4 Tickets, $440, And NEED ADVICE

Ok, So I drive a custom air ride suspension vehicle, Im Very low, My windows are tinted, My licence plate is in my back window (mounted to the bed) other than that, my truck is 100% stock (Well, Custom intiror too but that has nothing to do with this)

I get pulled over the other day, and the officer says to me,

"Son your muffler is offuly loud." He then gave me a ticket for that (Granted, My muffler is non existant, But he did not check, he just said it was too loud)

"Your window tint is too dark" Again another ticket.

"Your turn signals are not amber, they are white" Again. Ticket.

"And your licence plate is not mounted properly" And the final blow.

Now Im pritty sure on some of the laws here, but I want to check to make sure.

Window tint. Because the law is vauge, and law is all about interpretation, I interpret the law to say the window film cannot obstruct the drivers view of the road. Meaning if I can see properly and safely out my windows, Its leagle.

Turn signal color- your vehicle may only posess the following color bulbs, White, amber, and red. Red may only be on the three brake lights (Two on older modles) head lights may only be white, and turn signals can be either or....

License plates. Have to be PROMINENTLY displayed on the front and rear of the vehicle. Since he has a problem with my rear plate, my arguement is a lighted plate, That is reflective white, and in the middle of a large black square (my rear window) Is prominent no?

And finally my muffler, Altho he is most likely right, is there not a DB level that a muffler may not exceed, Meaning unless he metered my exhaust level, He has no legal grounds...

Am I way off in left field, Or Am I pritty well right here?

I have never had a ticket stick in court before, because Ive allways come prepared, But I just found this site, and recent disgust with the local athoritys have caused me to further my efforts to fight the racisem I endure on a daily basis.

Might want to throw your post in a spell checker, prior to posting next time.

We have discussed these items before...

Muffler:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic728.html

Licence Plate:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic884.html

Window Tint:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic745.html

and....just found your turn signal colours for you.

Canadian Motor Vehicle Standards

Technical Standards 108

Turn Signal Lamps - At or near the front - 1 amber on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable.

On the rear - 1 red or amber on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable

hwybear wrote:

and....just found your turn signal colours for you.

Canadian Motor Vehicle Standards

Technical Standards 108

Turn Signal Lamps - At or near the front - 1 amber on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable.

On the rear - 1 red or amber on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable

I see lots of newer looking cars that have white rear turn signal lights.

How do they pass the D.O.T.

Mostly I just avoid these cars as best as I can.

Cheers

Viper1

viper1 wrote:

I see lots of newer looking cars that have white rear turn signal lights.

How do they pass the D.O.T.

Mostly I just avoid these cars as best as I can.

Cheers

Viper1

Clear lens with a amber bulb?

BelSlySTi wrote:

viper1 wrote:

I see lots of newer looking cars that have white rear turn signal lights.

How do they pass the D.O.T.

Mostly I just avoid these cars as best as I can.

Cheers

Viper1

Clear lens with a amber bulb?

no! clear lens with clear bulb.

I will note a few tomorrow to say what kinds of cars.

Cheers

Viper1

Interesting with the lights.

We had a discussion about HID's before.

All i think was said was headlights must emit white light.

I guess it depends on the officer but some of those people with weird color lights (purple, pure yellow, green, etc) are very annoying and distracting.

Or those that use HID's in a reflector system!

tdrive2 wrote:

Interesting with the lights.

We had a discussion about HID's before.

All i think was said was headlights must emit white light.

I guess it depends on the officer but some of those people with weird color lights (purple, pure yellow, green, etc) are very annoying and distracting.

Or those that use HID's in a reflector system!

I only am talking about rear lights.

Cheers

Viper1

And my ticket was for my head lights, And my turn signals there in...

I drive an 07 ford ranger, The head lights and the turn signals are in the same housing... I was ticketed for the turnsignals on the front of the vehicle not being amber...

My thing is, they are 100000000000X more visiable than any amber bulb at ANY time of day or night regardless of weather conditions.....

Ps. To the admins, Sorry about the (**** cop) thing in the title, Im just getting a little fed up with all the issues with harassment Im having... Im a normal human who goes to work 7 days a week 14 hours a day, and the one thing in this world that means anything to me is my truck...and every time I start her up, im a criminal...

Correction, My ticket was for the turn signals in the same housing as the head lights.... Not for the headlamp at all... I have stock bulbs.....

And since it seams we have an officer on here... I want to list the "did commit the offence of" portion of the ticket, As well as the HTA section and act...

Color coating obscuring interior - HTA 73(3)

improper muffler - HTA 75 (1)

Improperly display plate - HTA 7 (1)(??b??) *cant make out if its a b or something else?*

improper signal device - HTA 142( 8 )

I found a few out of places sections when I read the HTA subsections mentioned... Maybe Im nuts but are they the proper subsections to have quoted for the offence comitted??

Plates - they are required to be attached on the front and rear of the vehicle, not just be visible from the front and rear. Thus, you can only attach your rear plates to your rear bumper or tailgate.

Bulbs - as Bear has pointed out, front turn signals may only be amber. Trying to be as visible as possible is missing the point. The reflectors are not meant for white bulbs, and put out a lot of glare at night. I see it all the time with people who have replaced an amber turn signal bulb with clear bulbs.

Tint - the point of tinting laws as they apply to front passenger windows is to allow an officer to see inside your vehicle.

Viper - are you talking about the newer Hyundais? Those are the only ones I have noticed that are borderline. Others are either owner-modified or they have replaced with the wrong bulb, as other vehicles of the same model have proper signals.

The officer COULD have educated you about all these issues by explaining the laws then issuing a warning to correct the deficiencies. Unfortunately, this modern era of policing seems to associate performance with number of tickets written.

