http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/538115 I watched a 1-hour interview with Mr. Mulcahy on Legal Briefs with Lorne Honickman a few weeks ago. I felt terrible for him because he lost his 18-yr.old son at a very young age. When I listened to his pleas for "no tolerance" legislation with regard to drinking and speeding, I really did sympathize with him but knew legislation would never be passed based solely on his emotional recommendations. Of course, I was wrong. We can't ignore the number of drinks this 18-yr.old quickly consumed, then ripped down the road at a blistering pace (as confirmed by his surviving girlfriend). But we already have plenty of harsh laws prohibiting such behavior. Mr. Mulcahy suggested that if his son had lost his license to the two speeding tickets he had received months earlier, he would not have been able to be driving that night and would still be alive. With all due respect, this is nonsense. I just can't see how speeding tickets relate to drinking and driving. And not just drinking, but drinking a ridiculous amount (my kids would use the word "s**tfaced). All these new laws are going to do is harshly punish rural families. It seems that most legislation comes from leaders familiar with big cities such as Toronto or Ottawa. They say things like, "maybe riding the bus for a few months will teach them a lesson". Well guess what gentlemen, many of Ontario residents don't HAVE bus service. many of use live over 20 miles from the nearest town. Taking the license from a kid in this situation (for one speeding ticket) will surely spell the end of his/her job and place undo pressure on the parents. Is this really what our government wants? To punish parents for raising a child that has the gaul to rack up ONE lousy speeding ticket?? Perhaps, instead, we should be THANKED for instilling in our children that it is NOT OK to drink yourself stupid and fly down the road. Maybe that speeding ticket isn't a clear indication that a kid is going to go out a kill someone. Maybe it's just what it is... A SPEEDING TICKET! As much as I feel for Mr. Mulcahy, I don't see why he feels he must punish me and my kids with "zero-tolerance" legislation. To suggest "we" cannot stop at one or two drinks is an unfair statement. Everyday, thousands of young Ontarians stop at one or two drinks without ANY difficulty! Yet now they're going to be slammed for acting in a mature, self-controlled manner! Possible Scenario: - Take my oldest boy who's 6', 200lbs. - He spends the day helping me with yard work. - After a hard days work, I thank him over barbecued steak and a beer. - He then hops in his car and heads over to his girlfriends. - On the way, he's stopped and relieved of his license due the the single beer that has NO effect over his abilities behind the wheel. Is this really how we want to live our lives in this Province?
Theoretically the demerit point system is supposed to do that. As drivers "gather" more points they clearly exhibit an inability to drive eventually leading to a license suspension. People should not be penalized for their youth. The assumption that young people have no maturity and therefore we need to enact laws to protect them is nuts. These politicians should be at the airport welcoming home our combat troops and then explain to them why they are not mature enough to drive without "protective" legislation.
Radar Identified wrote:
Would rather see re-testing & higher standards put in place than anything else. Some people get really good at driving; others learn, barely pass their driving test, then continue to get worse, bumping and crashing into things constantly without realizing that they are inspirations for public transit, so they continue to drive. (Like Michael from CWD2.) Subsequent re-testing might get some of them, who are disasters waiting to happen, off the road.
Theoretically the demerit point system is supposed to do that. As drivers "gather" more points they clearly exhibit an inability to drive eventually leading to a license suspension.
People should not be penalized for their youth. The assumption that young people have no maturity and therefore we need to enact laws to protect them is nuts. These politicians should be at the airport welcoming home our combat troops and then explain to them why they are not mature enough to drive without "protective" legislation.
Last edited by ticketcombat on Sat May 02, 2009 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Theoretically... but in practice? We have motorists who have been in 40+ collisions and are still licensed. I think the demerit point system and enforcement should a "backstop" to ensure safe driving, not the primary method. Besides, I think most people could use refreshers/pointers on driving every now and then. Doesn't mean that the re-testing has to be 100% perfect, but a driving examiner could, in a post-test de-brief, point out the poor driving tendencies that some of us have. Driving on Lawrence Avenue & Mount Pleasant earlier today made me think of that. :x I think there's a balance, but I'm afraid that Ontario has gone so far to restrict young drivers that we may actually see our collision and death rates go up. Give a person no responsibility and they'll never be responsible. Some have suggested "raising the driving age." What will that achieve? A person with 0 years of driving experience at 16 has the same amount of driving experience as someone who's 25 and has 0 years of driving experience. The difference is, as you start getting into your 20s, it becomes harder to learn things, particularly visuo-spatial/psycho-motor things like driving, so it would take longer for people to learn how to drive properly, and they'd probably crash their cars more. I think the drinking & driving rules we had for young/new drivers was fine. Maybe just take Bear's suggestion: "G" driver must be at least 19 yrs of age.
