Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Discuss the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.


Post Your Traffic Ticket, and Get Help!


The Ontario Traffic Ticket Forum!


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Check It Out
No unread posts New Set Fines Starting Sept 1st, 2015! Read and Learn Here.
  Print view

Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:34 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:38 pm
Posts: 632
Location: Stratford, Ontario
Reflections wrote:
Quote:
Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,


Lack of consideration for others.......hhhhmmmmmmm
:evil:


Naw... Reflections nailed it! The word "or" breaks this sentence into 3 separate possibilities for conviction. If "and" had been used instead, THEN the "endangerment" portion would be required for all of it.

"Marked Departure" of speed is in the definition of "Race" or "Contest", not "Stunt".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:45 am 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 5:59 pm
Posts: 486
Location: Toronto
Bookm wrote:
Naw... Reflections nailed it! The word "or" breaks this sentence into 3 separate possibilities for conviction. If "and" had been used instead, THEN the "endangerment" portion would be required for all of it.

"Marked Departure" of speed is in the definition of "Race" or "Contest", not "Stunt".


Actually the word "by" is what's at play here:
Quote:
Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle [A]without due care and attention, [B]without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or [C]in a manner that may endanger any person by,
The
"or" means any of the above, so a stunt under section 8 is causing either A or B or C. But the word "by" defines A, B, and C. In other words you are causing A, B, or C "by" doing any of the following which is listed in subsections i to iv.

_________________
Fight Your Ticket!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:08 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:38 pm
Posts: 632
Location: Stratford, Ontario
I ain't no English professor (hehe), but I believe the "By" being on the left of the comma restricts subsections i to iv to "[C]" only. If the "By" had been on the right of the comma, [A],[B] AND [C] would have been associated to subsections i to iv.

I think it could be argued that the officer's conduct would fall under [B]. Sure it would be a stretch, but purposely blocking the "passing" lane is, by far, my biggest pet peave with Canadian driving philosophy.

OK, I could be convinced that he didin't actually "stunt", but he was EASILY subject to prosecution under:
147. (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of the roadway. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 147 (1).

Exception

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a driver of a,

(a) vehicle while overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction;

(b) vehicle while preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway; or

(c) road service vehicle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 147 (2).


If the cruiser is considered a "road service vehicle", then there is no offence and he was simply being a pompous, arrogant, power-trippin' a$$.


WAIT!!!... I put myself in the cops shoes in an attempt to understand his actions:
- Fantino has publicly stated that his officers are expected to obey every speed limit and set an example for this new era of "slower is safer".
- I can imagine how upsetting it must be for an officer to see other drivers exercising THEIR opinion of what an appropriate speed is, and joyously pulling away from him, while he's stuck at that dang "Fantino-limit" even though he knows it's too slow (I've never seen an OPP cruiser driving the speed limit until Fantino's era).
- So the OPP take advantage of Fantion's new solution and lash out at the vast majority of this provinces population who clearly refuse to accept 100 as a reasonable speed on the 401.
- Basic human reaction.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Posts: 2933
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!
Bookm wrote:
I put myself in the cops shoes in an attempt to understand his actions:
- Fantino has publicly stated that his officers are expected to obey every speed limit and set an example for this new era of "slower is safer".


Put it this way, I will always be within 15km/hr of the posted limit unless a fellow officer needs assistance and that is it. 90% of my moving speed enforcement is parallel mode (same direction) waiting for drivers to "catch me" and then "LOCK" the speed. So many drivers are oblivious to rear antenna, do the ole slow down once they identify the cruiser and then still pass the marked car above the speed limit :shock: This way I don't have to drive unnecessarily fast. So then either issue a speeding or disobey sign offence.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 6:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Posts: 2881
Location: Toronto
hwybear wrote:
So many drivers are oblivious to rear antenna, do the ole slow down once they identify the cruiser and then still pass the marked car above the speed limit


Drivers not looking far enough ahead... or paying attention? Out of curiosity... how many times have you been driving along in a marked cruiser and had a driver rocket up behind you and blow past you without changing speed at all? How about on a two-lane highway? :shock:

Bookm wrote:
purposely blocking the "passing" lane is, by far, my biggest pet peave with Canadian driving philosophy.


You're not alone. Considering all of the amazing driving I see daily, I'm wondering if it would be possible to take a gorilla, train it, and see if it can pass an Ontario driver license exam (in a simulator, of course).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:50 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 5:59 pm
Posts: 486
Location: Toronto
Bookm wrote:
I ain't no English professor (hehe), but I believe the "By" being on the left of the comma restricts subsections i to iv to "[C]" only. If the "By" had been on the right of the comma, [A],[B] AND [C] would have been associated to subsections i to iv.
That's one heck of a comma! If you are right, then basically the definition of a stunt is anyone driving [B] without consideration to other drivers. That basically takes out every driver in TO. Hey, maybe that was Fantino's plan all along: revenge for TO firing his a$$!

_________________
Fight Your Ticket!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:50 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Posts: 2933
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!
Radar Identified wrote:
Out of curiosity... how many times have you been driving along in a marked cruiser and had a driver rocket up behind you and blow past you without changing speed at all? How about on a two-lane highway? :shock:


About once a month in the winter.....daily in the summer (when I become an "evil knievel")

2 lane hwy rarely in a marked car...maybe once a year. Evil Knievel style daily in the summer!!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:34 am 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:38 pm
Posts: 632
Location: Stratford, Ontario
ticketcombat wrote:
That's one heck of a comma! If you are right, then basically the definition of a stunt is anyone driving [B] without consideration to other drivers. That basically takes out every driver in TO. Hey, maybe that was Fantino's plan all along: revenge for TO firing his a$$!


It really just illustrates how difficult it is for the average citizen to know EXACTLY what the laws are these days. So many compensate by driving well below the speed limit. I see it all the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:10 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
Posts: 1490
Location: somewhere in traffic
It still remains that the officer was holding up the "normal" flow of traffic. Numeric speed limits are not at issue here. Flow is flow. Any person, and I mean any, should be looking in their rearview mirror and see if there is a line up of cars behind them. If there is, move the hell over. I do believe that the more vehicles in close proximity, i.e. vehicles moving side by side or close to it, hold more chance of collision then those "following the leader" in a nice "train". In my little automation gig, I remove bottlenecks, I wish I could do the same on the roads.

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:18 pm 
Offline
VIP
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:27 pm
Posts: 959
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Bookm wrote:
Exception:
...
c. road service vehicle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 147 (2).[/i]

If the cruiser is considered a "road service vehicle", then there is no offence and he was simply being a pompous, arrogant, power-trippin' a$$.


Road service vehicles must be readily identified as such by their license plates, which say "Road Service Vehicle". Therefore there was an offense. Also, as OHTA 133 tells us,
OHTA 133 wrote:
“road service vehicle” means a vehicle operated by or on behalf of a municipality or other authority having jurisdiction and control of a highway while the vehicle is being used for highway maintenance purposes; (“véhicule de la voirie”)

_________________
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:36 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Posts: 2933
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!
racer wrote:
Road service vehicles must be readily identified as such by their license plates, which say "Road Service Vehicle".


You have to be making that line up

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:13 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Posts: 2881
Location: Toronto
hwybear wrote:
(when I become an "evil knievel")


You're a motorcycle cop too? Oh great, now I have to re-plan my "ticket avoidance" strategy when travelling to Windsor. :lol:

Quote:
Road service vehicles must be readily identified as such by their license plates, which say "Road Service Vehicle".


Thought it was by some sort of decal... if at all...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:25 pm 
Offline
VIP
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:27 pm
Posts: 959
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Any and all Road Service Vehicles I have encountered in my life:
A. Never had an Ontario license plate
B. Had "Road Service Vehicle" plate instead.
C. Never seen one with a decal saying anything about it being a RSV. Usually the only decal(s) they had were the company name decals or municipality decals...

These do not have to follow a whole slew of OHTA laws (kinda scary actually), and can use dyed diesel fuel (it's half the price of diesel, but dirtier)...

_________________
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:11 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 8:14 pm
Posts: 109
Location: Caledonia, Ontario
Bookm wrote:
I ain't no English professor (hehe), but I believe the "By" being on the left of the comma restricts subsections i to iv to "[C]" only. If the "By" had been on the right of the comma, [A],[B] AND [C] would have been associated to subsections i to iv.

I think it could be argued that the officer's conduct would fall under [B].


Well, I am a former university English department faculty member, and I wish I hadn't been away a few days ago when this discussion took place. I would have agreed with Bookm (and with the other posters who think that this law may be sloppily written).

You could argue that there should be a comma before the words "or in a manner that may...," but in any case the intended meaning of the sentence is clear. No, check that: the actual meaning of the sentence is clear -- God knows what was intended. The sentence says that there are three separate ways to offend under 8, which are A, or B, or C. The absence of punctuation after the "endanger any person" means that what follows is part of C, and not of A or of B. The comma after "by" serves no grammatical purpose. It merely indicates that the poor drudge who wrote this thing felt that he or she needed to take a breath before diving into the subsequent phrases.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:54 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
Posts: 1490
Location: somewhere in traffic
Every single law needs a few commas being the long winded babbling gobbly goop that goes on and on trying to include every single possibility with one or two simple phrases because the government has GOD-like powers and childlike responsibility so that they can read them only as they wish


Damn my comma button is broken I hope that doesn't sound like I am rambling like the written law

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. 2 tickets - fail to obey signs; insurance card.

28WCC

2

675

Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:41 pm

28WCC View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. OPP cruiser Struck on 401

hwybear

6

1394

Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:51 pm

Reflections View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. OPP cruiser rear-ended, minor injuries sustained by 2 LEOs.

racer

3

1138

Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:42 pm

racer View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Failing to Obey signs

PhantomDeep

0

1168

Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:36 am

PhantomDeep View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. My son got a failure to obey signs

cottager

3

1124

Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:34 am

GwennVassie View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. fail to obey sign

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2 ]

farisimo

15

1463

Fri May 09, 2014 3:51 pm

farisimo View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fail to Obey Lane Sign

bechung

4

1439

Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:16 pm

Radar Identified View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fail to obey stop sign

jonnybravo14

8

1739

Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:53 pm

Radar Identified View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fail to Obey Lane Sign

corpfan1

5

1022

Fri May 31, 2013 4:19 am

corpfan1 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fail to Obey sign ticket

RAZOR99

0

738

Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:24 am

RAZOR99 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. FAIL TO OBEY STOP SIGN

ticketholder

1

826

Wed Feb 05, 2014 2:39 pm

bend View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fail to Obey Stop sign: first ticket, help?

garyluk

6

4038

Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:34 pm

iFly55 View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Web Development & Search Engine Optimization
Home | Court Listings | Ontario Traffic Ticket

Copyright 2007 - 2017 © Microtekblue Inc. Web Development & Search Engine Optimization Service. We Support phpBB All Rights Reserved.