Ontario doubling down on 172.

[TwistedKestrel]

Before this even came out, I was telling my son that it's getting harder and harder to have fun these days - it's slowly getting outlawed it seems and here it is getting worse.

As usual, it's the few bad apples that spoil it for the rest of us.

I wanna make something really clear, since HTA 172 is now 13 years old not everyone may have been present for all the discussion around it this whole time - whether or not harsh penalties should exist for speeding is a discussion that can be had, sure. However the critical problem with HTA 172 is how it completely sidesteps the justice system, and burdens people with substantial financial penalties without being convicted of a crime. And now this bill 282 will not only will double these hidden financial penalties, but in a system where there is some incentive for tow & impound operators to offer kickbacks to police (because they are the ones collecting the money from the roadside suspensions, not the province), this will now make these kickbacks MORE lucrative as these suspensions will now make the tow & impound operators MORE money!

The financial penalties I am talking about are the fees for having your car towed to impound from the spot where you are charged with HTA 172, and the fees for your vehicle being in impound for 7 days (and now potentially 14 days). These fees are very explicitly described as uncontestable in HTA 172 - you have absolutely no recourse once you have been charged. The only language in the law that comes even close to being a reprieve from those fees are petitioning to have your vehicle released from impound early if it was seized from someone who had stolen it - you're STILL on the hook for those fees up to the point it gets released.

 

[LBV]

The politicians? This has nothing to do with people driving 100 over. This is fundraising or pandering for votes. They should abolish these roadside judge/jury/executioner laws and lean on the courts to deliver appropriate punishments to those found guilty.

The politicians didn't just wake up one morning and decide to do this. The people who elected the politicians complained to them about excessive speed in their neighborhoods not to mention the cops who see it all the time. Something prompted the politicians to act.

Where did you get the idea that Ontario roads are supposed to be "FUN"?

I'm not sure why you own a motorcycle then if you're not having "fun".

 

[GreyGhost]

The politicians didn't just wake up one morning and decide to do this. The people who elected the politicians complained to them about excessive speed in their neighborhoods not to mention the cops who see it all the time. Something prompted the politicians to act.

I'm not sure why you own a motorcycle then if you're not having "fun".

People complained, politicians decided to implement a process that sidesteps the entire justice system and does very little to address the problem. Why not something like upon conviction for 172, your license is cancelled and you start again at G1/M1? Maybe upon conviction for 100+ over, you are ineligible for a license for 5 years? No need for roadside extortion, that is all on the politicians.

 

[Superveloce]

Where did you get the idea that Ontario roads are supposed to be "FUN"?

From @shanekingsley. And my brain

 

[Hack]

Trouble is... For the most part public roads have to consider the lowest common denominator.
It's far to congested out there anyway to be horsing around.
If i want to really enjoy riding I find i gotta get out into the sticks... others with a need for bigger speed go to the track.

 

[shanekingsley]

Any ideas when this might become reality/enforceable on the ground?

Trouble is... For the most part public roads have to consider the lowest common denominator.
It's far to congested out there anyway to be horsing around.
If i want to really enjoy riding I find i gotta get out into the sticks... others with a need for bigger speed go to the track.

I get the need to control speeding or reckless driving in higher density areas, school zones etc, but this is applicable on all roads even out in the sticks. An example would be White Falls Road - it's now down 60km/hr or maybe even 50km/hr. Even Harburn Road and Swords Road are both 60km/hr while all the surrounding roads are 80km/hr.

 

[nobbie48]

I hate this. I have no problem with increasing penalties after conviction but increasing roadside penalties is horrendous especially after there have been clearly documented cases of abuse (and most 172 tickets don't result in a conviction for that charge).

Do you have specific numbers?

Pursuing this further, if LESS that 5% (That includes 4%, 3% etc) have records and convictions indicate that MOST charges don't result in a conviction, what is the ratio of reasonable to unreasonable charges considering the drivers records.

This is proof that the government and the judicial system they set up are beyond their abilities to govern the use of our roads and just about anything else.

So what is next in the civil liberty to be taken away?

Martin Niemoller is rolling over in his grave.

 

[GreyGhost]

Do you have specific numbers?

Pursuing this further, if LESS that 5% (That includes 4%, 3% etc) have records and convictions indicate that MOST charges don't result in a conviction, what is the ratio of reasonable to unreasonable charges considering the drivers records.

This is proof that the government and the judicial system they set up are beyond their abilities to govern the use of our roads and just about anything else.

So what is next in the civil liberty to be taken away?

Martin Niemoller is rolling over in his grave.

There were published numbers. They were bad. IIRC <50% conviction for 172. Most were plead out to a lesser charge. I don't have the link at hand, I would have to search for it. In any case, it is somewhere between embarrassing and criminal that you pay a monetary penalty of thousands for being charged with a crime you were never convicted of. They should have to pay back double for the inconvenience if the charge doesn't stick (or better yet don't inflict penalties until after conviction).

 

[nobbie48]

Before this even came out, I was telling my son that it's getting harder and harder to have fun these days - it's slowly getting outlawed it seems and here it is getting worse.

As usual, it's the few bad apples that spoil it for the rest of us.

Fun or cheap thrills?

Our roads were built for transportation. Most motorcyclists use them for recreation. It doesn't work well.

If you want to speed go to a track.

On a track there is less chance of injury and it stops the BS talk. Yeah man, I was doing 150 on 507 and was blah, blah, blah is BS talk. Any idiot can point it and pin it. Try doing that on a track and see if you end up bragging about coming in last because you don't know how to corner, position, brake or strategize.

This thread is about rights which I feel are being taken away. One can argue that driving is a privilege but that privilege is payed for by being responsible. I "bought" my licence by paying for lessons, licences and insurance and by complying with the conditions set forth within the law. I keep my part of the bargain and the government keeps its part.

How about off road, trials, track anything but stupid gross speed. Learn a skill and measure yourself against known standards.

As many have said, after conviction, hammer the crap out of them if found guilty.

 

[Jayv]

Southern Ontario, we have 4 drag strips, 5 road courses, countless off road trails.

I gave up doing Hooligan rides the first time I got pinched for 172.

For touring or cruising our roads are okay.

 

[GreyGhost]

Southern Ontario, we have 4 drag strips, 5 road courses, countless off road trails.

I gave up doing Hooligan rides the first time I got pinched for 172.

For touring or cruising our roads are okay.

As they keep dropping speed limits, you don't need to be riding like a hooligan to get 282. On many roads, a reasonably safe cruising speed is above the new threshold.

 

[SVeezy]

IMO no monetary penalties should be incurred until conviction. Or at the very least any penalties levied need to be reversed afterwards. Anything else is complete BS.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com

 

[LBV]

Listen, I get it and going 50 over is totally irresponsible and I've only caught myself a few times but only for short bursts to pass some one and then I'm back down (usually on the 407).

I'm referring to having some fun by exceeding the speed limit by 20-30 when it's safe to, we all do it, but certainly not by 50.

I did not make myself clear as I certainly don't condone that kind of excessive speed.

Now if they could only put the same sort of emphasis on red light runners which likely cause way more destruction and death!

 

[GreyGhost]

Listen, I get it and going 50 over is totally irresponsible and I've only caught myself a few times but only for short bursts to pass some one and then I'm back down (usually on the 407).

I'm referring to having some fun by exceeding the speed limit by 20-30 when it's safe to, we all do it, but certainly not by 50.

I did not make myself clear as I certainly don't condone that kind of excessive speed.

Now if they could only put the same sort of emphasis on red light runners which likely cause way more destruction and death!

It's not just speed. Because the cop said so is sufficient to catch the charge. I haven't read 282 but 172 had a lot of options for when the charge was issued. Speed was the one I had the least problem with as it was clearly defined. Now, they keep dropping speed limits artificially lower in a quest for revenue and to drive people away from certain roads. Are you really going 40 over if they dropped the speed limit by 30 km/h for political reasons?

 

[Hack]

I get the need to control speeding or reckless driving in higher density areas, school zones etc, but this is applicable on all roads even out in the sticks. An example would be White Falls Road - it's now down 60km/hr or maybe even 50km/hr. Even Harburn Road and Swords Road are both 60km/hr while all the surrounding roads are 80km/hr.

maybe it's time to sell the bike and start flying..?
'have a buddy who flies... 'never hear him complaining about speed limits

 

[GreyGhost]

maybe it's time to sell the bike and start flying..?
'have a buddy who flies... 'never hear him complaining about speed limits

Jeebus, not a good plan for me. Most small plane flying is the ultimate in boredom. No corners, no hills, everything far away, etc. Aerobatics would be fun but you are at the bleeding edge of low survival rate activities. Flying is like iron butt riding. You are going reasonably quickly in a straight line and stop every four hours for a pit stop. Also for most of us, the bike collection is substantially cheaper than a plane. You can pick up a decent plane for the price of a decent GT car though.

 

[matt220]

I'm referring to having some fun by exceeding the speed limit by 20-30 when it's safe to, we all do it, but certainly not by 50.

You ride a 1000, have you ever hit redline?

 

[GreyGhost]

Any ideas when this might become reality/enforceable on the ground?


I get the need to control speeding or reckless driving in higher density areas, school zones etc, but this is applicable on all roads even out in the sticks. An example would be White Falls Road - it's now down 60km/hr or maybe even 50km/hr. Even Harburn Road and Swords Road are both 60km/hr while all the surrounding roads are 80km/hr.

Those are the ones where this is really going to suck. We all know that there are very few places to safely pass and most cars speed up by ~30-40 km/h coming out of the corner onto those stretches. Almost every pass will be risking this crap while the car driving like a dbag continues on their self-important way.

 

[LBV]

You ride a 1000, have you ever hit redline?

Good point and come to think of it, I probably was 50 over when I wrung it out over the weekend on a barren country road but to answer your question, rarely on the bike as I recall 1st goes to ~ 120. Are we going to evolve this into a discussion of how much bike we really need next 'cause I do like that new Tuono 660.

 

[LBV]

Those are the ones where this is really going to suck. We all know that there are very few places to safely pass and most cars speed up by ~30-40 km/h coming out of the corner onto those stretches. Almost every pass will be risking this crap while the car driving like a dbag continues on their self-important way.

So are you hating this law as you said in the OP and in this response or are you liking it as you say in your responses to me 'cause I'm reading 2 different POV??