Theoretically... but in practice? We have motorists who have been in 40+ collisions and are still licensed. I think the demerit point system and enforcement should a "backstop" to ensure safe driving, not the primary method.
Besides, I think most people could use refreshers/pointers on driving every now and then. Doesn't mean that the re-testing has to be 100% perfect, but a driving examiner could, in a post-test de-brief, point out the poor driving tendencies that some of us have. Driving on Lawrence Avenue & Mount Pleasant earlier today made me think of that.
I think there's a balance, but I'm afraid that Ontario has gone so far to restrict young drivers that we may actually see our collision and death rates go up. Give a person no responsibility and they'll never be responsible. Some have suggested "raising the driving age." What will that achieve? A person with 0 years of driving experience at 16 has the same amount of driving experience as someone who's 25 and has 0 years of driving experience. The difference is, as you start getting into your 20s, it becomes harder to learn things, particularly visuo-spatial/psycho-motor things like driving, so it would take longer for people to learn how to drive properly, and they'd probably crash their cars more. I think the drinking & driving rules we had for young/new drivers was fine. Maybe just take Bear's suggestion: "G" driver must be at least 19 yrs of age.
I think parenting makes a far greater difference than some magical 'age of responsibility', which brings us back to education. There is probably a medical reason not to let your 8-year-old get drunk, but once you hit puberty, I think your capacity for reasoning and processing information is about equal to an adult. The only thing lacking is experience. Make it against the law to get that experience, and you just end up with older-looking children. Heck, I first got drunk when I was two years old. Look how I turned out. :D
I think parenting makes a far greater difference than some magical 'age of responsibility', which brings us back to education. There is probably a medical reason not to let your 8-year-old get drunk, but once you hit puberty, I think your capacity for reasoning and processing information is about equal to an adult. The only thing lacking is experience. Make it against the law to get that experience, and you just end up with older-looking children.
Heck, I first got drunk when I was two years old. Look how I turned out.
PK...have to stop doing that.....making sense that is....
PrincessKyle wrote:
I will say again, All this law does is make young adults look more and more like criminals, instead of people who are just trying to make a life for them selves. The law should be changed to this
Under 19 regardless of license class is zero tolerance. 19+ Normal legal limit..
PK...have to stop doing that.....making sense that is....
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Fact is, I don't know how much alcohol intake in how much time will produce 0.04% blood/alcohol level. I am a fairly typical Canadian who rewards myself with a cold beer after cutting the lawn, cleaning the shop, washing the car, etc., etc. Then I'm apt to have another one while barbecuing some burgers. If I run out of BBQ sauce, I'm hoppin' in the car and runnin' down to the store for more. No idea what my blood alcohol level will be. Not gonna' try to figure out the alcohol wheel, I'm just going! I come from a time when impaired driving was tolerated. I know what "real" impairment feels like. I really, really doubt my ability to drive down the road is going to be affected at .04% (or .05%, or whatever the new level is). Also: Stats show a disproportionate number of accidents are caused by new drivers. Well, DUH! They're NEW. I would expect to see 99% of all accidents be caused by new drivers. I think it makes a BIGGER statement that so many EXPERIENCED drivers have accidents. What's that all about? ;)
Fact is, I don't know how much alcohol intake in how much time will produce 0.04% blood/alcohol level. I am a fairly typical Canadian who rewards myself with a cold beer after cutting the lawn, cleaning the shop, washing the car, etc., etc. Then I'm apt to have another one while barbecuing some burgers. If I run out of BBQ sauce, I'm hoppin' in the car and runnin' down to the store for more. No idea what my blood alcohol level will be. Not gonna' try to figure out the alcohol wheel, I'm just going!
I come from a time when impaired driving was tolerated. I know what "real" impairment feels like. I really, really doubt my ability to drive down the road is going to be affected at .04% (or .05%, or whatever the new level is).
Also:
Stats show a disproportionate number of accidents are caused by new drivers. Well, DUH! They're NEW. I would expect to see 99% of all accidents be caused by new drivers. I think it makes a BIGGER statement that so many EXPERIENCED drivers have accidents. What's that all about?
Bookm....think we did this beer ratio thing before. Good quick guideline. (weight, sex will affect it, but this is a standard average) 1 drink (beer, glass wine, 1 shot) = 15 mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. 2 drinks = 30mgs 3 drinks = 45mgs 4 drinks = 60mgs etc Body Eliminates 15mgs of alcohol per hour.
Bookm....think we did this beer ratio thing before.
Good quick guideline. (weight, sex will affect it, but this is a standard average)
1 drink (beer, glass wine, 1 shot) = 15 mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood.
2 drinks = 30mgs
3 drinks = 45mgs
4 drinks = 60mgs etc
Body Eliminates 15mgs of alcohol per hour.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I think it's mostly to do with all this population growth. Way back in Bookm's day (1903?), you could be impaired and drive down the road without meeting too many cars (limits the input you have to process and decisions you have to make). If you were impaired enough to crash, chances are you would drive into a ditch and maybe hit a tree. Now, streets are always busy and that ditch has become a busy sidewalk. That "tree" might now be a bus stop. The margin for error becomes very small, though for more rural places like Stratford and even off-season Orillia, all these new strict guidelines seem ridiculous. So once again, we can blame Toronto for being so crowded and making the rest of us suffer. 8) Bear, do you think BAC is a good measure of the level of impairment? The most "impaired" I get is after two beers while fixing the car, then taking it for a test drive around the block. Face is a little red and might seem happier than usual, but my reaction times are okay. Decision making might be affected, so I don't go far or into busy areas. Even being a svelte 200 lbs, I would not be able to drive with four beers (assuming about 1-1.5 beers per hour). 4-6 beers is the area where I just sit on the couch and tell funny (to me) stories. At that rate, CAA's online drunkered meter puts me at just 0.0384 BAC.
I think it's mostly to do with all this population growth. Way back in Bookm's day (1903?), you could be impaired and drive down the road without meeting too many cars (limits the input you have to process and decisions you have to make). If you were impaired enough to crash, chances are you would drive into a ditch and maybe hit a tree. Now, streets are always busy and that ditch has become a busy sidewalk. That "tree" might now be a bus stop. The margin for error becomes very small, though for more rural places like Stratford and even off-season Orillia, all these new strict guidelines seem ridiculous. So once again, we can blame Toronto for being so crowded and making the rest of us suffer.
Bear, do you think BAC is a good measure of the level of impairment? The most "impaired" I get is after two beers while fixing the car, then taking it for a test drive around the block. Face is a little red and might seem happier than usual, but my reaction times are okay. Decision making might be affected, so I don't go far or into busy areas. Even being a svelte 200 lbs, I would not be able to drive with four beers (assuming about 1-1.5 beers per hour). 4-6 beers is the area where I just sit on the couch and tell funny (to me) stories. At that rate, CAA's online drunkered meter puts me at just 0.0384 BAC.
Could be also due to shifting attitudes toward drinking and driving. "One for the road" used to be a literal expression, people would grab a beer and drink it as they drove to their destination. Now we shake our heads at the gall of someone who would stop in traffic, look over at the cop next to them, and proceed to crack open a cold one and chug the beer in front of the officer. And yes, that has happened.
Squishy wrote:
I think it's mostly to do with all this population growth.
Could be also due to shifting attitudes toward drinking and driving. "One for the road" used to be a literal expression, people would grab a beer and drink it as they drove to their destination. Now we shake our heads at the gall of someone who would stop in traffic, look over at the cop next to them, and proceed to crack open a cold one and chug the beer in front of the officer. And yes, that has happened.
Could be also due to shifting attitudes toward drinking and driving. "One for the road" used to be a literal expression, people would grab a beer and drink it as they drove to their destination. Now we shake our heads at the gall of someone who would stop in traffic, look over at the cop next to them, and proceed to crack open a cold one and chug the beer in front of the officer. And yes, that has happened. But the reason why it has become such a social taboo can still be linked to population growth, as the one act of driving drunk starts to affect more people. At least, that's my theory.
Radar Identified wrote:
Squishy wrote:
I think it's mostly to do with all this population growth.
Could be also due to shifting attitudes toward drinking and driving. "One for the road" used to be a literal expression, people would grab a beer and drink it as they drove to their destination. Now we shake our heads at the gall of someone who would stop in traffic, look over at the cop next to them, and proceed to crack open a cold one and chug the beer in front of the officer. And yes, that has happened.
But the reason why it has become such a social taboo can still be linked to population growth, as the one act of driving drunk starts to affect more people. At least, that's my theory.
We are speaking of 2 different things there. There is: 1) Driving with more than 80mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. This is the total amount a person has consumed. 2) Impaired driving - if the symptoms and signs are there after 1 drink, theoretically one could be charged with impaired driving. This is how a body has reacted/ been influenced by alcohol (speech, eye colour, face, reaction time, stability etc..)
Squishy wrote:
Bear, do you think BAC is a good measure of the level of impairment?
We are speaking of 2 different things there. There is:
1) Driving with more than 80mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. This is the total amount a person has consumed.
2) Impaired driving - if the symptoms and signs are there after 1 drink, theoretically one could be charged with impaired driving. This is how a body has reacted/ been influenced by alcohol (speech, eye colour, face, reaction time, stability etc..)
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
We are speaking of 2 different things there. There is: 1) Driving with more than 80mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. This is the total amount a person has consumed. 2) Impaired driving - if the symptoms and signs are there after 1 drink, theoretically one could be charged with impaired driving. This is how a body has reacted/ been influenced by alcohol (speech, eye colour, face, reaction time, stability etc..) My eyes a green and they stay that way......or do you mean bloodshot??
hwybear wrote:
Squishy wrote:
Bear, do you think BAC is a good measure of the level of impairment?
We are speaking of 2 different things there. There is:
1) Driving with more than 80mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. This is the total amount a person has consumed.
2) Impaired driving - if the symptoms and signs are there after 1 drink, theoretically one could be charged with impaired driving. This is how a body has reacted/ been influenced by alcohol (speech, eye colour, face, reaction time, stability etc..)
My eyes a green and they stay that way......or do you mean bloodshot??
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I used this before to explain something to some one... this is to show how dumb it is to say that such a high number of young drivers get into accidents, Vs people over the age of 22... if there is a city with 100 drivers in it.. 90 are 21 and under, and 10 are 22 and over, Then it stands to reason that 80% of accidents in that city will involve a young driver no? Thats why the same for males insurance being higher that young females. Because there are more young male drivers on the road than young female drivers, Just like there are more honda civics on the road that other models of cars, and bla bla bla bla The sats show convenient numbers, done on test subjects that are taken in convenient demographics... Im just wondering when there is gunna be a kid wearing a hat in an accident and then that will become a new law too... As some one said on here once before.
I used this before to explain something to some one...
this is to show how dumb it is to say that such a high number of young drivers get into accidents, Vs people over the age of 22...
if there is a city with 100 drivers in it..
90 are 21 and under, and 10 are 22 and over, Then it stands to reason that 80% of accidents in that city will involve a young driver no?
Thats why the same for males insurance being higher that young females. Because there are more young male drivers on the road than young female drivers, Just like there are more honda civics on the road that other models of cars, and bla bla bla bla
The sats show convenient numbers, done on test subjects that are taken in convenient demographics...
Im just wondering when there is gunna be a kid wearing a hat in an accident and then that will become a new law too... As some one said on here once before.
- What ever happened to "Innocent Until Proven Guilty"?
Am really confused about this one, this morning i got a reduced speeding ticket (80km speed in 60 zone), and in the ticket the cop wrote 10km over the speeding limit.. and it has the 'R' code in it.. and the cop said i need to pay this and it doesn't have any points on it..
im fine with paying the ticket which is only 40 dollars but my biggest concern, will it show in my record ? or only tickets…
I got a ticket for driving with handheld device in Oct 2015 and I had requested for a trial. Yesterday I received the notice of trial (notice is dated 26-Jan-2017, court of trial is Newmarket, ON) and trial date is Mar 8, 2017. Today, I have sent in a registered request for disclosure (i.e on 29-Jan-2017).
Need some help here for the 1st time speeding ticket?
Sunday morning 12:10am when I was going home from work I was doing bit speeding on Gardiner. I was going with about 130km/h. I know its fast. I always take the same way and I know where the cops hide. They always hide entrance of the highways. If I will do speeding I always look my back and did look this time too. I took gardiner…
I just have a question in regards to the summons Under Part 1 I received for an rear end accident:
I was driving on the 2 lane road, and the car in front of me suddenly stopped, I had seen the car, and so I started to brake, however I heard noise from the back and looked int o the rear view mirror and saw a huge "truck" so I decided to go right, took the feet out of brakes but couldnt…
I have searched and I know the general rule is no, barring criminal charges or tresspassing. So let me use 2 specific issues I have.
1) I have some business in some area malls after hours. Once I have pulled into the mall lot on the way to the closest door I rarely stop at stop signs unless there is a car or person nearby. (i do not carelessly speed, i do show caution, just do not fully stop) Can…
In June at 401 London and Wellington I got hit twice, speeding which I didn't realize I was doing and cell phone. The Officer made me open my purse and show him my phone. I was going to meet a Rep of my Company in Kitchener, he called I answered. WRONG! The Officer wasn't even nice. My record was clean and he slapped me twice. I sat in the car and sobbed for 20 minutes as I was scared out of…
I wanted to "reply" elsewhere...but the more appropriate areas were "locked" to replies....so, here are a couple of questions...from a newbie to this site:
1. Who ARE you? (I'm a little edgy about conversing on a forum whose ownership is not stated anywhere on an "About" page") No offense intended whatsoever. Just like to know who I'm talking with/in front of.......your honor!
You are coming off of a highway exit and there are 3 lanes: right hand lane for right hand turn; middle lane for left AND right turn (but no straight thru since it is only a three-way intersection); and left lane for left hand turn. You are first in the middle lane, signalling to make a right.
CAN YOU make a right hand turn from the middle lane on a red if the traffic is clear?
Hey everyone first off I'd like to say great website, I have been reading and it is very useful
I'm posting today as I'd like to get some feedback on my situation and have a couple of questions. Please excuse the vagueness in some areas - I don't want my case to be identifiable given the small town.
So I was driving up north and was pulled over by an OPP SUV for doing 31 over. Cop drove past me,…
Hello! I'm under 16 currently and really want to drive. I know that section 37(1) says you have to be 16, but I've read that the HTA does not apply when you are in private property, so does that mean I can drive in a parking lot if I wanted to?
I was heading northbound on my bike downtown on friday. After the east/westbound lights went red and after a long pause I decided to get a head start and proceed before the light changed to green. About a block north of me an officer stepped out of an unmarked cruiser and pulled me over and gave me a $180 ticket. Now I see on this site that I should have been given points for it..but…
Got a ticket Saturday for insecure load. The officer was a real jerk and unfair. I had nothing hanging out the sides and the load wasn't that high. Just taking some junk to the dump. I was doing 40 on Ashley St in Foxboro, 4 ways on taking my time and nothing was going to fall out. I'm thinking about fighting it. Anyone experienced this before?
So I got convicted of a dui.. I have been riding my bike in the snow and taking the bus. I am a driving enthusiast and I will be going to the race track all summer but I NEED to drive something right now!
I have done lots of research and even an electric assisted bike that a 16 year old can drive legally on the road is not an option to someone with a dui suspension.
Hey this is my first ticket so as much information that people can provide will be appreciated. I was making the drive home going around 90kph(in a 80) behind what I knew was an undercover police car. The cop abruptly pulled to the side and pulled back in behind me to pull me over. Now I reduced my speed to below 80 when the cop pulled to the side but he claimed he had me clocked at 109kph and…
So I was heading home to today and I was in the left lane of the off ramp, some lady cut across her lane of traffic and across the off ramp median and hit the back side of my car! After a few meters of bumping (I was dazed and confused) I stopped the car.
I call 911 and was told to move the car to the shoulder.
Cop comes, interviews both of us, and lets the lady go! The cop proceeds to give…
An undercover cop, well not sure if he was even a cop to be honest, maybe a constable pulled me over after I passed him shortly after a construction zone. He asked me if I was in a rush and said that he was going 105 and I was going 120. It seems mostly from our conversation that he was pissed off that I passed him, because he never told me that I was speeding. None the less the ticket says…
I got this ticket last year in toronto and received court date recently.
Basically I parket on a street where there are marked spots for car parking but they were all faded with only the white edges showing. I assumed I was in the correct spot when I got out. I never noticed the fire hydrant in the bushes.
When I returned I saw the ticket and then noticed the fire hydrant and when I to the…
I would like to know if anybody could tell me what "V" stands for on the Code section of the Form 4. I think that it will be useful to understand what information is on this form in order to make a decision on what option we should chose.
I recently received a ticket for red light fail to stop under section 144 (18) of the Highway Traffic Act at the intersection of Dupont St. and Dufferin St. in Toronto with a set fine of $150 and total payable of $190. I think I entered the intersection on a yellow, however that is not the way the officer saw it. During the traffic stop the officer was polite bordering on friendly…
Got my first ticket last Thursday and I have a couple of questions. I was driving westbound on Moore St. (west of Bayview) and made a left onto a residential street at a 4-way stop sign. It was my first time driving through that area - was driving my girlfriend to a wisdom tooth surgery.
The police were set up to catch people, as that intersection had a no left turn sign from 7-9 am (buses…
