Only 3 points for running the red?

Do you think that running the red light should be penalized more harshly?

Yes, to 7 Demerit points
1
17%
Yes, to 6 Demerit points
4
67%
Yes, to 5 Demerit points
0
No votes
Yes, to 4 Demerit points
0
No votes
No, the current penalty is fair.
1
17%
 
Total votes: 6

User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined:
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

Only 3 points for running the red?

Unread post by racer on

This has been irking me for the longest time. In most European countries you loose your car, or license, or both, when you run the red light. I consider running the red light to be the most dangerous offense possible. I have also been in a car accident last September, when the car in which I was travelling (passenger) T-boned a vehicle that ran the red from my side. I was lucky it was not him that T-boned us, so all I had was a shock and purple outline of the seatbelt on my chest for a week, same as the driver I was with. The offender was not so lucky, he got sprayed by the glass. What are your thoughts?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

25% of fatal accidents in Toronto, and about 18% province-wide, happen because someone runs a red light. 0.12% in Ontario are due to street racing. 7% province-wide are due to "excessive speed."

I think that running a red light should be six demerit points, a $1000 fine and a seven-day licence suspension for the first offence. Second offence, $2500 fine, and a 30-day licence suspension. Third offence, $5000 fine and a 1-year licence suspension. Or something like that.


User avatar
Proper1
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined:
Location: Caledonia, Ontario

Unread post by Proper1 on

I'll vote for upping it to six, because this really is dangerous behaviour. Way worse than, say, "speeding" at 130k with the flow of traffic on a 400-series highway (though I don't know, offhand, how many points that's worth).

I vote with trepidation, though, because I wouldn't trust the current folks at Queen's Park to get it right if they were to take a shot at changing the law. If they could just raise the penalty AND LEAVE EVERYTHING ELSE ALONE, fine: but I doubt they would be able to leave it at that. Recent evidence suggests that if they did rewrite the law they'd also invent a way to subvert our charge-trial-conviction/acquittal-penalty sequence for this offense by cutting around those two awkward bits in the middle. And maybe throw in forfiture of the vehicle (also without trial or conviction, of course) for good measure.

It's unfortunate that this lot is simply not to be trusted -- otherwise I'd vote for the higher penalty UPON CONVICTION without hesitation.


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined:
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

Unread post by racer on

Proper1 wrote: "speeding" at 130k with the flow of traffic on a 400-series highway (though I don't know, offhand, how many points that's worth).
30 over = 4 points
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Proper1 wrote:I'll vote for upping it to six, because this really is dangerous behaviour. Way worse than, say, "speeding" at 130k with the flow of traffic on a 400-series highway
Q. What happened?
A. Not sure, I was just going with the flow of traffic
Q. Why?
A. Well they all did it, it was the right thing to do!

Image
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Proper1
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined:
Location: Caledonia, Ontario

Unread post by Proper1 on

hwybear wrote: A. Well they all did it, it was the right thing to do!
You got me. I should have added "in fine weather conditions, with no tailgating," or something to that effect.






Post Reply

Return to “Failing to obey a stop sign, traffic control stop/slow sign, traffic light or railway crossing signal”