Because they're using an illegal plate cover?
|
|
|
Lane splitting at a red light?
- Thread starter Max527
- Start date
That hit on future vehicle insurance is going to sting too!
It was on the DVP for riding on the shoulder.
I BEAT 172(1) ! But feel like I lost the battle..
Okay, so here goes the story. I was charged with Stunt Driving - Driving too close last october 29, and have been worried since and seeking advice. Here is how the court case went down, today, at 10:30am. An intersting start off the bat, as I'm getting my school back ran through the...
archive.gtamotorcycle.com
Thanks for the link. Obviously my memory wasn't perfect, but the logic still applies. Cops can hand out 172 to anyone at any time with relative impunity. Avoiding situations that make it easy for them seems like a good plan to me.
Reading that link it appears to me like the law has had its intended impact over the years since it was implemented. We are more cautious. I know that’s not going to be a popular point of view but it’s just an observation from various posts on this site. However, the downside is that if that observation is correct, then it takes a long, long time to adjust behaviour on the roads. Which brings us back to any possible filtering laws etc. It’s quite possible it might take 10y plus to get that working properly, with driver cooperation, if it is ever implemented.
We're not very innovative here in Ontario.
Filtering [and lane splitting] should absolutely be legal for motorcyclists here in Ontario. If performed correctly and conscientiously: 1) improved traffic flow and 2) increased rider safety --you're statistically less likely to get rear-ended.
The often cited UC Berkeley study conducted several years ago made these conclusions.
Sent from my SGH-M919V using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
Filtering [and lane splitting] should absolutely be legal for motorcyclists here in Ontario. If performed correctly and conscientiously: 1) improved traffic flow and 2) increased rider safety --you're statistically less likely to get rear-ended.
The often cited UC Berkeley study conducted several years ago made these conclusions.
Sent from my SGH-M919V using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
I pulled some quotes from the study here:
"Lane-splitting riders were significantly less likely to be rear-ended than other non-lane-splitting riders (2.6% vs 4.6%). LSM were, on the other hand, more likely to rear-end another vehicle than other riders (38% vs 16%) (Tables 13 and 14)." You missed half of the sentence. You're much more likely to run into the back of someone else then they into you.
Here's the part where they say that the study doesn't conclude that lane splitting is safer: "To estimate how the risk of being involved in a collision changes when motorcyclists chose to lane-split, we would require information on both the lane-splitting and non-lane-splitting riding that is done by some identifiable sample of motorcyclists. The collection of these data is fraught with problems, and the current study did not attempt to collect such data. The current data set cannot be used to compare the collision risks for lane-splitting or non-lane-splitting riders."
It was introduced in the wake of street racer activities having led to the deaths of innocent people. For actual racing or actual stunting I have no problem with it.
However, the malleable interpretation of "stunting" has led to a misapplication (IMHO) of the law against individuals. For example, (and forgive the crude example), if my lads need an adjustment I don't want to live in fear a 172 charge if I stand on the pegs for a second and give 'em a reset wiggle. Similarly, I don't want that same charge hanging over me if I stand on the pegs traversing rough roads or railway tracks. Technically, 172(3)(6) "Driving a motor vehicle while the driver is not sitting in the driver’s seat." makes you an offender for wanting to adjust your balls or safely traverse potholes.
Stood on my pegs quite a few times today. Went past 4 cruisers. No issues.
That goes to the arbitrary nature of the enforcement. It's like going 120kph on the 401; sometimes you'll get dinged, other times not. Sometimes the cop is doing 120 or 125 -- in pursuit? racing to the scene of a crime? or just doing what everyone else does? -- and other times he's crawling at 100 pissing off and bottling everyone up around him.
According to the wording of the Act, any one of those cops would have justification to pull you over and penalize you for the next 6 years of your life through major insurance rate hikes. You weren't stunting or racing but you could have been tagged. That you weren't just means the cop-predators were well-fed that day.
The problem is cruiser number five could easily lay the ticket and you are instantly out over $1000. Anoher poorly thought out and worded law.
Trials
Well-known member
Thats what happens when you let car guys write laws about how to ride a motorcycle.
It’s not something I worry about. I feel like the whole “stand on pegs get a stunt charge” is more urban myth than anything else. Going 50 over....yes. I think about that a lot.
That's cool, but it doesn't alter the wording of the law nor the fact that you could get tagged for it.
One could probably defend themselves in court using the MTO's motorcycle handbook recommendation "Rise slightly on the footrests so that you can absorb the shock with your knees and elbows" when handling uneven surfaces but it might be dodgy if you're adjusting the lads or stretching a cramp on a smooth road...
Show me a pattern of multiple indictments for standing on pegs (just standing on pegs alone) and I’ll be concerned. I think I remember one case and there’s a decent chance that was bonus “gift” charge too.
50 over..definitely something I watch for. Standing on pegs....well, I was on them for an hour today on gravel roads, over railway crossings and just to stretch. Not a concern for me. If you’re worried about it then OK.
50 over..definitely something I watch for. Standing on pegs....well, I was on them for an hour today on gravel roads, over railway crossings and just to stretch. Not a concern for me. If you’re worried about it then OK.
I happen to know someone, stood on pegs to go over railway tracks. Got lit up, pulled over and HTA 172 for stunting.
Ok, That all they were doing?
I know noone that’s had this issue nor have I met anyone that’s known anyone have this issue. Maybe it’s a “not GTA” thing.
From what i heard yes. I won't support it being a common occurrence, just that i do know of it happening.
|
|
|
|
|