the term described in clause (2) (b); and
(c) the court shall make an order suspending the person’s driver’s licence,
(i) for a period of five years, unless subclause (ii) applies, or
(ii) for a period of not less than 10 years, if the court is satisfied on the evidence that the person’s conduct or the pursuit resulted in the death of or bodily harm to any person. 1999, c. 13, s. 1 (1).
Lifetime suspension
(4) An order under subclause (3) (c) (ii) may suspend the person’s driver’s licence for the remainder of the person’s life. 1999, c. 13, s. 1 (1).

---

And the drivers licence suspension for stunting can be for up to two years on a first offence:

172. (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway in a race or contest, while performing a stunt or on a bet or wager. 2007, c. 13, s. 21.
Offence
(2) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $2,000 and not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both, and in addition his or her driver’s licence may be suspended,
(a) on a first conviction under this section, for not more than two years; or
(b) on a subsequent conviction under this section, for not more than 10 years. 2007, c. 13, s. 21.

Forum Sponsor
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom