slowbird
Well-known member
Hmmm....yeah. That does make sense, and sounds familiar.
Though, I still think an addition to the HTA would be better than a specific Motorcycle noise bylaw in certain municipalities.
|
|
|
Noise restrictions bylaw coming for Oakville
- Thread starter the bandit
- Start date
Hmmm....yeah. That does make sense, and sounds familiar.
Though, I still think an addition to the HTA would be better than a specific Motorcycle noise bylaw in certain municipalities.
There's no question, in my mind, that this sort of thing needs to be dealt with via an update to the HTA and not a patchwork of local bylaws. The last time I saw a vehicle that was explicitly illegal under the phraseology of the HTA, it was a 1972 Challenger with a 'Hush' Thrush muffler.
slowbird
Well-known member
yeah...as much as I love the old muscle cars, they too tend to get away with being loud and smelly.
gwelfmike
Well-known member
From the City of Brampton Web site.
Noise By-law By-Law 93-84 “To Prohibit and Regulate Noise” states that:
“… a person shall not, within the City of Brampton, make, create, cause, or cause or permit to be made, noises likely to disturb the inhabitants.”
Brampton City Council passed the bylaw to curb persistent and recurring noise that lasts longer than ten days, usually from a machine or other mechanical equipment. The bylaw specifically prohibits noises such as:
I cannot locate the case law regarding this right now, but I have seen a number of charges laid under the criminal code for someone yelling and screaming or general obnoxiousness and they have been found guilty. It is not hard, but it is a long process and does not give a financial gain for the police like a speeding or a stunting charge.
But I agree, if there is a law regarding loud motorcycles it should be province wide under the HTA and it should include all motor vehicles, not just motorcycles.
Noise By-law By-Law 93-84 “To Prohibit and Regulate Noise” states that:
“… a person shall not, within the City of Brampton, make, create, cause, or cause or permit to be made, noises likely to disturb the inhabitants.”
Brampton City Council passed the bylaw to curb persistent and recurring noise that lasts longer than ten days, usually from a machine or other mechanical equipment. The bylaw specifically prohibits noises such as:
- A dog barking daily and excessively
- Someone playing a loud stereo or musical equipment regularly.
- Someone operating construction equipment daily before 7 a.m. and after 11 p.m.
I cannot locate the case law regarding this right now, but I have seen a number of charges laid under the criminal code for someone yelling and screaming or general obnoxiousness and they have been found guilty. It is not hard, but it is a long process and does not give a financial gain for the police like a speeding or a stunting charge.
But I agree, if there is a law regarding loud motorcycles it should be province wide under the HTA and it should include all motor vehicles, not just motorcycles.
As I said, just being noisy isn't enough:
http://canlii.ca/en/ca/scc/doc/1992/1992canlii112/1992canlii112.html
gwelfmike
Well-known member
Your case you cited involved an appeal because there was no evidence that no one was disturbed by the accused actions, this case I followed and it would apper the investigating offiicer failed to provide any evidence as such. If a couple of neighbours would have complained, than it would be a different outcome. Again, if the police were to use the CC of C for Cause a disturbance, then there would be more convicitons, they just don to want to be bothered because of the time involved and either a suspended sentence or a small fine does nt make it worth it.
They don't because (a) it isn't applicable, as the disturbances don't rise to a criminal level and (b) it's like swatting a fly with a skip loader.
OpenGambit
Banned
Its not about money at all. I'll be suprised if they even break even with something like this.
gwelfmike
Well-known member
The reason why we have laws are that they are suppose to restrict unwanted or socially unwanted behaviour. Unfortunatly governments then depend on fines for a source of revenue, which is the wrong reason for laws/regulations. It does turn into a money making venture, a good example of this is Metro Toronto and parking authority, council is now looking at squeezing every dollar it can get for revenue, including motorcyclists to pay for parking, the amount of money they wll get in parking fees is very small, but look at how much they will make in parking tickets. Another is the ridiculous speed limit on the 400 series highway, good way to generate revenue for the sake of "safety".
OpenGambit
Banned
There is nothing in this to indicate that its a money making venture or that they will even make money. The cost of actually enforcing this law will easily be far greater than the fines recouped. This is clearly based on a rationale of deterrance.
This may be a hard thing for people on this forum to understand, but the world isn't all trying to take your money.
Sometimes, they just want the losers to piss off.
This may be a hard thing for people on this forum to understand, but the world isn't all trying to take your money.
Sometimes, they just want the losers to piss off.
Last edited:
The cops won't bother you unless you give them a reason to. Here are examples of things cops have the power to already do and you rarely see it, unless they fully need to.
Example:
Driver and passenger window dark tints.
Unnecessary noise (car audio, unnecessary honking, squealing tires, unecessary revving,
Muffler to loud) - they already have this under the HTA for years and years and years.
1 km/h over speeding tickets (7 buck fine) HTA
Lowered cars - (unsafe and could he fines)
Stone chipped windshields (HTA)
License plate trim (the plastic with the dealer info that borders a license plate)
And many more other things that most citizens are unaware about.
Now that being said, I'm not saying that bikers in Oakville will not get a ticket; however, cops already have the power to stop motorists for many things, which they don't unless there is a task force "project loud pipes" or something lol.
So if you respect the bike, your surroundings and most importantly yourself, then you should need not to worry about being harassed.
And if you get pulled over, so me a favor and don't be a smart ass.. Because that will guarantee you getting a ticket and it may not even the noise one. Lol.
Have a safe 2012 boys and girls.
Taleb
Example:
Driver and passenger window dark tints.
Unnecessary noise (car audio, unnecessary honking, squealing tires, unecessary revving,
Muffler to loud) - they already have this under the HTA for years and years and years.
1 km/h over speeding tickets (7 buck fine) HTA
Lowered cars - (unsafe and could he fines)
Stone chipped windshields (HTA)
License plate trim (the plastic with the dealer info that borders a license plate)
And many more other things that most citizens are unaware about.
Now that being said, I'm not saying that bikers in Oakville will not get a ticket; however, cops already have the power to stop motorists for many things, which they don't unless there is a task force "project loud pipes" or something lol.
So if you respect the bike, your surroundings and most importantly yourself, then you should need not to worry about being harassed.
And if you get pulled over, so me a favor and don't be a smart ass.. Because that will guarantee you getting a ticket and it may not even the noise one. Lol.
Have a safe 2012 boys and girls.
Taleb
Btw also implementing a by-law also allows the enforcement officer to apply the law on private property as well as city streets. Meaning if the root of this issue started in a timmies private lot, then now they don't have to wait until you exit on to the road. They could come right up to the source while your in the parking lot. HTA is provincial, meaning they couldn't apply it unless it was government streets. Thats another reason, a side of it just being a municipal law.
slowbird
Well-known member
ahhhh....that would make sense.
OpenGambit
Banned
I didn't realize being a dick and waking up all your neighbours was a civil right. What country is that?
That's not what I'm talking about.
Now they have the right to search you or your car on private property.
Now they have the right to search you or your car on private property.
OpenGambit
Banned
I see nothing in this law that gives the police the power to search any individual or their car in any location, that did not already exist.
I believe the wording in the bylaw is to "... operate a motor vehicle ..." which means they have to see you operating the vehicle (whether on the road or otherwise). Means they can't walk up to you in a parking lot (your engine not running) and subject you to this test, does it not? ('Course, they can just wait for you to start up the engine in preparation of leaving ...)
Most of the HTA stuff concerns "operate a motor vehicle on a highway" and a "highway" in certain cases can be extended to other publicly accessible roads (e.g. the driveways in and out of that Tim Horton's).
What about "operating a motor vehicle" in my own private driveway, where the vehicle in question is my non-registered-for-the-road race bike, and I want to make sure the engine starts and runs (not even moving the bike under its own power) before committing to the 3 hour trip to the track (and away from my tool box and spare parts)? It so happens that I've had this particular bike tested, and it (barely) passes this test, but not all others will. Normally it's a non issue because the bike is never used on the road.
Most of the HTA stuff concerns "operate a motor vehicle on a highway" and a "highway" in certain cases can be extended to other publicly accessible roads (e.g. the driveways in and out of that Tim Horton's).
What about "operating a motor vehicle" in my own private driveway, where the vehicle in question is my non-registered-for-the-road race bike, and I want to make sure the engine starts and runs (not even moving the bike under its own power) before committing to the 3 hour trip to the track (and away from my tool box and spare parts)? It so happens that I've had this particular bike tested, and it (barely) passes this test, but not all others will. Normally it's a non issue because the bike is never used on the road.
Originally Posted by Taleb
Btw also implementing a by-law also allows the enforcement officer to apply the law on private property as well as city streets. Meaning if the root of this issue started in a timmies private lot, then now they don't have to wait until you exit on to the road. They could come right up to the source while your in the parking lot. HTA is provincial, meaning they couldn't apply it unless it was government streets. Thats another reason, a side of it just being a municipal law.
Btw also implementing a by-law also allows the enforcement officer to apply the law on private property as well as city streets. Meaning if the root of this issue started in a timmies private lot, then now they don't have to wait until you exit on to the road. They could come right up to the source while your in the parking lot. HTA is provincial, meaning they couldn't apply it unless it was government streets. Thats another reason, a side of it just being a municipal law.
|
|
|
|
|