HTA 172 is still unconstitutional -- anyone had issues with standing on pegs? | GTAMotorcycle.com

HTA 172 is still unconstitutional -- anyone had issues with standing on pegs?

D

drumstyx

Well-known member
I've been working to improve my technique on rough roads, especially easy now that I've got a KLR650. Of course, one major technique, especially on dirt roads, is standing on the pegs.

Anecdotal evidence shows people getting charged with stunting with roadside seizure ($$$$ impound) and 7 day license suspensions. Charges may be dropped in court, but no reimbursement for the huge fees incurred without trial. Just reading these threads make me incredibly angry, even non-motorcyclists who, after the prosecution fails to prove them guilty, are out *thousands* of dollars with no recourse.

What is the state of standing on pegs these days, and has anything been done to address this law? Constitutional challenges are probably pretty expensive, but it's just terrifying to have this threat at the whim of a cop's bad day.
 
drumstyx said:
I've been working to improve my technique on rough roads, especially easy now that I've got a KLR650. Of course, one major technique, especially on dirt roads, is standing on the pegs.

Anecdotal evidence shows people getting charged with stunting with roadside seizure ($$$$ impound) and 7 day license suspensions. Charges may be dropped in court, but no reimbursement for the huge fees incurred without trial. Just reading these threads make me incredibly angry, even non-motorcyclists who, after the prosecution fails to prove them guilty, are out *thousands* of dollars with no recourse.

What is the state of standing on pegs these days, and has anything been done to address this law? Constitutional challenges are probably pretty expensive, but it's just terrifying to have this threat at the whim of a cop's bad day.
Click to expand...

Don't stand on the pegs anywhere close to the GTA. Take your bike to forest service roads, non-maintained access roads, off-road, etc...

The gravel roads around the GTA are not rough enough to warrant standing on the pegs, and you would have a very difficult time explaining that to Mr. Policeman :sad11:
 
drumstyx said:
I've been working to improve my technique on rough roads, especially easy now that I've got a KLR650. Of course, one major technique, especially on dirt roads, is standing on the pegs.

Anecdotal evidence shows people getting charged with stunting with roadside seizure ($$$$ impound) and 7 day license suspensions. Charges may be dropped in court, but no reimbursement for the huge fees incurred without trial. Just reading these threads make me incredibly angry, even non-motorcyclists who, after the prosecution fails to prove them guilty, are out *thousands* of dollars with no recourse.

What is the state of standing on pegs these days, and has anything been done to address this law? Constitutional challenges are probably pretty expensive, but it's just terrifying to have this threat at the whim of a cop's bad day.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately HTA 172 has been challenged a few times and has stood up. As standing on the pegs is useful for roughs roads, bumps, potholes and is still a recommended technique in the MTO Motorcycle Handbook, I'm gonna do it anyway.
 
TwistedKestrel said:
Unfortunately HTA 172 has been challenged a few times and has stood up. As standing on the pegs is useful for roughs roads, bumps, potholes and is still a recommended technique in the MTO Motorcycle Handbook, I'm gonna do it anyway.
Click to expand...

Sometimes good to confirm whether the vehicle in front of you has a reason for driving so slow.
 
There was a letter kicking around from the province that said standing on pegs was not a valid reason for a 172 charge. That being said, when a cop pulls you over and is hungry for a 172,pulling out a letter telling them they are wrong may not help you much.
 
GreyGhost said:
There was a letter kicking around from the province that said standing on pegs was not a valid reason for a 172 charge. That being said, when a cop pulls you over and is hungry for a 172,pulling out a letter telling them they are wrong may not help you much.
Click to expand...

That's my biggest concern. I know with 100% certainty that standing on the pegs won't get a 172 conviction, but it'd still hurt me for a few grand in impound fees, not to mention not being able to drive for a week.

I really don't think it's been contested on property seizure grounds. I know the imprisonment section has been challenged, maybe that's been struck down? None of it matters though, *any* punishment without a hearing is unconstitutional, and it shakes me to my core to think such practices exist in this province, when we so frequently scoff at the rights violations in the USA, considering ourselves better.
 
Unfortunately, the right to own (and keep) property isn't addressed in our charter of rights and freedoms outside of the "unreasonable search or seizure" clause, which is too vague to be of any help in this matter.
 
drumstyx said:
That's my biggest concern. I know with 100% certainty that standing on the pegs won't get a 172 conviction, but it'd still hurt me for a few grand in impound fees, not to mention not being able to drive for a week.

I really don't think it's been contested on property seizure grounds. I know the imprisonment section has been challenged, maybe that's been struck down? None of it matters though, *any* punishment without a hearing is unconstitutional, and it shakes me to my core to think such practices exist in this province, when we so frequently scoff at the rights violations in the USA, considering ourselves better.
Click to expand...

Every province but Quebec has administrative suspensions these day, and Quebec will soon be joining the list if it hasn't already. All of the court challenges to date right across Canada have been unsuccessful.

The provinces have the constitutional right to regulate transportation under the authorities granted to them by the British North America Act. The Courts have consistently ruled that the right to impose administrative suspensions fall under these authorities.
 
As far as I know a cop could consider it a HTA172 offense, although I'd like to think many would overlook it if you only stood on them for a few seconds at most. I'll openly admit to doing it, as per MTO handbook when going over train tracks or similar surfaces...as well as for very short (10 seconds or less) periods when I need to stretch a little a few hours into a ride, or reposition myself on the seat a little. The real reason imo for it to technically be included in 172 is to prevent people trying to do stunts on public roads. Ideally, the HTA should be rewritten to say *** must be on the seat or feet on pegs at all times (since if someone is going to try surfing or sit on their tank, they won't be sitting on the seat nor on the pegs), but I doubt that will ever happen.

That said, I don't do it to stretch if I see a cop car around, because why tempt fate. As for train tracks you can't control when and where with those, but I'd like to think that any cop with half a brain could see immediately why you did it, especially when you stand, go over track, and immediately sit back down. Even if they never rode before that one should be universally understood.

Bit of a tangent, but on a similar note, I heard recently of one guy getting a ticket for weaving in his own lane...not sure if he was weaving to increase visibility or 'warming his tires' (which doesn't actually work)...if it was the former, that's another one that should be allowed, but could fall on the wrong side of the HTA with a non-understanding cop...as the anti-SMIDSY maneuver can save lives and prevent accidents, imo.
 
Last edited:
conundrum said:
As far as I know a cop could consider it a HTA172 offense, although I'd like to think many would overlook it if you only stood on them for a few seconds at most. I'll openly admit to doing it, as per MTO handbook when going over train tracks or similar surfaces...as well as for very short (10 seconds or less) periods when I need to stretch a little a few hours into a ride, or reposition myself on the seat a little. The real reason imo for it to technically be included in 172 is to prevent people trying to do stunts on public roads. Ideally, the HTA should be rewritten to say *** must be on the seat or feet on pegs at all times (since if someone is going to try surfing or sit on their tank, they won't be sitting on the seat nor on the pegs), but I doubt that will ever happen.

That said, I don't do it to stretch if I see a cop car around, because why tempt fate. As for train tracks you can't control when and where with those, but I'd like to think that any cop with half a brain could see immediately why you did it, especially when you stand, go over track, and immediately sit back down. Even if they never rode before that one should be universally understood.
Click to expand...

Isn't that kinda messed up though? You can ride a motorcycle safely while standing (you don't see cyclists getting charged for pedalling hard, now do you?) yet we have to consider the length of time standing to not have our lives potentially financially destroyed.

As for half a brain, well non-motorcyclist cops simply don't understand, and again it doesn't matter if you can beat it in court with 100000% certainty, roadside seizure can hurt worse than any fine.

Do we not have a right to a fair trial before punishment?
 
drumstyx said:
Do we not have a right to a fair trial before punishment?
Click to expand...

