I got this via email today:

http://fightyourtickets.ca/halton-polic ... -as-taxis/

Have you heard of this? This is the first I've heard of it.

old news...that was about April 2009. It was a test type of thing for a few weeks and apparently has been shelved.

hwybear wrote:

old news...that was about April 2009. It was a test type of thing for a few weeks and apparently has been shelved.

yup. A few complaints from Oakville residents and things get moving......hmmm?

people that would complain are the ones that get caught....b/c "I would not have done that IF I seen a marked police car"

hwybear wrote:

people that would complain are the ones that get caught....b/c "I would not have done that IF I seen a marked police car"

Well, yeah.........

The theory was good, execution was lacking.......

hwybear wrote:

people that would complain are the ones that get caught....b/c "I would not have done that IF I seen a marked police car"

You've got point their. Put come on, the cops already have undercover cars, do they really need these Taxi Cab look-alike? The game would be unfair, how can i possibly enjoy the sports car if every Ford Crown Vic i see is cop, life would be unbearable.

nexxen90 wrote:

hwybear wrote:

people that would complain are the ones that get caught....b/c "I would not have done that IF I seen a marked police car"

You've got point their. Put come on, the cops already have undercover cars, do they really need these Taxi Cab look-alike? The game would be unfair, how can i possibly enjoy the sports car if every Ford Crown Vic i see is cop, life would be unbearable.

This is already my assumption.......

Unmarked vehicle = no problem, at least from my point of view. What bothered me about the taxi/police car was that it looked like a cab, so some motorists may think that it's some cabbie who installed the lights just to get around traffic faster and wouldn't pull over or stop.

Odot has an unmarked Chevy Tahoe in the Chatham area that is used for traffic enforcement. I don't think there's any problem with that. In fact, the Tahoe is shown in these photographs here:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1406.html

As I drive through that area on the 401 every 2-3 months, I've come up with a solution: Look at the photograph, and memorize the licence plate.

Although... friend of mine with the Ottawa Police says that when he drove unmarked vehicles, he used to get REALLY ticked off when a motorist would offer: "Gee, if I'd known you were a cop, I wouldn't have cut you off/ran the stop sign and almost hit you/gave you the finger." His response: "You mean, it's okay to do it to a civilian? Hold on, I'll be right back." And then he'd ticket them for multiple offences.

Radar Identified wrote:

As I drive through that area on the 401 every 2-3 months, I've come up with a solution: Look at the photograph, and memorize the licence plate. .

Wondering if you are that close.... is it too late

hwybear wrote:

Wondering if you are that close.... is it too late

We'll find out on Friday.

I think having as much police presence on the road as we can afford is a good thing. However, marking a cruiser to look like a cab is underhanded and done only to generate revenue for the region it's in.

A positive outcome of police presence on the road is the deterence of bad drivers from making bad mistakes that could hurt someone and I don't see how having a cruiser marked as a taxi cab prevents that except for after the violation when the risk was already taken.

The fact that drivers behave themselves when a cruiser is sharing the road means that having that cruiser on the road potentially saves lives and injuries by drivers who would've otherwise drove in ways that pose a risk to others on the road. The benefit of known police presence on the road is preventing accidents before they happen. Going incognito does not prevent the risk - it's done to catch the driver then charge and primarily to generate revenue.

It is not like having a bait car in a Go Train parking lot, nor is it remotely similar to undercover agents who need to infiltrate a crime ring in order to stop the behavior.

We need the visibility of our police on the roads to keep us safe, not them under cover in a cab-cruiser waiting to risk all of us to catch some creep driving recklessly and risking us all.

Marquisse wrote:

I think having as much police presence on the road as we can afford is a good thing. However, marking a cruiser to look like a cab is underhanded and done only to generate revenue for the region it's in. .

For general patrol vehicles, I completely agree.

For traffic enforcement I disagree. I would like to see a majority of units doing traffic enforcement unmarked, variety of colours and makes/models.

Why you might ask? Well a lot of people just turn into "Angels" when they see a marked car and do not do offence.

Here are a few noteables that have happened while in an unmarked:

- littering, in fact the napkin landed and stuck in my windshield wiper

- beer bottles being tossed

- vehicle passes me on the shoulder, in a single lane construction zone, presenting the universal hand gesture

- hear engine rev and driver blows by me, to blow a light

- 2 lane hwy at speed limit, mv following too close, passes then slams on brakes in front

- passing me and drinking a beer

etc...

These type of things I listed are always being complained about but rarely happen in a marked unit. Why? people know the police are there and just don't do the offence......soon as they think they are in a police free zone....away they go with no concern for anybody except themselves......think I'm off base? then answer why in an unmarked do I see drivers doing things like I mentioned and not in a marked unit

Oh wait...I get in my own personal car and see still see drivers doing drastic bonehead moves.

Revenue - laugh every time I hear that one!!

It is one thing that every driver can AVOID by following the rules of the road!

Hwy, I do not doubt for a second that you see these things more when you are in unmarked cars, and I know you see knuckle-headed drivers pull their dangerous stunts when you are in your own car. I drive 109km a day just to get to work and back, not including other driving I need to do, and I see morons everywhere, all the time. I need a 6th sense mock-off bumper sticker that says "I see bad drivers".

I wish I was a traffic cop just to bust them. My favorite is the speed demon who is pissed off that I am doing the limit of 100km on the QEW in the slow lane, speeds ahead of me, just to break and risk a collision to "teach me a lesson".

You differentiate between routine patrol and traffic enforcement. I'm not an officer, obviously, so I assume you mean routine patrol versus blitzes and going out onto the roads specifically to catch people in the act. Because I am not familiar with the differences in outcome, I can't comment on why it is or isn't different, but can only say that from my perspective, I think the value is in prevention, not apprehension. In preventing with police presence, no lives are at risk. With the unmarked enforcement, it's giving the bad drivers enough rope to hang themselves, but in the process of doing that, they may perform a dangerous stunt hanging others on the road with them. Perhaps what the unmarked enforcement does is catch them off guard, and remind others that out of sight shouldn't mean out of mind.

And, laugh as you will, but revenue from HTA offenses is a HUGE deal to municipalities. HUGE, and they pass off their mandates to the police force.

Marquisse wrote:

You differentiate between routine patrol and traffic enforcement. I'm not an officer, obviously, so I assume you mean routine patrol versus blitzes and going out onto the roads specifically to catch people in the act.

By routine, I mean patrolling town, cities neighbourhoods. By traffic enforcement, I mean officers dedicated solely to traffic duties.