Nitrous and its implications

Moderators: Reflections, admin, hwybear, Radar Identified, Decatur, bend

r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Nitrous and its implications

Unread post by r1user on

OK so I have a showbike, that may or may not have a nitrous tank strapped on it. The tank is disconnected, and it is empty. Is this grounds for tickets? if so what kind and is it more than a ticket like impoundment? There seems to be a lot of confusion around this topic. I have a government issued paper I got with my insurance renewal stating "banning driving on public roads with a CONNECTED nitrous oxide system" the word connected seems ambiguous. I am wondering what the HTA says about this, and what powers officers have around this subject. I have also heard other things off and on from people that make no sense at all like if it is not concealed it is not illegal. Is there anyone who can shed some light so I know what I am permitted to do.

Thanks alot guys.


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined:
Location: Planet X

Unread post by lawmen on

In my view, this is an absolute liability offence. Courts have determined offences employing the “no person shall” or “every driver shall” formulation are interpreted as absolute liability offences.

R. v. Hickey (1976), 13 O.R. (2d) 228. (speeding) R. v. Kurtzman (1991), 66 C.C.C. (3d) 161 at 172 (Ont. C.A.)-(failing to stop at a red light) and London (City) v. Polewsky (2005), 202 C.C.C. (3d) 257 (Ont. C.A. )-(speeding).

Strict liability offence at times employ the "no person shall" term, too, but strict liability offences provide a defence of due diligence while absolute liability offences impose punishment despite any defence of the accused. Therefore, as s. 172.1(3) articulates the words "is guilty," it confirms this is an absolute liability.

This offence contains a possible term of imprisonment, thus, the provision is unconstitutional as it violates s. 7 of the Charter and cannot be justified under s. 1, therefore it's unenforcable and of no force and effect pursuant to s. 52(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.

B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486

"A law that has the potential to convict a person who has not really done anything wrong offends the principles of fundamental justice and, if imprisonment is available as a penalty, such a law then violates a person's right to liberty under s. 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1985/1 ... 2-486.html

A judge could strike down the term of imprisonment and the remaining provision becomes valid and enforceable.

R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc., [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154

http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1991/1 ... 3-154.html


The fine is from $500 to $2,000. A vehicle impoundment does not apply at any time, but the imposition of imprisonment is grossly disproportionate to the offence committed, thus an accused has a compelling claim under s. 12 of the Charter.

In any event, from what you describe regarding your bike; you're totally legal. The provisons that apply to you are 172.1(2)(a)(b) and (c). You do not have to meet each and every section and subsection in 172.1.

Bear in mind "some" cops lie. If he charged you despite it being disconnected, it would be your word against his in court.


A motorcycle is defined as a motor vehicle under the HTA.

“motor vehicle” includes an automobile, motorcycle, …


Nitrous oxide fuel systems prohibited

172.1 (1) No person shall drive or permit to be driven on a highway a motor vehicle manufactured or modified after its manufacture such that nitrous oxide may be delivered into the fuel mixture unless,

(a) the part of the fuel system that may connect to a canister, bottle, tank or pressure vessel capable of containing nitrous oxide can be clearly seen by looking at the interior or exterior of the motor vehicle;

(b) there is no canister, bottle, tank or pressure vessel connected to that part; and

(c) if the part of the fuel system that may connect to a canister, bottle, tank or pressure vessel capable of containing nitrous oxide is located inside the passenger compartment, there is no canister, bottle, tank or pressure vessel capable of containing nitrous oxide in the passenger compartment. 2007, c. 13, s. 22.

Same

(2) No person shall drive or permit to be driven on a highway a motor vehicle manufactured or modified after its manufacture such that nitrous oxide may be delivered into the fuel mixture unless,

(a) the part of the fuel system that may connect to a canister, bottle, tank or pressure vessel capable of containing nitrous oxide is completely disconnected from the part of the system that connects to the engine;

(b) the disconnection can be clearly seen by looking at the interior or exterior of the motor vehicle; and

(c) the disconnected parts cannot be reconnected from inside the passenger compartment. 2007, c. 13, s. 22.

Offence

(3) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $500 and not more than $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both. 2007, c. 13, s. 22.
Last edited by lawmen on Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:56 am, edited 7 times in total.
Without Justice there's JUST US


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

Well, thank you so much. Now what I am going to do is locate the provision you gave me on E laws print it, highlight it and carry it with me.
I had an offduty officer tell a mechanic when he saw my bike in a dealer parking lot, that if he was on duty I would not have left the parking lot with the bike. I was in a shop getting a part so I didn’t hear him say this, but the mechanic approached me later and told me what he said. I told the mechanic to tell him that he should know what I was doing was not illegal and he had no grounds to do anything. Which I’ll admit took balls considering I had only a vague idea of what I was talking about. I guess that’s why he didn’t call any on duty.


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

just thought I would add in, that if a cop was to pull me over I would be on the phone fast to anyone that could witness that it is disconnected. further more I would probably have my mechanic come in and second it. and I would be using my camera phone fast to take a picture of the tank with the cruiser in view. either way though. It is in plain view and disconnected so it should be no issue.


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined:
Location: Planet X

Unread post by lawmen on

Even when cops are off duty they can still make arrests, but they must witness the crime. You committed no offence. But given his comments, you can see the bad attitude some of them have.
Without Justice there's JUST US


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

Believe me I know all about attitudes, in my family we have a 500 some odd HP vette, a stang gt and a caddy with tinted windows as well. the amount of times my father and I have been pulled over is quite baffling. The sad part is after all of it my record is still 100% perfect, no tickets for anything, on my bike and car. it gets extremely aggravating being grouped in the young male category.... makes you wonder some days why we even have a equality rights section 15 in the charter for, but then again I guess the insurance industry is even worse. ahah


PetitionGuy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 24
Joined:
Location: Trana

Unread post by PetitionGuy on

that NOS stipulation in 172 is pretty straight-forward.....and I'm quite surprised that a cop would misinterpret it

for the system to be legal on the street, it can't be operational

but it is not illegal to simply have the system installed, as it's legal to run it at the track...not to mention on a show vehicle

so...to make the system unoperational, you simply disconnect the bottle....done, you're legal.....hit the track, connect it, disconnect it before you leave

as long as that bottle is not connected (whether the bottle is empty or full) you are legal

it would suck to get zinged for having an empty bottle connected...but you could


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

yea, that is pretty well what I do. I just find it amazing there are so many people that have no concept in what they are talking about. Im glad I came here, it got to the point where I would pull in anywhere and get an onslaught of "oh man you can get your bike crushed for that", or fined, or arrested, or etc, etc. the shop I initially took it to said there is nothing wrong with what I was doing. they build alot of bikes with nitrous, just one of those things I guess. I must say though, when I heard what the one officer said to the mechanic I was pretty taken back, so it bugged me long enough that I had to ask.


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

Personally, I think the whole idea of making nitrous illegal is a joke. I think a few stuffy legislators watched the Fast & the Furious one too many times.

Nitrous is just the poor-mans way of pulling more horsepower out of an engine. The same results can be gained by supercharging, turbo-charging, or by making major upgrades to the engine components such as cams, heads, etc. All these mods are much more expensive though. So this law really only affects the lower income earners. Heck, a guy could go buy a Bugatti Veyron (for 1.4 million) and immediately have 1000hp in his hands. Why aren't we outlawing these cars?


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

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Dangerous Goods Transportation Act.

Prohibits the transport of Nitrous Oxide, unless the driver has a DGTA certificate to transport the nitrous. Further the vehicle must display the DGTA placards (dangerous goods square symbols located on transports) on all 4 sides of the vehicle (front, back, both sides).

Only legal way to transport under the DGTA is when hooked into the fuel system, where obviously the HTA has that covered.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

Bookm wrote:Personally, I think the whole idea of making nitrous illegal is a joke. I think a few stuffy legislators watched the Fast & the Furious one too many times.

Nitrous is just the poor-mans way of pulling more horsepower out of an engine. The same results can be gained by supercharging, turbo-charging, or by making major upgrades to the engine components such as cams, heads, etc. All these mods are much more expensive though. So this law really only affects the lower income earners. Heck, a guy could go buy a Bugatti Veyron (for 1.4 million) and immediately have 1000hp in his hands. Why aren't we outlawing these cars?

you are dead on with everything you said. it is a compressed gas. so is propane, which is also in trucks, hell everything in cars goes kaboom if combusted or ignited.. i remember the first time i saw the article with the car on fire how hard i laughed. has anyone averaged the amount of NOS explosions compared to that of leaky gas lines, and other issues..... ive seen alot of car fires in my life and usually they arent from nitrous. somthing is strange here! they know there is no chance in hell of outlawing superchargers or turbos since so many vehicals use them so i guess if you want to look progressive to citizens you have to outlaw somthing.


PetitionGuy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 24
Joined:
Location: Trana

Unread post by PetitionGuy on

Bookm wrote:Personally, I think the whole idea of making nitrous illegal is a joke. I think a few stuffy legislators watched the Fast & the Furious one too many times.

Nitrous is just the poor-mans way of pulling more horsepower out of an engine. The same results can be gained by supercharging, turbo-charging, or by making major upgrades to the engine components such as cams, heads, etc. All these mods are much more expensive though. So this law really only affects the lower income earners. Heck, a guy could go buy a Bugatti Veyron (for 1.4 million) and immediately have 1000hp in his hands. Why aren't we outlawing these cars?
fine....tell the poor man to take it to the track then

but here's the reality....

some kid buys an old 92 Civic for $1500 cause he's broke like most kids....car's got 350,000 kms with a totally worn out susp/drivetrain installs at 200 shot because he's an idiot and it only cost him $500....goes out on to the street.....flicks the switch....buddy now has 200 more HP come on immediately...he snaps a shaft on his POS worn-out fwd 80-hp go-kart and goes hurling outta control into a post....all for $2000...this is the kinda thing the law is designed to stop IMO

and further reality is if that kid took that car to the track, they wouldn't let him run it cause it's a death trap set up like that....they have rules at the track....and a properly set up NOS system on a properly set up machine is far from cheap

it's a shame that a show bike is getting hassled....I hang with a show car crowd and I see many NOS systems but none of these guys use them on the street...it's all about the custom painted bottles, and the SS plumbing, polished aluminum hardware etc


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

PetitionGuy wrote:....this is the kinda thing the law is designed to stop IMO...
Then I have to assume ALL charges laid under this section have conformed to this exact scenario you describe. Then I guess it's a good law.
PetitionGuy wrote:....none of these guys use them on the street...it's all about the custom painted bottles, and the SS plumbing, polished aluminum hardware etc
You don't know how bad I'd like to hook these guys up to a lie detector test and ask if they've EVER hit that button on a public street, hehehe.


PetitionGuy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 24
Joined:
Location: Trana

Unread post by PetitionGuy on

Bookm wrote: You don't know how bad I'd like to hook these guys up to a lie detector test and ask if they've EVER hit that button on a public street, hehehe.
true

to be honest.....before 172 made an operational NOS system illegal....I didn't know it wasn't

I thought for sure that it was already illegal

pretty sure if MTO pulled you over leaving the track with it hooked up (before 172) that there was hell to pay

and don't forget that a 50-100hp shot on a newer V8 muscle car will up the hp by 15-30%......compare that to some idiot running a 200 shot on a 16 year old worn out civic that multiplies the HP two and a half times over

unfortunately though.....the specifics on the HP shot and car are irrelevant to the law


r1user
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by r1user on

nitrous on a well set up machine is really expensive. on a bike it is the same if not more then a turbo. Anyways sorry to light the fuse on this situation I guess again it comes down to one bad apple. Just a shame the millions spent to save one or two wasn't spent on health care to save hundreds. I guess whatever makes headlines.






Post Reply

Return to “General Talk”