The concept of "administrative suspension" was an end run around that right.

Apparently in the eyes of the legal system, something that was "administrative" isn't considered a "punishment" no matter how much it costs someone to deal with. The common man (me) sees anything dished out by the authorities that puts a serious hole in my bank statement as a "punishment".

The concept of "administrative suspension" might have been accepted by all the courts in the land, but it's still crap law.
 
Chasem said:
Don't stand on the pegs anywhere close to the GTA. Take your bike to forest service roads, non-maintained access roads, off-road, etc...

The gravel roads around the GTA are not rough enough to warrant standing on the pegs, and you would have a very difficult time explaining that to Mr. Policeman :sad11:
Click to expand...

I should clarify that I ride and plan to ride far outside the GTA. I live in Whitby, but particularly on rides to northern Ontario on my new KLR, I don't want to be dealing with cops that simply don't understand. Maybe it's not likely, being on small fire roads, but above all, this is about the possibility. There exists a possibility to be *totally ****ed* for no reason, and that's terrifying in a free country.
 
drumstyx said:
I should clarify that I ride and plan to ride far outside the GTA. I live in Whitby, but particularly on rides to northern Ontario on my new KLR, I don't want to be dealing with cops that simply don't understand. Maybe it's not likely, being on small fire roads, but above all, this is about the possibility. There exists a possibility to be *totally ****ed* for no reason, and that's terrifying in a free country.
Click to expand...

I ride around downtown Oshawa and stand on the pegs of my DRZ all the time. Especially last week when it was so hot, feels great, and a good way to stretch your legs. Honestly I didn't even know it was illegal until now.

I will say everyone stares at me when I do it. You aren't going to drive past a cop unnoticed.
 
48Connor said:
I ride around downtown Oshawa and stand on the pegs of my DRZ all the time. Especially last week when it was so hot, feels great, and a good way to stretch your legs. Honestly I didn't even know it was illegal until now.

I will say everyone stares at me when I do it. You aren't going to drive past a cop unnoticed.
Click to expand...

It's not illegal, per se. It's just that HTA 172 is broad enough that it can be interpreted that way by a cop (the exact phrase is "Driving a motor vehicle while the driver is not sitting in the driver’s seat") and whether or not the charge sticks (it won't), your license was suspended for a week and your bike was impounded.
 
There are several aspects of HTA mentioned that make it repulsive.

No trial
No recourse
Vague terms

These are made worse by politicians turning cops into cash grabbers.
 
Let's not forget for cops using it for petulance and revenge. "Oh, you want to talk back to me, eh?"
 
It would appear from the stories being told that the title of this thread "HTA 172 is unconstitutional" isn't correct.
However, it is certainly your right to challenge it and I will be looking forward to your report on the outcome.
A reminder that any challenge under constitutional or Charter of Rights grounds requires that you disclose the facts you will be relying on to the prosecutors.
I believe it must be submitted 15 days in advance of the trial.
You will need a copy of the delivery receipt to prove you have complied.
No disclosure and the Justice will refuse to hear your arguments.
This process is convoluted and everything must be on the correct form, so you may want to consult a paralegal.
 
Last edited:
Chasem said:
Don't stand on the pegs anywhere close to the GTA. Take your bike to forest service roads, non-maintained access roads, off-road, etc...

The gravel roads around the GTA are not rough enough to warrant standing on the pegs, and you would have a very difficult time explaining that to Mr. Policeman :sad11:
Click to expand...

I was going to say, whats the chances of seeing a cop in a back/gravel road.. then I remembered how many times I've been surprised in actually seeing them there! - doh!
 
The wording in the HTA refers to "ghosting" which is where a car driver sits in the passenger seat so it appears that there is no driver. It was not meant to apply to motorcyclists easing off the seat for things like railway crossings. There was a letter written, from the minister of transport to a biker in response to an inquiry, stating that the stunting law was not meant to be interpreted that way but I don't know if it would hold much weight with a cop if produced at the right time? Attitude would play a big part here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom