Cops Solution to Stunt Racing being Unconstitutional

[darkdrgn2k]

As most of you heard by now the first step towrds the new Stunting law has been taken

(Street-Racing Law Ruled Unconstitutional but OPP Will Continue To Lay Charges (http://www.imintrouble.ca/blog/index.php/2009/09/10/street-racing-law-ruled-unconstitutional))

But we are not in the clear yet. The law is the law and we will STILL see copy laying charges.

Sgt. Dave Woodford told CTV Toronto the legislation is still being enforced because the law has been effective in reducing the number of fatalities on Ontario highways by about 30 per cent in the last two years since it was enacted.


But to cover their own butts you will also see a SECOND charges when you get pulled over..

One -> for Stunting
One -> for speeding (section 128)

So even IF the stunting one falls because of the new case-law (which will STILL be apealed) you will be left with speeding :)

So dont get to excited with that gas pedal just yet!

And Remember

By law, speeding is considered an absolute liability. A driver can't argue they didn't know they were speeding and hope to get acquitted.

However, the driver could very well be "morally blameless," meaning the motorist thought she was going at the speed limit even though she was not, Morton said.

[shawn99]

Yes kids don't speed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95lD91VtSlo

[mkerian]

From some of the members on this forum it sounds like as soon as this law is amended they're going to go out and speed over 50 right away...

[Kellster]

From some of the members on this forum it sounds like as soon as this law is amended they're going to go out and speed over 50 right away...

Maybe but no, not right away.

[masterballer]

From some of the members on this forum it sounds like as soon as this law is amended they're going to go out and speed over 50 right away...

:lol: :twisted:

[Nikita]

As most of you heard by now the first step towrds the new Stunting law has been taken

(Street-Racing Law Ruled Unconstitutional but OPP Will Continue To Lay Charges (http://www.imintrouble.ca/blog/index.php/2009/09/10/street-racing-law-ruled-unconstitutional))

But we are not in the clear yet. The law is the law and we will STILL see copy laying charges.




But to cover their own butts you will also see a SECOND charges when you get pulled over..

One -> for Stunting
One -> for speeding (section 128)

So even IF the stunting one falls because of the new case-law (which will STILL be apealed) you will be left with speeding :)

So dont get to excited with that gas pedal just yet!

And Remember

Ooh, I see a lot of problems with that! The police may think they can get around this ruling that way, but I can see some courts considering this an abuse of process. Guess we'll have to wait and see when this starts happening, but that's my feeling.

[tokajim]

Ooh, I see a lot of problems with that! The police may think they can get around this ruling that way, but I can see some courts considering this an abuse of process. Guess we'll have to wait and see when this starts happening, but that's my feeling.

How do you figure that? Even if the stunting law was completely repealed and didn't exist, it's still ILLEGAL to be driving 150 on a 100 road. It's still dangerous driving. The OP makes it sound like it's perfectly fine to be driving 150 and endangering other people's lives as long as the stunting law didn't exist.

They're not 'getting around' the ruling in any way. They're just covering themselves in case the easier to litigate stunting law gets repealed. What should happen is that they should never lay the stunting charge and just lay speeding/dangerous driving charges to begin with. In which case your car would still be towed and license automatically suspended.

[d-burn]

How do you figure that? Even if the stunting law was completely repealed and didn't exist, it's still ILLEGAL to be driving 150 on a 100 road. It's still dangerous driving. The OP makes it sound like it's perfectly fine to be driving 150 and endangering other people's lives as long as the stunting law didn't exist.

They're not 'getting around' the ruling in any way. They're just covering themselves in case the easier to litigate stunting law gets repealed. What should happen is that they should never lay the stunting charge and just lay speeding/dangerous driving charges to begin with. In which case your car would still be towed and license automatically suspended.

Someone driving 105km/h and exercising poor lane discipline is endangering lives more than someone driving 140km/h down the left lane. This is was causes collisions, not speed. I HATE how all of you talk about driving 150km/h like it is the most life threatening thing in the world. How is it that in Germany many sections of their highways have No Limit, and there isn't any more traffic fatalities? Drive over there for a few days and you will quickly learn why. People there actually know how to drive! Stay to the right except to pass. Seems pretty simple to me.

[Kellster]

Someone driving 105km/h and exercising poor lane discipline is endangering lives more than someone driving 140km/h down the left lane. This is was causes collisions, not speed. I HATE how all of you talk about driving 150km/h like it is the most life threatening thing in the world. How is it that in Germany many sections of their highways have No Limit, and there isn't any more traffic fatalities? Drive over there for a few days and you will quickly learn why. People there actually know how to drive! Stay to the right except to pass. Seems pretty simple to me.

"Speeding" is a cheaper, easier, and far more profitable "offence" to go after. It's all about the revenue generated....and the cop's ticket quota of course (gotta win that toaster!).

[tyfriend]

Sgt. Dave Woodford told CTV Toronto the legislation is still being enforced because the law has been effective in reducing the number of fatalities on Ontario highways by about 30 per cent in the last two years since it was enacted.

Dave,

I want to see hard evidence of this please.

Stats are always manipulated so the truth is so skewed you can't truly believe everything they say.

[mkerian]

"Speeding" is a cheaper, easier, and far more profitable "offence" to go after. It's all about the revenue generated....and the cop's ticket quota of course (gotta win that toaster!).

Gotta win that toaster? Seriously man, your only posts are anti-cop this and anti-cop that. Not very original..

[tyfriend]

From some of the members on this forum it sounds like as soon as this law is amended they're going to go out and speed over 50 right away...

RFD 50 over cruise?

No civics and corollas allowed?! :D

[new_vr]

RFD 50 over cruise?

No civics and corollas allowed?! :D

Won't be anybody there then!

[masterballer]

RFD 50 over cruise?

No civics and corollas allowed?! :D

Even if it has a big wing and 100+ HP worth of stickers?

[corrupt123]

Dave,

I want to see hard evidence of this please.

Stats are always manipulated so the truth is so skewed you can't truly believe everything they say.

+1

I bet there has been virtually no change

[tyfriend]

Won't be anybody there then!

Har har.

RFD is frugal but not cheap.

Even if it has a big wing and 100+ HP worth of stickers?

Only if it has hip-hop rims too.

[masterballer]

Har har.

RFD is frugal but not cheap.



Only if it has hip-hop rims too.

hell yeah...plastic spinners FTW

[mazdubb]

Wow. So the stunting charge is now being laid for what it's truly been designed for. The upfront penalty and theft of property. Then it would be tossed in court in favor of the section 128 charge since it's the lesser offense.

Section 172, your days are numbered.

[new_vr]

Dave,

I want to see hard evidence of this please.

Stats are always manipulated so the truth is so skewed you can't truly believe everything they say.

I don't think it would be possible to show it was this law that changed the stats, and not other things, like the slowdown in the economy (people driving less to save money, or because they don't have to go to work) or the price of gasoline causing people to drive slower to conserve, or not drive at all.

[tyfriend]

I don't think it would be possible to show it was this law that changed the stats, and not other things, like the slowdown in the economy (people driving less to save money, or because they don't have to go to work) or the price of gasoline causing people to drive slower to conserve, or not drive at all.

Exactly. You can't say for certain that the law caused this result. You will need a environment where you can control the variables. Who's to say that the reduction wasn't caused by more people wearing seatbelts or cars being safer or people driving less like you said.

[Kellster]

Gotta win that toaster? Seriously man, your only posts are anti-cop this and anti-cop that. Not very original..

I'm not going for Mr. Popularity.....just Mr. Realistic.

[Piro21]

How is this a consistent application of the law? If you got hit with this before I assume it was just the street racing charge, but now it's street racing and speeding? Why the different punishments for the same crime?

[ThePointblank]

How is this a consistent application of the law? If you got hit with this before I assume it was just the street racing charge, but now it's street racing and speeding? Why the different punishments for the same crime?

They are using the mud throwing technique; throw as many charges as they can, see which one sticks.

[Piro21]

Yeah, but there's some sort of limit as to redundancy of charges, no? You don't charge a guy who shoots someone with a murder charge and then littering because he didn't pick up his shells, so where's the limit on these traffic charges, and how does it work in regard to convictions?

[jetway1212]

Exactly. You can't say for certain that the law caused this result. You will need a environment where you can control the variables. Who's to say that the reduction wasn't caused by more people wearing seatbelts or cars being safer or people driving less like you said.

And you expect Sgt Dave to even remotely understand this? Seriously have you looked at those cops exam? My buddy is a cop and his exam is A JOKE. Once i saw his exam preparation papers, cops are below avg intelligence in my eyes now.

(For gods sake other than stupid laws, cops dont have any general knowledge of math or science)

[actng]

this reminds me of the game police quest.
anyone else ever played that game?

when i arrested some guy and i hauled him back to the station, you have to punch in the codes that the perp committed.

i used to punch in every single code in the book, even ones that don't apply and let the computer tell me they didn't apply. then for the duplicate offenses, i punched those in anyway and let the game handle it. i got points for entering the codes!!

i was in grade 6 i think. turns out i qualified for police traffic work at grade 6.

[Trowa]

Cops cannot charge you with both street racing and speeding at the same time. The two laws conflict with each other. You can only be charged with one or another.

[l69norm]

....(For gods sake other than stupid laws, cops dont have any general knowledge of math or science)

Don't a lot of younger cops have university degrees now ?(i.e. criminology)

Cops cannot charge you with both street racing and speeding at the same time. The two laws conflict with each other. You can only be charged with one or another.

Happened already. Guy got charged with both. Judge dismisses the lower offence (128) but convicts on the higher one (172)

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj248/2009oncj248.html
A. The Charges

1 xxxxx was before the Court on April 2, 2009 charged with two offences:

Speeding 158 kilometres in a 100 kilometre per hour zone, contrary to Section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act; and
Stunt driving, contrary to Section 172(1) of the Highway Traffic Act.

2 The agent for the defendant pleaded guilty to the charge of speeding 58 kilometres an hour over the speed limit, but not guilty to the charge of stunt driving.

B. Issues

5 Is the court obligated to accept the defendant’s guilty plea to the charge of speeding contrary to Section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act and register a conviction?

6 If the court accepts a guilty plea to the charge of speeding contrary to Section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act, is the court obligated to stay the charge of stunt driving according to the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Kienapple v. the Queen?

7 If the court accepts a guilty plea to the charge of speeding contrary to Section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act, can the court, having heard and considered the evidence with respect to the charge of stunt driving contrary to Section 172 (1) of the Highway Traffic Act, find the defendant guilty of stunt driving?

8 What is the appropriate disposition should the defendant be found guilty of both charges?

[actng]

Cops cannot charge you with both street racing and speeding at the same time. The two laws conflict with each other. You can only be charged with one or another.

Cops should not be able to charge you with both street racing and speeding at the same time. But they certainly can.

The two laws do NOT conflict. They overlap.

I think you had the right idea but wrong choice of words.

[apn64]

Someone driving 105km/h and exercising poor lane discipline is endangering lives more than someone driving 140km/h down the left lane. This is was causes collisions, not speed. I HATE how all of you talk about driving 150km/h like it is the most life threatening thing in the world. How is it that in Germany many sections of their highways have No Limit, and there isn't any more traffic fatalities? Drive over there for a few days and you will quickly learn why. People there actually know how to drive! Stay to the right except to pass. Seems pretty simple to me.

+10

Today's cars are built for it, the roads can handle it, but in many cases, the driver can not. The data from Europe proves that higher speeds do not have to translate into higher RTA's and fatalities.

IMHO, it's about teaching people to drive properly and those same people exercising good judgement. 150 on a deserted highway in good weather is a lot different than 80 on a residential street.

I hold both UK and ON licences and spent some time in the UK a few months ago. It was refreshing to see the discipline of people only passing on one side and (mostly) checking the mirror AND signalling before doing so. Despite the 70mph speed limit, most people on UK "motorways" are doing 85mph = 137kph, if you're not, then you'd better stay in the inside aka "slow" lane.

The UK police leave everyone alone at 85mph, but get excited if you go over it. At a "ton" (100mph = 161kph) you might briefly lose your licence, but they wouldn't tow your car.

IMHO, there are two problems here; firstly, beginners licences are given to kids (vs. 17yrs in UK). When I lived in AB, 14yr olds could get a beginners permit (which I guess was a holdover from the old days of working on the farm). These kids borrowed their parents cars, showed off to their friends, and through inexperience destroyed the same cars. I heard plenty of stories of 16yr olds borrowing a car for their high-school graduation, having a beer or two and sleeping it off in the ER or morgue.

The other problem I see is quality of the training and licencing requirements. I can tell you that it was a lot harder to get a UK licence than an ON or AB one. Adding a much more inclement (winter) climate here is IMHO, a recipe for disaster.

Finally, I have to agree that as far as policing is concerned it's all about the revenue. After I moved to AB, I recall that ON introduced and then abandoned photo radar.

IMO, ON is still better off than AB in this regard; AB still loves "multanova", Calgary recently introduced "Speed on Green" and a couple of years ago, the province introduced a Sheriff patrol to increase revenues on the two main traffic corridors of HWY#1 (Trans-Canada) and #2 (Calgary to Edmonton).

Multanova was massively deployed in Calgary using a fleet of unmarked minivans and pickup trucks. After a while you learned to be suspicious of ANY vehicle deploying a tinted rear window and parked in the shoulder lane. These vehicles generate millions in revenue with no identification of or demerits to the driver; the vehicle owner simply receives a demand to pay.

Calgary also loves red-light cameras. The last I heard was that most of the major intersections in the city were covered, and recently the cameras started generating more revenue via the "Speed on Green" initiative: when the traffic light is green, these cameras generate speeding tickets.

Pardon the pun, but the sheriff's have proven wildly successful in raising revenues with their long-weekend blitzes. I recall reading that they dispatched THOUSANDS of speeding tickets this last labor-day weekend.

With such revenue-generating scams/programs in place, I guess the provinces have no incentive to improve the quality of driver training and licensing :o

[stealth]

Someone driving 105km/h and exercising poor lane discipline is endangering lives more than someone driving 140km/h down the left lane. This is was causes collisions, not speed. I HATE how all of you talk about driving 150km/h like it is the most life threatening thing in the world. How is it that in Germany many sections of their highways have No Limit, and there isn't any more traffic fatalities? Drive over there for a few days and you will quickly learn why. People there actually know how to drive! Stay to the right except to pass. Seems pretty simple to me.

As long as our speed limits are what they are, you cant really compare what goes on the autobahn to here. Doing 150 in a 100 zone, where noone is expecting cars to be doing 150 IS extremely dangerous.
Example: Someone's cruising along at 100, decides to make a lane change, takes a look around, puts on a signal, starts the change, then bam! some joker doing 150 is right behind them, seemingly appearing from nowhere. Theres no time to react because we arent in the frame of mind of expecting other cars around us to be driving so fast. On the autobahn people have that mindset, and also speeders are very disciplined at staying in the appropriate lanes.
Here, most of the excessive speeders I see are also weaving around cars in various lanes pretty recklessly, whether or not you want to admit it.

Also, bottom line, their roads are in much better condition and design than our crappy narrow, bumpy pot-holed excuses for highways.

[Nikita]

How do you figure that? Even if the stunting law was completely repealed and didn't exist, it's still ILLEGAL to be driving 150 on a 100 road. It's still dangerous driving. The OP makes it sound like it's perfectly fine to be driving 150 and endangering other people's lives as long as the stunting law didn't exist.

They're not 'getting around' the ruling in any way. They're just covering themselves in case the easier to litigate stunting law gets repealed. What should happen is that they should never lay the stunting charge and just lay speeding/dangerous driving charges to begin with. In which case your car would still be towed and license automatically suspended.

It's what the law calls doing through the back door that which you are not permitted to do through the front door...and it's considered highly unethical. Most judges won't allow it, nor should they.

Wow. So the stunting charge is now being laid for what it's truly been designed for. The upfront penalty and theft of property. Then it would be tossed in court in favor of the section 128 charge since it's the lesser offense.

Section 172, your days are numbered.

I thnk you missed the entire conversation in the numerous threads on this topic where it's been said a few times that this ruling does not stirke down the entire law, only one part of it and further, that even that very narrow ruling is out of a court that is not binding precedent. In fact, the 'upfront penalty and theft of property' (remains unchanged). So don't get too excited, this will change very little right now. But IMO it's a good start.

Cops cannot charge you with both street racing and speeding at the same time. The two laws conflict with each other. You can only be charged with one or another.

Unless you were actually racing and speeding. I believe in that circumstance there's no conflict as they are two separate offenses so both could be laid. The only problem I see is the definition of 'racing' in s.172. It needs to be tweaked to require that racing actually means racing in the general sense of the word, which requires racing with another car or cars.

[mazdubb]

I thnk you missed the entire conversation in the numerous threads on this topic where it's been said a few times that this ruling does not stirke down the entire law, only one part of it and further, that even that very narrow ruling is out of a court that is not binding precedent. In fact, the 'upfront penalty and theft of property' (remains unchanged). So don't get too excited, this will change very little right now. But IMO it's a good start.

I realize that the ruling only applies to a very narrow portion of the law. I was commenting on the statements that police are charging people under both sections 128 and 172. Presumably to apply the upfront penalties that 172 still enjoys while falling back on the tried and true 128 penalties in court if 172 fails completely.

From reading the transcripts it seems to me that the upfront penalties may be tougher to get rid of than I previously thought. It'll take somebody (or a group) with deep pockets. Possibly a class action lawsuit.

[actng]

As long as our speed limits are what they are, you cant really compare what goes on the autobahn to here. Doing 150 in a 100 zone, where noone is expecting cars to be doing 150 IS extremely dangerous.
Example: Someone's cruising along at 100, decides to make a lane change, takes a look around, puts on a signal, starts the change, then bam! some joker doing 150 is right behind them, seemingly appearing from nowhere. Theres no time to react because we arent in the frame of mind of expecting other cars around us to be driving so fast. On the autobahn people have that mindset, and also speeders are very disciplined at staying in the appropriate lanes.
Here, most of the excessive speeders I see are also weaving around cars in various lanes pretty recklessly, whether or not you want to admit it.

Also, bottom line, their roads are in much better condition and design than our crappy narrow, bumpy pot-holed excuses for highways.

you sighted a really good example but arrived at the wrong conclusion.

the problem isn't with the "joker" doing 150. there are perfectly many valid reasons for why a vehicle is traveling at 150. just ask members of emergency services.

the problem is with driver training. the real joker is the one doing 100 and pulling out into a passing lane for no good reason and doing so in an unsafe manner (not accelerating to match traffic flow). worst yet, he has no idea (cuz he didn't look) there is a 150 vehicle coming up from behind.

just cuz the speed limit is x, doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking out for people doing x + 50 or x + 100.

[d-burn]

you sighted a really good example but arrived at the wrong conclusion.

the problem isn't with the "joker" doing 150. there are perfectly many valid reasons for why a vehicle is traveling at 150. just ask members of emergency services.

the problem is with driver training. the real joker is the one doing 100 and pulling out into a passing lane for no good reason and doing so in an unsafe manner (not accelerating to match traffic flow). worst yet, he has no idea (cuz he didn't look) there is a 150 vehicle coming up from behind.

just cuz the speed limit is x, doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking out for people doing x + 50 or x + 100.

Thanks for the support.
I think my argument was misunderstood by the other poster. The reason european countries, and specifically Germany, can have much higher speed limits, and in turn cars travelling much quicker (with no more accidents) is because drivers there are more skilled and exercise proper lane discipline.
You say that "speeders" are always weaving in and out of traffic. The whole reason for that is because people are cruising along in the leftmost lane at 105 or 110 km/h, while they can clearly travel at that speed in a lane more to the right unimpeded. They are the ones disrupting the regular flow of traffic (about 120-130km/h in most cases) and thus causing traffic problems, and in turn, congestion and accidents. There will obviously be more chance of any accident when a driver has to change his speed and move around a vehicle on the right, then if he were able to continue on at a constant rate of speed in the same lane.
Also, just because a speed limit is increased, does not mean that people are automatically going to drive faster. People will drive at a speed they feel comfortable driving. For many, like most of the people on this forum, it appears to be 120-130km/h. So, most people would still travel at that speed, but NOT have to worry about getting a ticket. Up the speed limits, and enforce lane discipline. It will make the highways a safer place. It will only take a few people getting nailed for poor lane discipline for the rest to get the message and start paying more attention to their surroundings.

[internetsandbox]

Thanks for the support.
I think my argument was misunderstood by the other poster. The reason european countries, and specifically Germany, can have much higher speed limits, and in turn cars travelling much quicker (with no more accidents) is because drivers there are more skilled and exercise proper lane discipline.
You say that "speeders" are always weaving in and out of traffic. The whole reason for that is because people are cruising along in the leftmost lane at 105 or 110 km/h, while they can clearly travel at that speed in a lane more to the right unimpeded. They are the ones disrupting the regular flow of traffic (about 120-130km/h in most cases) and thus causing traffic problems, and in turn, congestion and accidents. There will obviously be more chance of any accident when a driver has to change his speed and move around a vehicle on the right, then if he were able to continue on at a constant rate of speed in the same lane.
Also, just because a speed limit is increased, does not mean that people are automatically going to drive faster. People will drive at a speed they feel comfortable driving. For many, like most of the people on this forum, it appears to be 120-130km/h. So, most people would still travel at that speed, but NOT have to worry about getting a ticket. Up the speed limits, and enforce lane discipline. It will make the highways a safer place. It will only take a few people getting nailed for poor lane discipline for the rest to get the message and start paying more attention to their surroundings.

Yes. I notice from experience that toll roads seem to have both of those qualities. Most of the time on the 407 if you are in the left most lane passing, it's completely clear ahead in every lane so you move back to the middle or right lane and can still be going 120, 130, 140. I've seen this all the time in NY on the interstates. As soon as they pass they're back in the right lane. Mind you, they have a sign every 15ft saying keep right except to pass.