Your right to trial is being removed. We must speak now or just pay the penalty | GTAMotorcycle.com

Your right to trial is being removed. We must speak now or just pay the penalty

Q

Quashed

New member
http://www.moepa.ca/?hc_location=ufi

Hello, this I my first post. It is about our rights to fundamental justice.

HOW DID WE GO FROM
1982
INNCOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
TO
2015
PRESUMED GUILTY

The Ontario Government has implemented an Administrative Monetary Penalty
(AMP) under Bill 15, and there are proposed amendments to the Highway Traffic Act Bill 31

The police will have the option to issue you an AMP under this system, or issue ticket. If you are issued with an AMP, you will not have the option of having trial. I urge you to read the information in the above link and contact you MPP and City/Town Council Representative to let them know you are insisting that your day in court be preserved. If you are issued with an AMP, the officer does not have show up, because he or she is now Judge and Jury at the roadside. Why contact your Councillor? Because funds collected through AMPS go right into the City Coffers. I could go on forever, but won't. BUT, I urge you all to check in to this, and speak up to preserve your fundamental right to Justice.
 
I tell people about this all the time, and I have come to the conclusion that the general public just doesn't care. I've also talked to the MP and MPP about Bill C-51 and they support it, which makes my brain ache.
 
Thank you! however, the petitions need an original signature, you can always print it and mail it in, you can send it to me, and I can make sure your signature gets attached to the petitions that are being submitted. And we should all call our local representatives.
 
It is because of the lovely spin put on it. It looks wonderful when you read the bill, it is the implications and ramifications that we are not told about that make it wrong. These AMPS things came in through bill 15 which was called "Fighting Fraud an Reducing Automobile Insurance Rates Act, 2014
"an act to amend various statues in the interest of reducing insurance fraud, enhancing tow and storage service and providing for other matters regarding vehicles and highways." We went to a no fault system for the very same reasons in 1989, and they just cannot get it right! But I believe the no fault was an NDP thing.
 
Welcome!
Wheelie.gif
 
This is the part to worry about:

Order imposing administrative penalties
(2) If a prescribed authorized person is satisfied that a person is contravening or not complying with or has contravened or failed to comply with a prescribed provision of this Act or of the regulations, the prescribed authorized person may, by order, impose an administrative penalty on the person in accordance with this section and the regulations.
 
There's another thread that discussed this: http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/vbforum/showthread.php?188666

Unfortunately, although the moepa site has good intentions; it's sending people in the wrong direction.

The attorney general's website has very specific instructions on how to voice your concerns, the e-mail address and the questions they want you to answer.

Signing the petition at moepa.ca, and sending it to your MPP is not the way to go here.

If you're truly passionate and concerned about this, you should follow the steps outlined in the AG's website.

At the moment it's in consultation phase, we need to nip this in the bud: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/poa_consultation.asp

Deadline for submissions has been extended to April 28, 2015.
 
iFly55 said:
There's another thread that discussed this: http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/vbforum/showthread.php?188666

Unfortunately, although the moepa site has good intentions; it's sending people in the wrong direction.

The attorney general's website has very specific instructions on how to voice your concerns, the e-mail address and the questions they want you to answer.

Signing the petition at moepa.ca, and sending it to your MPP is not the way to go here.

If you're truly passionate and concerned about this, you should follow the steps outlined in the AG's website.

At the moment it's in consultation phase, we need to nip this in the bud: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/poa_consultation.asp

Deadline for submissions has been extended to April 28, 2015.
Click to expand...

working my candid submission now.

DownDeep99ca said:
Petition signed and share on my facebook page!
Click to expand...

bro do you even read?
 
Just read both threads. Wow. So part of our justice system is being seriously altered for the convenience of the police/government and I only stumble over it on a motorcycle sub-forum? Borderline secret one-month "consultation" period with the public? Now that's cynical.

Democracy and the pursuit of justice is supposed to be messy. If we can't see the ingredients being put into the soup, there's no way to know why it tastes bad. Or makes you sick. Given the billions every level of government fritters away on dubious initiatives, I doubt cost really factors into it.

Bike Cop's quote is straight out of 1984. You could interpret that kind of language in any way in the absence of a court hearing. That's not law--it's government overreach. Not surprising considering how foolish the electorate was in re-electing the Liberals in the face of fraud investigations.

As for the idea of fighting automobile fraud, has anyone noticed the increase of those Quebec-plated cars? I've heard they're the latest out of Brampton.
 
People are busy. Work hard to pay the bills, raise the kids etc. When it comes to the legalities they only have time for the Cole's Notes. The politicians are looking after their best interests aren't they?
 
nobbie48 said:
People are busy. Work hard to pay the bills, raise the kids etc. When it comes to the legalities they only have time for the Cole's Notes. The politicians are looking after their best interests aren't they?
Click to expand...

LOL

Wait, you were joking, right?
 
This seems like a rather big issue, that I don't think many know about. Might be worth putting a sticky about it in the general thread, at least until the comment period closes.
 
Golluk said:
This seems like a rather big issue, that I don't think many know about. Might be worth putting a sticky about it in the general thread, at least until the comment period closes.
Click to expand...

It was finally discussed on "The Live Drive", on CFRB, this afternoon. That's at least two weeks after I emailed their news department IIRC.
 
I don't understand why they would even try this? There is NO WAY this will survive any kind of charter challenge...no way...so why waste our tax money implementing it and then getting sued and having to go back to the old system?
 
nm1 said:
I don't understand why they would even try this? There is NO WAY this will survive any kind of charter challenge...no way...so why waste our tax money implementing it and then getting sued and having to go back to the old system?
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing about HTA 172, for "stunt driving." It's also only an "administrative penalty."
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I thought the same thing about HTA 172, for "stunt driving." It's also only an "administrative penalty."
Click to expand...

Oh, but it doesn't get abused at all, amirite?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom