At which point, did I say, (seeing your inferring I was the arbitrator, of what the law was), I merely stated that, I as police officer I used my DISCRETION, as to when or not to lay a charge. NEWS flash for you this HAS to happen otherwise an officer would never go more than 5" if he/she were to stop and charge EVERY person for EVERY possible infraction. Not to mention the court system would burst at the seams, with all the charges.
I was also demonstrating that there really was/is NO need for a "NEW" piece of legislation as appropriate, legislation has been in existence for decades.
I merely stated that, based upon my experience and training, I applied the law, as it was written, at NO time did I state, nor would it be possible that I were the one to make the final decision. That, as you, yourself pointed out was for the judicial system to do.
Your whining because I used my discretion, while in many other posts you ***** that officers don't use common sense, while doing their job, so WHICH way do you want it? You can't have it both ways!! I get it you feel that all officers are jack booted thugs with minimal education, and no ability to make a decision on their own, but that simply isn't the case. Today you don't even get a preliminary interview unless you, hold a MINIMUM of one degree, preferred if you have more than one.
Perhaps it is YOU who should exercise some discretion! It would have been sufficient, to point out that the story posted was a "false story" rather than belittle those who posted it and discussed it, as you did in your final paragraph. Perhaps not everyone has the ability nor the time to spend countless hours researching EACH story that is related to them. Humility is a positive trait. But apparently not one that is easily mastered.
Also IF you were paying as close attention as you direct everyone else to do, you would have noted a LONG time ago that I am NO LONGER an active, "Cst nothing better to do" Perhaps spend more of your energy on relevant things than attempting to direct others lives???
The discretion or judgement of a peace officer is not to be trusted nor relied upon. This is why there is a judicial system. Officers who try to decide and enforce what THEY think the law should be, like mentioned above, are the reason why x-copper and other paralegal services are so successful. In the case of Ontario's distracted driving law, there is no room for roadside interpretation, as it is not vaguely written in the slightest.
The OP in this thread is describing the same exact fake news(sorry, that's what it is) which was spread when the law was first introduced. Yes, in 2019 the penalties will increase, and this is a good thing. No, they are not rewriting the definition, this is also a very good thing, otherwise Constable Nothingbettertodo above would have you in prison for scratching your nose(honestly, there are some real crimes going on out there... go fetch). This happens with every new piece of legislation, the media stretches on their reporting, and then every person that passes it along adds something like a giant game of telephone. I still to this day get stuck behind morons that think every intersection in Ontario is covered by the marked crosswalk law, why? because the media reported it wrong and people are too dumb to check HTA for themselves.
Bottom line, when you hear something that might sound like a bit of a stretch, look the **** up before spreading it around ffs.
