The Bad Drivers of Ontario Thread | Page 227 | GTAMotorcycle.com

The Bad Drivers of Ontario Thread

Rob MacLennan said:
Second One - It boggles the mind to think of how many people like that would never be caught, if they weren't stupid enough to let their plates expire.
Click to expand...
It boggles my mind HOW he had the vehicle back to put unauthorized (fake) plates on the car the very next day! I would have thought that driving under suspension with unauthorized plates the first time would have also earned an impound on the vehicle on day one.
 
Malks said:
It boggles my mind HOW he had the vehicle back to put unauthorized (fake) plates on the car the very next day! I would have thought that driving under suspension with unauthorized plates the first time would have also earned an impound on the vehicle on day one.
Click to expand...
The cop probably immediately removed the tags, then told him to get the vehicle towed home. Kid goes out and steals a set of plates, or takes them off a family member's car, then jumps right back on the road again.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Second One - It boggles the mind to think of how many people like that would never be caught, if they weren't stupid enough to let their plates expire.
Click to expand...
Stupid criminals get traffic citations. Smart ones get elected.

There's a YouTube video of a guy calling about a complaint with his McDonald's order. The police arrive and run his ID, finding out the guy is wanted for murder.
 
Just like almost every single episode of the cops tv show, initial stop is for missing license plate bulb, brake light out, or incomplete stop at stop sign… which almost always leads to drugs or warrants.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
The cop probably immediately removed the tags, then told him to get the vehicle towed home. Kid goes out and steals a set of plates, or takes them off a family member's car, then jumps right back on the road again.
Click to expand...
Which is why the car should be impounded on the spot! If it's left with him at the side of the road there's nothing to stop him from just driving away without plates after the police have left him for another call.
 
Malks said:
Which is why the car should be impounded on the spot! If it's left with him at the side of the road there's nothing to stop him from just driving away without plates after the police have left him for another call.
Click to expand...
I agree. Nothing except him getting pulled over again and *then* getting it impounded, but he's already shown that he's willing to drive illegally anyway. There are times when common practice just doesn't work.
 
mimico_polak said:
Crap same! Can’t remember if I renewed for 1 or 2 years as there is no sticker now.
Click to expand...
If you renewed online then you would have received an email "receipt", stating the length of the renewal and how much you were charged (zero).
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I agree. Nothing except him getting pulled over again and *then* getting it impounded, but he's already shown that he's willing to drive illegally anyway. There are times when common practice just doesn't work.
Click to expand...
Impounded on the spot as in HTA 172, no trial?

I understand the problem. In the case of a DUI the drunk driver, documented by a reasonable legal device, can't drive away with just a warning. They should however be able to call a friend to take charge of the vehicle. Other people in the family may be dependent on the vehicle so why are they being punished? (Please note that the OPP did exactly that once and the replacement driver showed up drunk.)

A friend was the service manager of a major dealership and they were obligated to pull the plates off a car that couldn't be safely released to the road. The owner had to tow the vehicle away without the plates.

No legal plates or insurance means the vehicle can't be driven on public roads. The vehicle may obstruct traffic or create a hazard if left in place. Even allowing a police officer to drive the vehicle a few feet could have negative consequences.

There is a legal way to handle the problem that doesn't require the trashing of the rights of the alleged perpetrator but it will take legislation more complex than the vigilante hip shot we now have.
 
nobbie48 said:
Impounded on the spot as in HTA 172, no trial?

I understand the problem. In the case of a DUI the drunk driver, documented by a reasonable legal device, can't drive away with just a warning. They should however be able to call a friend to take charge of the vehicle. Other people in the family may be dependent on the vehicle so why are they being punished? (Please note that the OPP did exactly that once and the replacement driver showed up drunk.)

A friend was the service manager of a major dealership and they were obligated to pull the plates off a car that couldn't be safely released to the road. The owner had to tow the vehicle away without the plates.

No legal plates or insurance means the vehicle can't be driven on public roads. The vehicle may obstruct traffic or create a hazard if left in place. Even allowing a police officer to drive the vehicle a few feet could have negative consequences.

There is a legal way to handle the problem that doesn't require the trashing of the rights of the alleged perpetrator but it will take legislation more complex than the vigilante hip shot we now have.
Click to expand...
A vehicle not being legal to drive is a pretty cut and dried situation. You can tow a vehicle if it's parked illegally, but not if it's on the road illegally? That's not anywhere near HTA172 territory.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
A vehicle not being legal to drive is a pretty cut and dried situation. You can tow a vehicle if it's parked illegally, but not if it's on the road illegally? That's not anywhere near HTA172 territory.
Click to expand...
If the problem is the driver (DUI) the car is subject to the legal parking situation. On a major highway there is usually no parking so it gets enforced immediately. "Sir, where do you want your car towed to at your expense?"

If the car is in a legal parking spot it can stay, based on the parking time limits. Four feet from the curb is not legal.
"Sir, where do you want your car towed to at your expense?"

If the car is not roadworthy, licensed and insured,
"Sir, where do you want your car towed to at your expense?"

If the unlicensed car gets driven again with a different set of stolen plates there should be provisions within the law to increase fines exponentially for multiple convictions.

People that advocate fighting every charge are part of the problem. Plugging the courts delays the smack in the head these guys and sometimes gals deserve.

I don't know if there is a provision whereby an action goes from traffic court to criminal court with criminal charges being laid. Can a court order be used to limit the abuse?

In a single car family others may need the vehicle for work, school or medical reasons. Why should the rest of the family be punished because pop had one too many? The car does have to be legal though. Thousands in storage charges add to the problem and are unwarranted.
 
nobbie48 said:
If the car is not roadworthy, licensed and insured,
"Sir, where do you want your car towed to at your expense?"

In a single car family others may need the vehicle for work, school or medical reasons. Why should the rest of the family be punished because pop had one too many? The car does have to be legal though. Thousands in storage charges add to the problem and are unwarranted.
Click to expand...
With unauthorized plates on the car it is not legally roadworthy and likely not insured at the time as it's being driven by a suspended driver. Therefore, an immediate impound is justified.

If other members of the family required the car they should have stepped up and kept this loser from tossing fake plates on it and driving!
 
Malks said:
With unauthorized plates on the car it is not legally roadworthy and likely not insured at the time as it's being driven by a suspended driver. Therefore, an immediate impound is justified.

If other members of the family required the car they should have stepped up and kept this loser from tossing fake plates on it and driving!
Click to expand...
It's still punishment before trial. IDC how brutal the post trial punishment is, banned for life or jail IDC. That or compensation if found innocent.
 
nobbie48 said:
It's still punishment before trial. IDC how brutal the post trial punishment is, banned for life or jail IDC. That or compensation if found innocent.
Click to expand...
In this case the driver was caught driving under suspension twice in two days! That is pretty cut and dried. I'm no supporter of HTA172, but when suspended drivers repeatedly continue driving against court orders, I have no issue with the a roadside impound. They already had their day in court and don't care to follow the ruling.

I'm sure the thought of a lifetime driving ban would be a deterrent for him to not do that again!:rolleyes: Actually I would like to see some serious jail time for these a__holes!
 
Another hit and run in Mississauga. Close to home as a few blocks from my place and I saw the pedestrian lying on the ground surrounded by helpers and tons of blankets to keep her warm.

People actually blocked the road with their cars so no one can make a mistake and hit her while laying down.

globalnews.ca

Woman sustains injuries in Mississauga, Ont. hit-and-run, police say | Globalnews.ca

Peel Regional Police told Global News they were called to a collision involving a pedestrian in the area of The Credit Woodlands and Forestwood Drive just after 6 p.m.
globalnews.ca globalnews.ca

I’ve seen cars literally speed up to blow through that stop sign. Zero regard for others or pedestrians.
 
Malks said:
In this case the driver was caught driving under suspension twice in two days! That is pretty cut and dried. I'm no supporter of HTA172, but when suspended drivers repeatedly continue driving against court orders, I have no issue with the a roadside impound. They already had their day in court and don't care to follow the ruling.

I'm sure the thought of a lifetime driving ban would be a deterrent for him to not do that again!:rolleyes: Actually I would like to see some serious jail time for these a__holes!
Click to expand...
Driving under suspension should include a mandatory lock up for the driver, not vehicle lock up. This doesn't call for any judgement by the police.

Fact 1: Driver has a suspended license.

Fact 2: Driver was driving a car.

Fact one plus fact two = Jail until case is heard.

Second offense? No bail until case is heard and judgement applied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom