So just heard on the news that a new regulation is being implemented, soon police officers stopping people will need to advise them they do not have to talk to them. Odd if you ask me, because it makes the entire process moot since right there that individual can turn around and say "OK, then I'm walking, ciao".

But that is not what got me wondering, what I'm wondering is how is this going to really play out on the street when a driver gets pulled over.

I suspect half the officers will not be very kind/happy if a driver decides to utilize this right.

Once again politicians implementing a half baked idea, (IMO) but hey, what do I know? I'm a simpleton....

Well if people understood their rights, they would already know that they do not have to talk to police and do not have to answer any questions.

In Ontario, the only information you MUST give a police officer (or risk being charged for not providing it) is:

- if doing something that requires a license (like hunting), you must provide that license when asked (but you do not have to talk or answer any questions);

- if being charged with something, you must provide name, address and date of birth when asked. This could be done either by providing identification OR by just verbally providing this information (but you do not have to talk or answer any other questions);

- if driving a car, you must report any accident you are in (but you do not have to talk or answer any other questions);

- if driving a car, you must provide license, ownership and insurance when asked (but you do not have to talk or answer any questions);

NEVER volunteer any of this information.

Always wait to be asked for it.

Always asked if you are required to give them the information.

Always say that any information you give them is not voluntary.

And remember to always be polite and NEVER lie to police. You are better to shut your mouth and say nothing at all rather than to lie.

"NEVER volunteer any of this information.

Always wait to be asked for it.

Always asked if you are required to give them the information.

Always say that any information you give them is not voluntary."

If you follow this advice, be prepared to get every ticket that the officer has grounds to lay.

You're better off engaging in a polite greeting and getting the documents for the officer without any of the extra statements that jsherk thinks are some magic phrase that will prevent the use of your identity in court.

jsherk wrote:

NEVER volunteer any of this information.

Always wait to be asked for it.

Always asked if you are required to give them the information.

Always say that any information you give them is not voluntary.

This should make every interaction awkward and lengthy. Good advice.

Observer135 wrote:

So just heard on the news that a new regulation is being implemented, soon police officers stopping people will need to advise them they do not have to talk to them. Odd if you ask me, because it makes the entire process moot since right there that individual can turn around and say "OK, then I'm walking, ciao".

But that is not what got me wondering, what I'm wondering is how is this going to really play out on the street when a driver gets pulled over.

I suspect half the officers will not be very kind/happy if a driver decides to utilize this right.

Once again politicians implementing a half baked idea, (IMO) but hey, what do I know? I'm a simpleton....

I'm assuming the regulation you're referring to is in regards to street checks (commonly called "carding" in the Toronto media). The new policy specifically states it does not apply in situations in which an individual is legally required to provide their information, such as during a traffic stops.

If you are a dick with the police, like another poster said above, expect to get a mitt full of tags...

jsherk wrote:

And remember to always be polite and NEVER lie to police.

I think it is a dick move to only quote the parts of what people say that you disagree with and not acknowledge the rest of what they said.

As a Canadian, I am not afraid to exercise my RIGHT (and the law) to not to talk to police!

I never said be a dick. I never said be rude. I specifically DID say be polite.

People can make their own mind up. Follow jsherk's advice and get every ticket possible or be respectful and pleasant. No-one is saying to blurt out 'you're right officer, I was speeding and don't have any insurance', but to pull the old 'I'm only speaking to you because I have to, am I being detained, etc etc' is not the advice I give my friends.

The regulation is not HTA related... Topic MOVED

Regulation mostly deals with people on foot.

However, people still need to be cognizant of all laws. There are so many areas even within one Act, such as the HTA that people don't know, once an officer knows a section, then can enforce it. A couple come to mind that rarely people know. If a road has a crosswalk, people must use the crosswalk...which means no crossing anywhere else. Another is bicycle must have reflective tape on its forks at night.

Just bringing it up, that was just a couple examples.....think of all the other laws, regulations and bylaws out there.

Think Argyll is correct, just be respectful from the start, look up things after

hwybear wrote:

The regulation is not HTA related... Topic MOVED

Regulation mostly deals with people on foot.

However, people still need to be cognizant of all laws. There are so many areas even within one Act, such as the HTA that people don't know, once an officer knows a section, then can enforce it. A couple come to mind that rarely people know. If a road has a crosswalk, people must use the crosswalk...which means no crossing anywhere else. Another is bicycle must have reflective tape on its forks at night.

Just bringing it up, that was just a couple examples.....think of all the other laws, regulations and bylaws out there.

Think Argyll is correct, just be respectful from the start, look up things after

Just adding onto this, the new crosswalk law, where you need to wait until the person completely exits the intersection. There is one right near the entrance of my work, and 9/10 times, someone is usually crossing. So I stop, wait for them to completely finish crossing, then proceed. I'd say out of all the times I do that, 50% of the time, people honk at me, and then speed right past because they don't know the new law. I feel like every renewal (5 years), drivers should redo a written test (similar to the G1) just to be re-familiarized with the rules of the road.

That is not such a bad idea....even online where yes, someone else could take it for you, but at least you'd had the opportunity to learn the changes.

The other that people get wrong all the time is in an intersection with one through road and the other with stop signs in both directions. One person is at a stop sign and wants to turn left and the other is at the opposite stop sign and wants to go straight through.

It's not odd, many people don't know their rights. They feel like they have to provide the officer everything they ask for. I think this law is necessary for the individuals who don't know their rights.

I like that idea about people having to retake the written test... I agree, HTA changes over the years and hardly anyone keeps up with the changes.

Also, in order to get a G license you need to know the minimum, it might just get people to read more of it.

Not trying to open the can of warm again, but some times there is no good answer without incriminating yourself, when you are pulled over and asked "do you know how fast you were going?"

How can you answer that without incriminating yourself?

UnluckyDuck wrote:

Just adding onto this, the new crosswalk law, where you need to wait until the person completely exits the intersection. There is one right near the entrance of my work, and 9/10 times, someone is usually crossing. So I stop, wait for them to completely finish crossing, then proceed. I'd say out of all the times I do that, 50% of the time, people honk at me, and then speed right past because they don't know the new law. I feel like every renewal (5 years), drivers should redo a written test (similar to the G1) just to be re-familiarized with the rules of the road.

The new crosswalk law to what I read does not apply to what you describe. It applies to a

1) crossover - where overhead signs indicate pedestrian crossing Ont Reg 402/15

2) intersection which has school crossing guards HTA 176(3)

hwybear wrote:

The new crosswalk law to what I read does not apply to what you describe. It applies to a

1) crossover - where overhead signs indicate pedestrian crossing Ont Reg 402/15

2) intersection which has school crossing guards HTA 176(3)

I agree, the new law is quite limited in regards to where it applies. I think part of the blame falls on media who made it sound like it applies to all crosswalks when it was first introduced.