I, too, liked to display my personal sense of "cool" by modifying my vehicles, when I was younger. Jacked-up in the back with big fat tires was the norm back then. The cars didn't handle worth a *EDIT*, but who cared, it looked cool! Of the 20+ tickets I've had, never did I get an "equipment" ticket. I don't think I had a working license plate light until my 4th car, LOL. And the exhaust was always loud and raunchy. These things just weren't a priority to police back then. Seems things have changed A LOT!

I think the police strategy has become: write multiple tickets so that the crown will negotiate down to just one or two. This influences defendants to avoid going to trial by thinking they've plead to a good offer from the crown.

Bookm wrote:

Unfortunately, this modern era of policing seems to associate performance with number of tickets written.

I have never been told to write any more or less tickets. Nor have I seen anyone with a handful of tickets for a month get bothered either.

I think the police strategy has become: write multiple tickets so that the crown will negotiate down to just one or two. This influences defendants to avoid going to trial by thinking they've plead to a good offer from the crown.

From the other side....issuing multiple warnings and only one ticket....only to have more and more people fight the one ticket, sorry for being nice. Obtain enough trial notices after giving multiple breaks and finally realize why bother give a break, people will fight the one ticket, might as well fight them all.

(ie MV for speed 132km, chg with no insurance card, warn speed....fights insurance card ......MV speed of 136km, chg: fail to surrender permit, warn speed...fights permit chg ......these people appear nice, friendly, apologetic, so use of discretion in what offence to issue)

Oh I DO understand WHY it's done. Just saying that never used to happen in the olden times . I think it's difficult for both sides to adapt to the modern environment.

Just imagine the respect drivers would have for police in general if they were issued fix-it tickets instead of real tickets. I've received two fix-it tickets in the last 10 years (both local police). I tend to pick on the OPP here, because I have NEVER been issued a warning or a fix-it ticket by the OPP. You really need a chief who better understands sociology and driver psychology. Mutual respect and friendly interaction CAN be achieved, but not with the zero-tolerance attitude that J.F. demands.

This is really why I could never be a cop. I know I am expected to "produce" by my superior officers. But I am also way too accepting of drivers breaking the law on technicalities. I wouldn't care if a guy rolled a stop sign (if affecting no one), and I wouldn't care if a driver sped (even significantly) while passing another motorist. I would listen intently to every excuse offered, and would grudgingly accept the explanation EVERY TIME, LOL.

I'd be fired in no time!

Squishy wrote:

Plates - they are required to be attached on the front and rear of the vehicle, not just be visible from the front and rear. Thus, you can only attach your rear plates to your rear bumper or tailgate.

Bulbs - as Bear has pointed out, front turn signals may only be amber. Trying to be as visible as possible is missing the point. The reflectors are not meant for white bulbs, and put out a lot of glare at night. I see it all the time with people who have replaced an amber turn signal bulb with clear bulbs.

Tint - the point of tinting laws as they apply to front passenger windows is to allow an officer to see inside your vehicle.

Viper - are you talking about the newer Hyundais? Those are the only ones I have noticed that are borderline. Others are either owner-modified or they have replaced with the wrong bulb, as other vehicles of the same model have proper signals.

Yes

Cheers

Viper1

hwybear wrote:

Bookm wrote:

Unfortunately, this modern era of policing seems to associate performance with number of tickets written.

I have never been told to write any more or less tickets. Nor have I seen anyone with a handful of tickets for a month get bothered either.

I think the police strategy has become: write multiple tickets so that the crown will negotiate down to just one or two. This influences defendants to avoid going to trial by thinking they've plead to a good offer from the crown.

From the other side....issuing multiple warnings and only one ticket....only to have more and more people fight the one ticket, sorry for being nice. Obtain enough trial notices after giving multiple breaks and finally realize why bother give a break, people will fight the one ticket, might as well fight them all.

(ie MV for speed 132km, chg with no insurance card, warn speed....fights insurance card ......MV speed of 136km, chg: fail to surrender permit, warn speed...fights permit chg ......these people appear nice, friendly, apologetic, so use of discretion in what offence to issue)

Your are doing great.

Keep it up.

Cheers

Viper1

PrincessKyle wrote:

I found a few out of places sections when I read the HTA subsections mentioned... Maybe Im nuts but are they the proper subsections to have quoted for the offence comitted??

Short answer: Yes, BUT...

If the officer mis-matched the offence and the section or subsection, (looks like only one of them was missed), it can be amended at trial, but the counterpoint you could use is that if that is the case, it is an "insufficient" or "incorrect" charge. You would have to plead with the JP that the sections that were identified on the ticket led you to prepare a defence specifically to them, and not anything else, and the mistakes on the ticket misled you. As such, you were not rightfully given the ability to prepare a full and proper defence, so ask for it to be dismissed. Will it work? Maybe. This largely depends on the JP. I'd be willing to bet that many of them would just amend the charge and carry on. You could then, however, ask for an adjournment to prepare the defence to the correct section.

HTA 142 (8 ) is for failing to signal a stop. 142 (8 )(b) is for brake lights.

The rest appear to be issued under the correct sections of the HTA.

hwybear wrote:

(ie MV for speed 132km, chg with no insurance card, warn speed....fights insurance card ......MV speed of 136km, chg: fail to surrender permit, warn speed...fights permit chg ......these people appear nice, friendly, apologetic, so use of discretion in what offence to issue)

Yikes. Could've got 4 demerit points + big insurance hike and decides to fight a $75 insurance card charge? It probably cost him more to fight that one than just to pay it. Same with fail to surrender permit.