|
|
|
"Obstruct Plate"
- Thread starter mrspeaker
- Start date
TK4
Well-known member
Cop's not going to care about reflectors, that's an MOT requirement like a sidestand safety switch.you removed the DOT rear side reflectors
No, it's not.
Priller
Well-known member
For the record, if it's needed to pass an MOT safety, it's needed to be considered "fit for the road". You can't just do a safety and then just willy nilly remove all the stuff that was required for the safety.
So yes, a cop could very much indeed ticket you for it. It's the same as having a clearance light out in the eye of the law - it would be eligible for a fix-it ticket under the "operate unsafe vehicle" catch all if you did something to piss off the cop.
For commercial vehicles and even non-commercial trailers it's actually a specified ticket with it's on HTA subsection, as well.
Lots of good reading here:
Schedule 43 – Last Updated: January 1, 2023 | Ontario Court of Justice
www.ontariocourts.ca
TK4
Well-known member
It may be the law, but a cop's about as likely to bust you for a 'no reflector' compliance as they will for all the DUIs on e-bikes.
They have better things to do.
Trials
Well-known member
What does your motorcycle look like from the side after dark, it's suppose to have a yellow reflector to the front and a red towards the rear and now I know which way you are traveling if I'm trying not to broadside you at an intersection.
Just because a law is enforced and you know why it was put in place, how does that make it ok, I don't get that attitude, it's like dumping used oil down a storm drain and saying it's ok I did it after dark so nobody seen it. Go to CT and buy a chunk of DOT reflective material to put on there, don't wait to be a I did not see him statistic.
Just because a law is enforced and you know why it was put in place, how does that make it ok, I don't get that attitude, it's like dumping used oil down a storm drain and saying it's ok I did it after dark so nobody seen it. Go to CT and buy a chunk of DOT reflective material to put on there, don't wait to be a I did not see him statistic.
Pull you over for out of the blue for that alone? Nope. Not a chance. I agree.
Add another ticket while some smartass sits and chirps his mouth at the cop after being pulled over for something else, not knowing when to shut up?
Yep.
Provincial standards (or lack thereof) cannot supersede or eliminate federal required standards.
Again, if it's required to pass a MTO inspection it technically needs to remain on the vehicle to be deemed fit for the road, and reflectors are very clearly mentioned in lots of places in the required equipment lists. If you take off things like required reflectors a vehicle will not pass an inspection, assuming the inspector is actually doing the inspection properly. Accordingly, that doesn't mean you can just remove all that stuff after you get the slip of paper saying your vehicle is "fit" and it's somehow OK.
Priller
Well-known member
We live in a society where there are a number of unspoken grey areas where things are technically in violation of one regulation/law or another, but the police and other enforcement groups are expected to offer some leeway in order to allow common sense to prevail. 100 vs 120 in the highway is the most obvious example. They know people want to push the limit, so leave it at 100 knowing the bulk of traffic will travel between 110-120. This also leave some cushion for ticketing above 120, as the police aren't expected to make decisions about margins that fall within the error range of their equipment. It's a system that's flawed, but it works well enough.
If police were to start enforcing every single regulation on the books rigidly, it would create a social crisis, as laws would need to be updated so regularly it would be impossible to keep up. Nobody cares about those antiquated fines for things like riding horses into bars because it's seen as common sense to not get too fussy about it.
Some things need rigorous regulations because life safety risks are so high. Flight operations, for example. Reflectors on license plate hangers aren't on the same level, hence getting ignored.
If police were to start enforcing every single regulation on the books rigidly, it would create a social crisis, as laws would need to be updated so regularly it would be impossible to keep up. Nobody cares about those antiquated fines for things like riding horses into bars because it's seen as common sense to not get too fussy about it.
Some things need rigorous regulations because life safety risks are so high. Flight operations, for example. Reflectors on license plate hangers aren't on the same level, hence getting ignored.
Priller
Well-known member
You can see both my headlight and taillight from the side of my bike. The reflectors only come into play if it's parked and off. At that point, direction of travel is the least of my worries if someone might hit it...
Trials
Well-known member
Sure good luck with that. You want me to see a red glowing light and a white glowing light :| aimed at 90 degrees to my path of travel.
Your direction of travel and where your vehicle starts and stops is everybody's concern, there a few out there that don't want to squish you.
Your direction of travel and where your vehicle starts and stops is everybody's concern, there a few out there that don't want to squish you.
Ontario politice can only enforce ontario standards and not federal
, reflectors aren't mentioned in the ontario standards and are not needed for a safety. If I am wrong I would like to know.
Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk
, reflectors aren't mentioned in the ontario standards and are not needed for a safety. If I am wrong I would like to know.
Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk
How do you do the 30 kmph braking test in the new standards.
Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk
Don’t ask me, i was wondering the same things
Was told by MTO officer that you don’t need an engine in the car to cert
found this
Review: Ontario’s new safety inspection rules: What they mean for used car buyers
‘Despite all the hoopla, in principal, it’s the same thing we’re doing now’
www.theglobeandmail.com
Trials
Well-known member
I remember no helmet laws, remember that, they made that law because people just wouldn't take the advice to wear them. I remember no seat belt laws .... do I need to continue, nobody was at risk but the stupid people made it necessary to legislate it.
Trailer needs a working battery to operate the runaway brakes and the front has yellow reflectors and the rear has a red reflectors and a prescribed amount of red reflective material on the rear. Safety inspection required annually, it costs hundreds of dollars every time even if they find nothing wrong. All laws brought about because it became necessary, people were not maintaining their trailers and they were running away.
Trailer needs a working battery to operate the runaway brakes and the front has yellow reflectors and the rear has a red reflectors and a prescribed amount of red reflective material on the rear. Safety inspection required annually, it costs hundreds of dollars every time even if they find nothing wrong. All laws brought about because it became necessary, people were not maintaining their trailers and they were running away.
|
|
|
|
|