Unreasonable Smoke | GTAMotorcycle.com

Unreasonable Smoke

D

Delboy

Well-known member
I've got a bit of a fetish for old Yamaha RD's and RZ's and actually bought my first RD400 back in 1979.

So I nipped down to Timmies tonight with a few friends and was riding an old RD350LC.

There was a bunch of cops there when I came out, so I started up the bike on the choke as it had been sitting for about 40 mins and immediately got slapped with a ticket for Unreasonable Smoke - Hello, its a ****ing 2 Stroke. I'm also running it ~40:1 on premix so the amount of smoke is really minimal

Anyway, this woman looked about 19 and I tried to explain to her that it was a 2 stroke and how 2 strokes work.

However she went on to explain that she was an experienced traffic officer and that in her expert opinion the bike was defective and contravened HTA Section, Blah, Blah, Blah.........

A male cop came over and advised me to take the ticket and I could be in real serious trouble for arguing with a police officer, up to and including having by license suspended for 7 days and Bike towed. He was very threatening, clearly trying to impress her.

WTF. It felt like a shakedown by LE in some third world country.

I think it will be pretty easy to fight but I now have to spend my time and money going to court. This is crazy

Clearly this woman is utterly incompetent. Is there anyway to file a complaint against her? I did call the local station and spoke to a Sargent but she said ultimately it was the officers call and she trusts her judgement. It just pisses me off that I have been riding these things for over 30 years and this is the first time I've had to deal with an incompetent clown like this.
 
Not surprising, uneducated rookie, plus they just have a hate on for bikes.
And i see they decided to hit up the local meeting spots to whip up some bogus tickets, how clever.... :cool:

Now you get to waste your time and our tax dollars to fight a stupid ticket that never should have been written, typical Ontario efficiency. :snorting:
 
matthew said:
what is the HTA section that you got charged with?
Click to expand...

possibly s.75(1) ??

75. (1) Every motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle shall be equipped with a muffler in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise and excessive smoke, and no person shall use a muffler cut-out, straight exhaust, gutted muffler, hollywood muffler, by-pass or similar device upon a motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 75 (1). Same
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to,
(a) a motor-assisted bicycle with an attached motor that is driven entirely by electricity; or
(b) a motor vehicle that is driven entirely by electricity. 2009, c. 5, s. 31.
Fumes from engine
(3) The engine and power mechanism of every motor vehicle shall be so equipped and adjusted as to prevent the escape of excessive fumes or smoke. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 75 (3).
 
I have a vintage wooden boat with a matching vintage outboard that runs 20:1 oil mix. Ahhhh the good old days of mosquito fogging. I worry about the same thing when I run the boat.

Bikes don't have clean air tests so this is a case of the officers opinion as to what is an unreasonable amount of smoke. Two stroke motors can load up on oil at idle and let it rip when you open the throttle.

If you had a mechanic, licenced by the province, certify that the bike meets the manufacturer's tolerances it would be the court arguement of the cop versus an provincially accredited expert. Result ???

Were you on private property and would that make a difference?

Is the charge considered a moving violation that would affect insurance rates?

Also bothering me is the second cop threatening a tow and licence suspension. I understand that the police can pull the plate off a vehicle they feel is unfit or a hazard and the vehicle either has to be towed or left on private property. I didn't think a mechanical defect was cause for a licence suspension. If I am correct the bullying just makes the cop look bad.

Re explaining how technical things work. If the person is tuned out you are wasting your time. Everyone in a mechanical line of work gets the deer in a headlight stare from people that are clueless and want to stay that way. All they know is that they aren't happy about "something" and "someone" has to fix it and make them happy.
 
There's a reason why 2-strokes haven't been sold in Canada, for decades, but that doesn't mean normal operation of the vehicle should result in a ticket. The new crop of officers simply have no experience with them. Hell, many of them weren't born when the last legal 2-strokes hit the road.

Quick question: When was the last time that you had your canister repacked?
 
Should have let them take it under H.172....

I'd like to see them explain in court why they charged someone with H.172..... WHILE parked! Of course they probably would have charged you with resisting... and then lied to cover it.
 
raginduck said:
Should have let them take it under H.172....

I'd like to see them explain in court why they charged someone with H.172..... WHILE parked! Of course they probably would have charged you with resisting... and then lied to cover it.
Click to expand...

You would win in court, but still be out $1000+. I would have a lot fewer problems with 172 if there were repercussions on the department and officers for issuing 172 charges that get tossed. As it is now, it is an easy fundraiser for them with no downside.

If you put these two parts together, you have a pretty easy (although BS) 172 charge for a 2 stroke in a parking lot.

