Petition to change HTA 136 (1)(A)Failure to Stop at Stop Sign Hello, it does not seem right that not coming to a complete stop, that your wheels do not stop turning or rolling stop carries the same penalty as not stopping at all at a stop sign . I think it's time this laws challenged and quashed. I wondered how to go both that? Can we start a website that we can sign a petition to have this law changed. We all need to get together on this, there are people there with the skill to build a website, and lawyers I'm sure that would gladly assist. Let's make this happen
Petition to change HTA 136 (1)(A)Failure to Stop at Stop Sign
Hello, it does not seem right that not coming to a complete stop, that your wheels do not stop turning or rolling stop carries the same penalty as not stopping at all at a stop sign . I think it's time this laws challenged and quashed. I wondered how to go both that? Can we start a website that we can sign a petition to have this law changed. We all need to get together on this, there are people there with the skill to build a website, and lawyers I'm sure that would gladly assist. Let's make this happen
Well if people are interested, we can simply create a Petitions forum on this site, and then you can simply add whatever hta releated petition you want there.
Well if people are interested, we can simply create a Petitions forum on this site, and then you can simply add whatever hta releated petition you want there.
it is the identical thing...wheels keep on moving (whether 1km/hr or 30km/hr) = the vehicle did not come to a complete stop
edfun wrote:
Petition to change HTA 136 (1)(A)Failure to Stop at Stop Sign
Hello, it does not seem right that not coming to a complete stop, that your wheels do not stop turning or rolling stop carries the same penalty as not stopping at all at a stop sign .
it is the identical thing...wheels keep on moving (whether 1km/hr or 30km/hr) = the vehicle did not come to a complete stop
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
If you don't think you deserve the full fine you can try and plead guilty with an explanation and see if the Justice of the Peace agrees. I personally disagree. If they felt it was safe for you to simply slow down they would have put up a yield sign. Stop means stop and you either did or you didn't.
If you don't think you deserve the full fine you can try and plead guilty with an explanation and see if the Justice of the Peace agrees.
I personally disagree. If they felt it was safe for you to simply slow down they would have put up a yield sign. Stop means stop and you either did or you didn't.
[it is the identical thing...wheels keep on moving (whether 1km/hr or 30km/hr) = the vehicle did not come to a complete stop] The problem here is the wheels can stop turning for half a second and you're not breaking the law, but that does not mean the body of the vehicle stops moving. The body of vehicle is mounted on springs and shocks that even the wind can move around. The officer has to be able to see the tire has stopped turning. So what are they looking at, the body of the vehicle, the bumpers ,the top of the tires, speed of the vehicle. My complaint with this offense is that it is not defined enough, I find in monitoring stopping vehicles myself that full concentration and visibility is required, and that this law is broken by the police themselves. I suggest other people interested in this petition monitor a stop sign near their local police station and see for themselves. As for my case I did stop.
[it is the identical thing...wheels keep on moving (whether 1km/hr or 30km/hr) = the vehicle did not come to a complete stop]
The problem here is the wheels can stop turning for half a second and you're not breaking the law, but that does not mean the body of the vehicle stops moving. The body of vehicle is mounted on springs and shocks that even the wind can move around. The officer has to be able to see the tire has stopped turning. So what are they looking at, the body of the vehicle, the bumpers ,the top of the tires, speed of the vehicle. My complaint with this offense is that it is not defined enough, I find in monitoring stopping vehicles myself that full concentration and visibility is required, and that this law is broken by the police themselves. I suggest other people interested in this petition monitor a stop sign near their local police station and see for themselves. As for my case I did stop.
Unless you happen to be skidding with the tires locked (not likely unless it's sheer ice or you hammered the brakes), if the tire stops turning, the vehicle's forward motion will cease. As for the wind continuing to move the vehicle, you'd need the force of wind from a hurricane, microburst or tornado to do that. I agree rolling stops are pretty common. I'd rather see the offence differentiated into failure to stop, vs. failure to stop where another vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist, etc., was affected by the movement - although you could argue that is already taken care of by the charge of careless driving.
Unless you happen to be skidding with the tires locked (not likely unless it's sheer ice or you hammered the brakes), if the tire stops turning, the vehicle's forward motion will cease. As for the wind continuing to move the vehicle, you'd need the force of wind from a hurricane, microburst or tornado to do that.
I agree rolling stops are pretty common. I'd rather see the offence differentiated into failure to stop, vs. failure to stop where another vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist, etc., was affected by the movement - although you could argue that is already taken care of by the charge of careless driving.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
Instead of petetioning to have the wording of the offence changed or create a new HTA offence, you should petition your municipality to replace unnecessary stop signs with yields. It seems to be somewhat of an epidemic in North America to put 4-way stops at almost all intersections regardless of traffic volumes and rates of collisions. IMHO, a stop sign should only be used when a priority and non-priority road intersects. The heavily travelled road need not have stops when it is crossed by a minor road. This is the trend in Europe. (Why is it that we seem so backwards & non-progressive?!?) Slightly off topic, but this is also done with traffic lights that are installed at an intersection that only needs to be controlled in the morning and afternoon during rush hours. No, instead we sit idle for 2 minutes waiting for a green (day or night) when not a vehicle is in sight..... save for that LEO burning the midnight oil just waiting for you to burn that red :shock:
Instead of petetioning to have the wording of the offence changed or create a new HTA offence, you should petition your municipality to replace unnecessary stop signs with yields. It seems to be somewhat of an epidemic in North America to put 4-way stops at almost all intersections regardless of traffic volumes and rates of collisions. IMHO, a stop sign should only be used when a priority and non-priority road intersects. The heavily travelled road need not have stops when it is crossed by a minor road. This is the trend in Europe. (Why is it that we seem so backwards & non-progressive?!?)
Slightly off topic, but this is also done with traffic lights that are installed at an intersection that only needs to be controlled in the morning and afternoon during rush hours. No, instead we sit idle for 2 minutes waiting for a green (day or night) when not a vehicle is in sight..... save for that LEO burning the midnight oil just waiting for you to burn that red
I was driving on Eglinton W and turn right on Strathearn (near Eglinton/Allen Road). There was a no right turn (from 3pm to 7pm) sign which I didn't see.
The cop was waiting there, apparently nobody sees the signs but they are there.
I don't believe I have much to do here but, trying to find…
I know this technically doesn't fit on this board (3 demerit points) as it seems that 15km/h over just means a 50 dollar fine, I would like some advise though, I'm not sure how I should proceed.
The incident happened in Feb, driving south on highway 400 near Barrie. I was in the fast lane, doing…
Quick question about debris (broken taillights ect) from an accident and responsibility.
If someone hit something that broke off (not cargo), but 30 minutes after the original accident and other cars managed to avoid everything. The debris was avoidable who is responsible for damage to that car.
Need some advice on reaching a plea deal with the prosecutor and how to go about talking to the crown. I'm not here to be lectured ect. I'm aware I made a mistake, and need advice on fixing it. So kindly keep comments about my impulsive decision to yourself.
First post..... My fiancee this week was in an accident and she was handed a 3 demerit point 154 (1) (a) charge for 115 dollars or something and 3 demerit points.
Demerit points do not matter to insurance companies, convictions do ... is there a chance that she could go to court and the…
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster…
Got stopped for what I thought was going to be speeding, officer apparently had other ideas which needless to say surprised the heck out of me since Im positive I was not going over 150.
Ive done a LOT of reading already on here, Ticket Combat and some specific cases on Canlii (need to look up even…
I just received my first stop sign ticket in Markham. Has anyone successfully defended a stop sign ticket? If so, what strategies did you use? The officer that pulled me over said I slowed down but didn't stop. I felt that I stopped momentarily. I have no previous moving violations or…