TO bicycle stunt rider being looked for by TPS

Forum Sponsor
.... and if he has no dl? What exactly will they charge him with? Even if they fine him, the general punishment for non-payment is an injunction on your dl until you pay up. I loath many a cyclist, but this a pointless without some sort of licensing for bicycles behind it.
 
Neil_V said:
.... and if he has no dl? What exactly will they charge him with? Even if they fine him, the general punishment for non-payment is an injunction on your dl until you pay up. I loath many a cyclist, but this a pointless without some sort of licensing for bicycles behind it.
Click to expand...

You can get a HTA ticket without a DL.

Interesting story here:

http://globalnews.ca/news/3269801/o...s-after-being-ticketed-while-riding-bicycles/

While bicycle riders don’t require a licence, cyclists who are pulled over are required by law to identify themselves. If someone does not cooperate, they could be detained.

“You’re obliged to give your information or you may be subject to arrest for obstructing police,” said Paul Copeland, a criminal defence lawyer who practiced for almost 50 years before retiring in December.

But he said any form of identification would be sufficient, adding it does not necessarily need to be an operating licence.

READ MORE: Regina cyclists no longer need a bicycle licence

Cyclists may be surprised to learn that the Ministry of Transportation keeps track of offences, even if someone does not have a licence yet, police said.

“Once we write the ticket, the Ministry of Transportation transposes that information off the ticket into their systems. When that occurs, a driver’s licence number is generated if the person does not have a licence. So even if they’ve never applied for one, it’s used as a tracking number for any offences that person may commit,” said Stibbe.
Click to expand...

I think there's plenty they can charge this guy with in the HTA. Yeah, even if it doesn't make his life difficult for his DL (assuming as you suggest he doesn't even own a car or have a DL), the monetary amounts of all the tickets they could hammer him with will certainly hit home. There's probably several thousand dollars worth of tickets in that video alone if they really want to stick it to him, which given as how he's basically giving them a middle-finger in his latest posts, they might very well decide to do.

Whilst some see this as "going overboard", I think there's an argument to be made that something needs to be done to clean up cyclists in Toronto. If this guy is used as an example, well, is that not a positive thing in the end?
 
PrivatePilot said:
You can get a HTA ticket without a DL.

Interesting story here:

http://globalnews.ca/news/3269801/o...s-after-being-ticketed-while-riding-bicycles/



I think there's plenty they can charge this guy with in the HTA. Yeah, even if it doesn't make his life difficult for his DL (assuming as you suggest he doesn't even own a car or have a DL), the monetary amounts of all the tickets they could hammer him with will certainly hit home. There's probably several thousand dollars worth of tickets in that video alone if they really want to stick it to him, which given as how he's basically giving them a middle-finger in his latest posts, they might very well decide to do.

Whilst some see this as "going overboard", I think there's an argument to be made that something needs to be done to clean up cyclists in Toronto. If this guy is used as an example, well, is that not a positive thing in the end?
Click to expand...

Is there a mechanism to extract related funds from this man outside of revoking driving privilege until paid? Too lazy to search if i'm honest, but I do know they usually just perma-ban you from driving until paid up... So what do they do if you don't drive? Throw you in jail? that sounds expensive.
 
Collections is best option... "Oh yeah, good luck" *click*

... now if they could garnish wages? Less good.
 
Neil_V said:
Collections is best option... "Oh yeah, good luck" *click*

... now if they could garnish wages? Less good.
Click to expand...
Iirc, the garnishing of wages happens through HR. He owns the business. Pretty sure that won't work.

sent from my Purple LGG4 on the GTAM app
 
it works, a court order will collect payments or they put out a warrant. either way they will get thier money.
 
Neil_V said:
Collections is best option... "Oh yeah, good luck" *click*

... now if they could garnish wages? Less good.
Click to expand...

I checked - they add on a bunch of additional fees, send it to collections, and they also report it to the credit bureau.

So, yeah...a collection agency nagging you, and an R9 on your credit will ding ya pretty good. And if he ever does want to get a DL down the road all of that is going to be payable beforehand.
 
Out of curiosity, I remember when Ford way mayor, there was a photo of him talking on his cell phone while driving, but the police said that there wasn't anything they could do about it. Why couldn't they charge Ford if they had a picture, but can charge this guy on the bike?
 
Joe Bass said:
Iirc, the garnishing of wages happens through HR. He owns the business. Pretty sure that won't work.

sent from my Purple LGG4 on the GTAM app
Click to expand...

HR does not decide to garnish someones wages... cant. It would be through court order or similar.
 
Renboy said:
Out of curiosity, I remember when Ford way mayor, there was a photo of him talking on his cell phone while driving, but the police said that there wasn't anything they could do about it. Why couldn't they charge Ford if they had a picture, but can charge this guy on the bike?
Click to expand...

It was less that they couldn't and more that they wouldn't.
 
other than the front tire being in the air, I see little difference between this guy's riding and most cyclists on the road
 
PrivatePilot said:
5IljIBR.png


I struggle to find much sympathy for many bicyclists for reasons summed up in the above image.

But regardless of what happens with him and the law (Although he seems to be flaunting the law in the Instagram comments), I suspect karma will catch up to him sooner or later.
Click to expand...

You lack sympathy because you lack understanding.

Bicycles are the perfect blend of pedestrian and vehicle, and therefore not all rules of vehicles or pedestrians should apply to them. The laws surrounding bicycles need to be very specific; to the extent that they need to be specified based on the area (population density) and even zoning of where the rider is.

9/10 times, however, cyclists rules can be boiled down to common sense, and similarly to motorcycles; if you dont ride how/where they do, you have no idea.
 
Kri$han said:
You lack sympathy because you lack understanding.

Bicycles are the perfect blend of pedestrian and vehicle, and therefore not all rules of vehicles or pedestrians should apply to them. The laws surrounding bicycles need to be very specific; to the extent that they need to be specified based on the area (population density) and even zoning of where the rider is.

9/10 times, however, cyclists rules can be boiled down to common sense, and similarly to motorcycles; if you dont ride how/where they do, you have no idea.
Click to expand...
I call bs. Too many cyclists are splitting lanes by the curb, running reds etc. Nothing worse than taking your time to safely pass a cyclist only to have them squeeze between you and the curb at the next light and you have to find a safe spot to pass them again.
I enjoy cycling with my family but I completely agree with the above meme.

Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
 
Kri$han said:
You lack sympathy because you lack understanding.

Bicycles are the perfect blend of pedestrian and vehicle, and therefore not all rules of vehicles or pedestrians should apply to them. The laws surrounding bicycles need to be very specific; to the extent that they need to be specified based on the area (population density) and even zoning of where the rider is.

9/10 times, however, cyclists rules can be boiled down to common sense, and similarly to motorcycles; if you dont ride how/where they do, you have no idea.
Click to expand...

And the laws which apply to cyclists ARE rather specific. They are not required to obey laws which apply to MOTOR vehicles. They must obey the laws which simply state 'vehicles.' That includes obeying traffic signs such as one way, stop, and yield. There are also laws which specifically name bicycles. In most urban centres they are banned from riding on sidewalks. In Toronto the fine for doing so is $65.00 (at least it was the last time I checked). The HTA states that there is a $85.00 fine for operating a bicycle in a crosswalk.

As a motorcyclist I can certainly sympathize with cyclists.

... WHEN THEY ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
And the laws which apply to cyclists ARE rather specific. They are not required to obey laws which apply to MOTOR vehicles. They must obey the laws which simply state 'vehicles.' That includes obeying traffic signs such as one way, stop, and yield. There are also laws which specifically name bicycles. In most urban centres they are banned from riding on sidewalks. In Toronto the fine for doing so is $65.00 (at least it was the last time I checked). The HTA states that there is a $85.00 fine for operating a bicycle in a crosswalk.

As a motorcyclist I can certainly sympathize with cyclists.

... WHEN THEY ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW.
Click to expand...

There are some laws, but not enough of them, and I still think there is plenty of room for more definitions, such as how they should be have at small and large intersections. At a small intersection (residential, 2, 2-lane roads), I think it's fine for a cyclist to be in the left-turn lane/position right where a car would be. In large intersections (think Etobicoke, main roads), bicycles should have to behave as pedestrians, however I totally disagree with having to walk your bike in this scenario. A left turn should be done by going straight, then waiting for the light to turn and crossing at the side of the road.

Also, running a residential stop sign when there are no other cars around is a TOTAL :whocares: scenario. I wish there was a law that stated if a cyclist is disobeying the law and gets hit, it is 100% the cyclists fault.

Every cyclist with a brain is always thinking "what if I get hit right now?", and they (we) will still disobey the written rules of the road because if any imminent danger is avoided, then no harm/no foul.
 
Kri$han said:
You're comparing cycling with your family, to a guy who's solo urban riding in a dense city center? C'mon, son.
Click to expand...
Traffic laws don't change depending on traffic density. And you're not my dad lol.

Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom