|
|
|
Ontario doubling down on 172.
- Thread starter GreyGhost
- Start date
Bingo - this is my only concern.
I still have a problem with blindly applying the 40 over limit in every situation with no thought but whatever, I can live with that if it came down to it.
Laws that specifically bypass the legal system, exist for decades showing the pitfalls and abuses and then get updated to increase the potential for abuse are appalling.
Last edited:
matt220
Well-known member
Nope, we all have different definitions of what is irresponsible I just found it odd that you think in most cases 50 over is totally irresponsible while riding a bike that can do 50 over so easily you wouldn't notice without paying attention. Personally when I find a nice empty stretch of road in Mexico I enjoy going through the gears until about the top of 3rd before backing off, and I never maintain high speed on stretches not built for it.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.
Politicians who write these laws really need to spend some time in Germany on unrestricted sections of the Autobahn, maybe they'll realize road safety isn't really a speed problem but a s#!tty driver problem.
I give up!
I talk about having fun and I get lectured.
I talk about being responsible and I get lectured.
Seriously though, I get all points made by everyone but since when does the ability of a bike or car to do anything over the speed limit justify the responsibility of doing it?
What bike do you ride? I betcha it'll easily do 50 over too.
I talk about having fun and I get lectured.
I talk about being responsible and I get lectured.
Seriously though, I get all points made by everyone but since when does the ability of a bike or car to do anything over the speed limit justify the responsibility of doing it?
What bike do you ride? I betcha it'll easily do 50 over too.
Hack
Well-known member
Sure, but then we'd be complaining about how difficult it is to get a license and having to have our vehicles inspected every year...
BigEvilDoer
Well-known member
I
You have mods, bring it back to stock. Do inspection, change it all back.
They're pretty serious about the noise/pollution stuff, so better keep the entire exhaust system instead of selling it off piecemeal.
I believe the German TÜV inspection is every 2 years, once the vehicle is 3 years old...
You have mods, bring it back to stock. Do inspection, change it all back.
They're pretty serious about the noise/pollution stuff, so better keep the entire exhaust system instead of selling it off piecemeal.
matt220
Well-known member
Oh it does, that's why each ride I try to find an empty stretch of road in Mexico to go fast before coming back to Onterrible.
Not trying to lecture just having a discussion because I know our road laws are made for revenue first, not safety.
Only the people who actually make our roads unsafe would be complaining about the difficulty of getting a license. Also it would take a lot of unsafe vehicles (modified in unsafe ways or in a state of disrepair) off the roads. Win-win imo
As far as I know, yellow speed signs are still considered cautionary and not enforceable. So go ahead and rip through those on/off ramps at 139 or those rural route hairpins at 119 ?️
*edited to 1kph less than "street racing"
*edited to 1kph less than "street racing"
I had a Piper Cherokee and once probably had it at 180 MPH ground speed with a stiff tailwind and shallow dive. 140 MPH was normal. There was no sensation of speed because the points of reference were a mile down. The enjoyment was achieving things through discipline, calculating wind direction, air speeds, headings etc. Take offs and landings are the most fun. Low flying is illegal and dangerous.
I had a friend that was into skydiving and took him up for a flight. All went well until we were on final approach for landing and he commented "This is weird. I've never landed in a airplane before."
Mulroney's numbers Charges laid were just under 800. Less than 5% were repeat offenders. A certain amount of intelligence would gather that the other 95+% would settle down with the prospect of stiff fine and insurance hit.
This BS act is to target 40 repeat violators.
The problem here is that many of those stunt driving charges are plead out to minor HTA offences (1-2 points). Even drinking and driving charges are often plead down to careless.
The consequences in those cases are not meaningful. The Crown has to plead these down because they are not able to go to trial for them unless things change drastically at the court house. And if it were to go to trial, there needs to be promise that the consequences are going to be severe.
The government knows that they can not control this. So they make laws that allow them to be the judge right then and there, rather than let many of those cases get lowered/tossed, etc.
I think the conviction rate on these would be quiet high, but for the most part, 90-95% are plead down.
Personally, I don't have an opinion on this. I would just not do 50 over on the highway, or 40 over on the roads. I think this law is ok. What I really dislike are the speed cameras, thats the government going after hard working tax payers and its bs.
The consequences in those cases are not meaningful. The Crown has to plead these down because they are not able to go to trial for them unless things change drastically at the court house. And if it were to go to trial, there needs to be promise that the consequences are going to be severe.
The government knows that they can not control this. So they make laws that allow them to be the judge right then and there, rather than let many of those cases get lowered/tossed, etc.
I think the conviction rate on these would be quiet high, but for the most part, 90-95% are plead down.
Personally, I don't have an opinion on this. I would just not do 50 over on the highway, or 40 over on the roads. I think this law is ok. What I really dislike are the speed cameras, thats the government going after hard working tax payers and its bs.
Airport Road is 80 KPH heading south but once you're over the RR overpass south of Steeles the limit drops to 50. If a driver is 10 over, nothing rare, and doesn't notice the sign there's the 40 over.
South of the tracks there are all kinds of businesses with their own blight of signs. It isn't like the 400 series with limited signage. A driver could be alongside a large truck that is blocking the signs.
That doesn't exempt the driver from obeying the laws but being punished before convicted is the issue.
Do not confuse this with a person blowing over the limit. In that case the person, by instrumentation and scientific data, is unable to safely operate a motor vehicle.
Is this a Trump tactic to take the heat off of the PC's over their bungling of Covid?
If endangering the Ontario public is the issue the whole PC party should be in jail.
How many traffic deaths are the result of high speeds?
I thought cell phone use was the big killer. Why not do the roadside suspensions on those abusers?
Using the same logic, just don’t speed. Problem solved.
Personally I don’t like speed cameras or red light cameras (FWIW I don’t often speed or run red lights) but at least they don’t affect insurance and the fines are relatively small when comparing to getting hit with 172 and impound, tow etc.
One should only be penalized upon conviction but these laws penalize regardless and that’s a problem IMO
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
Not to mention the cop that didn't radar you but claims: 'you were catching up to him while he was going 140 so you must have been doing 150'.
Won't hold up in court most likely but doesn't stop them from impounding bike, taking away license and costing you a ton of money just to get your own stuff back and on the road again.
|
|
|
|
|