Where a police officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that a person is driving, or has driven, a motor vehicle on a highway in contravention of subsection (1), the officer shall

Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to lift some or all of its tires from the surface of the highway, including driving a motorcycle with only one wheel in contact with the ground

Two strokes like to lift the front, and you arrived on public roads so you are guilty. Again, I think this argument blows, but there is nothing stopping them from charging it.
 
Damn. Another example of officers with too much power and not enough knowledge. Such a dangerous combination. I'd file a complaint for sure. What evidence does the officer actually have? No readings or measurements were taken. The officer isn't an expert witness on engines (which can be easily established in court). I really hope you make this officer look stupid. This is exactly why their should be reprecussions when officers lay charges they know nothing about. A tally should be kept to establish a pattern.

An RZ350 was my first bike when I was 16 and I missed 2 strokes so much I am working on a scooter project right now. I sure hope I don't run into any officers like that when I'm out and about.
 
I just love how the other officer allegedy threatened to increase the charges because the OP argued. What a crock.

Turbodish should be around shortly....
 
GreyGhost said:
You would win in court, but still be out $1000+. I would have a lot fewer problems with 172 if there were repercussions on the department and officers for issuing 172 charges that get tossed. As it is now, it is an easy fundraiser for them with no downside.

If you put these two parts together, you have a pretty easy (although BS) 172 charge for a 2 stroke in a parking lot.

Where a police officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that a person is driving, or has driven, a motor vehicle on a highway in contravention of subsection (1), the officer shall

Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to lift some or all of its tires from the surface of the highway, including driving a motorcycle with only one wheel in contact with the ground

Two strokes like to lift the front, and you arrived on public roads so you are guilty. Again, I think this argument blows, but there is nothing stopping them from charging it.
Click to expand...

That win would be followed by a law suit if it were me.
 
nobbie48 said:
To sue the police one has to prove malace, criminal intent or other major no-no. They are allowed all the oopsies they want.
Click to expand...

Charging someone with a section of the HTA that doesn't apply followed by upping the charge to 'stunting' which really doesn't apply and confiscating a vehicle seems pretty malicious to me.

IMHO police are too protected. Even the most dirty ones still get paid legal services and suspended with pay for years as they drag it out in courts. If only every citizen had these benefits then maybe justice wouldn't only be for the wealthy.
 
Snobike Mike said:
I just love how the other officer allegedy threatened to increase the charges because the OP argued. What a crock.

Turbodish should be around shortly....
Click to expand...

There is a section in there about arguing with the police on the side of the road. Surprised no one here recalls it being there. When 172 came out, they also brought out a section in regards to "discussing it" on the side of the road with the police. I am sure someone will post it shortly. I don't have the patience right now to do it (just took the pain meds).
 
bear22099 said:
There is a section in there about arguing with the police on the side of the road. Surprised no one here recalls it being there. When 172 came out, they also brought out a section in regards to "discussing it" on the side of the road with the police. I am sure someone will post it shortly. I don't have the patience right now to do it (just took the pain meds).
Click to expand...

The section, that you're referring to, is specific to HTA 172. There are a couple of other places, where similar charges are mentioned. Nowhere does it state that you can be charged, in that manner, for arguing against a muffler ticket.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
The section, that you're referring to, is specific to HTA 172. There are a couple of other places, where similar charges are mentioned. Nowhere does it state that you can be charged, in that manner, for arguing against a muffler ticket.
Click to expand...

And that would be the malicious part in trying to prove malace in a lawsuit.
 
so on a 2 stroke repacking your canister will result the amount of smoke? (giggle) I have 3 spare rz motors that smoke bad.....i now know what to do!


Rob MacLennan said:
There's a reason why 2-strokes haven't been sold in Canada, for decades, but that doesn't mean normal operation of the vehicle should result in a ticket. The new crop of officers simply have no experience with them. Hell, many of them weren't born when the last legal 2-strokes hit the road.

Quick question: When was the last time that you had your canister repacked?
Click to expand...
 
This is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard. Id be super ****** off if i got this ticket. The fact that you actually got the ticket, the fact that her partner backed her up AND the fact that the sargeant doesnt see anything wrong with it... come on. 2 strokes are still legal, and they smoke, simple as that. Next thing you know theyre gonna be handing these tickets out to gardening crews running chainsaws, lawnmowers and weedwackers....
 
Sorry to hear about this. I hope you set them straight. Maybe consider taking video and comparing it to other video of similar bikes and show it to the crown before trial. Hopefully you will get one with a semi functional brain.... and they will drop charges before going to court.
 
Yes. Its 75.3.

I'm for sure going to fight it. I can a certified mechanic to certify that the bike is in proper operating condition and that's the nature of a 2 stroke.

I just find it painful that I need to do this as she can't do her job. As mentioned above she was probably born around the time of the last road legal twostroke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom