Search results

Perhaps, check into Back Clinic of Canada... lol My back is screwed. I have been seriously considering contacting them. I hear their ads on Newstalk1010 constantly. I have to use codeine 30 MG 3 - 5 per day, and 50MG tramadol, (An OLD school narcotic), 1 - 3 times per day. Now that isn't just...

There is VERY little speed enforcement on the 400 series in the GTA, that won't be changing. One of my GF's was OPP posted to the Downsview Detachment. It is considered an issue of "officer safety" to stop a vehicle on the 400 series, in the GTA proper, as the shoulders, (left a little more so...

I didn't realize there is an eye color Hidden...lmao

As Evoex stated YOUR insurer will pay to repair your bike and then go after your buddy for their costs. If it is your buddy's fault, (say single vehicle collision), the YOU would be out of pocket for the deductible. If the other person is deemed at fault, (your buddy gets rear ended, NO...

Nope, as outlined above, it is the vehicle which is insured not the operator. That is why you need multiple policies for multiple vehicles. If the insurance was tied to then we would need only one policy for all our vehicles, because obviously we can only drive/ride one at a time...lol that is...

Yes, I am sure, that if the property owner, "set up" a sanctioned event, in advance, that would suffice., (in the eyes of the court). My point was as some had suggested above, That an officer shows up for whatever reason and then suddenly the property owner declares, (seeing that his buddy is...

Not so fast. A "sanctioned event" is meant to be an event open to participants, (usually members of the organization). A land owner can NOT suddenly make a spontaneous claim that it is a sanctioned event. The courts would view a sanctioned event, as one being previously organized, with rules...

Well, It was much easier to "Serve and Protect", Back when I started my career, (before many on this forum were even a wet spot...lol). Back then, you pulled someone over, you gave them a "talking to", and MOST people took that to heart, and respected the rules, the uniform, and the authority...

Yes, I am familiar, with that case. The judge made a ruling, which goes along with, what I posted. The SCoC has ruled there is no entrapment, as an officer can't compel a person, to commit an offence they would have normal conditions, committed if the circumstances to commit the offence were...

Ok sorry for getting to the party late Greyghost, I will try to be as helpful as possible, while addressing all the misinformation being spewed forth..lol Firstly, there is NO reason radar can't be used in speed limit transition areas. A JP "may" view it as a bit of a d bag move if the accused...

Excellent out come for you. Sure you wasted your day in court, but sitting and observing is quite an educational experience, as you seen with the guy there for his wife, as what NOT to do..lol The discussion between the crown and the officer was likely that, for what ever reason, the crown was...

The term approach and towards will be seen as interchangeable, so not a fatal error. Yes fan interference IS an issue, but in my vast experience the ONLY way it becomes an issue if if the radar gun is actually pointed directly at vehicle dash board. We used to "test" this by pointing the radar...

The crown and JP will NOT permit you, (unless you recorded it with the officer's permission), what the officer said verbally. You simply can't testify to what was said, much the same, as the officer wouldn't be permitted to say. The accused admitted that he was knew he was speeding. The...

Krime I would be VERY careful on questioning the radar cosine. As noted in the manual. The fact that in that location it was being operated on a curve, which as you noted causes, a SLIGHT error in the target vehicles favour. Generally, you are talking about a 2 - 3 km/h differential...

Ok as someone with ACTUAL experience as a former officer. NONE of the points you have raised will be viewed as a "fatal error", (court terminology). The location is considered virtually non relevant, as the offence that you have been charged with is not location critical, (in other words, it...

Except Aviva is not the first and only company to place, "restrictions"... IE 6 years driving/riding experience into place. If you check with some of the brokers, they routinely post, as do other members, that in order for company y or company x to insure you, you must have 5 years riding...

In the beginning, (and supposedly still is the goal), Government run insurance was supposed to be "Not for profit" In other words they were "supposed" to offer lower premiums as the "profit" factor was removed from the equation.

Aviva is well within the rules. She is NOT a newly licenced driver, She has been licenced for at least 2 years, (on a bike, no idea if she has a G licence or not). Also it is illegal for an insurer to make it impossible for a person to get insurance, (which they are NOT doing in this case, as...

Yes Kerry Schmidt is a real Sgt. He is the PR for the force, just as Sgt Cam Wooley was before him. They were both the spokesperson for the Highway Safety Division. There is also a Spokesperson for the SAVE team. I believe their "title" is Media Relations Officer.