ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Regional forums > Canada
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-10-2013, 10:33 AM   #16
willys
Beastly Adventurer
 
willys's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Oddometer: 2,904
I too hate cell phones and all that is related to them. If people would consider for a mili-second the possible outcome of their need to text or talk while driving etc on these must have machines now a days then maybe they wouldn't do it. BUT, the fines are far too cheap and undamaging to your driving capabilities that none of the cell phone users think about getting caught. IMHO. The police need the power to be able to demand that you hand over your cell when stopped and if it has been on in the past 5 minutes from the time you were stopped then you get the fine and I would love to see you loose the phone until fine paid. Make this a full time carreer for officers to be able to do......the idea of allowing the officer to determine what fine or adjust the fine to suit the amount you show of cleavage is wrong......no sweet talking nothing full pop everytime no mater what. Also bring back speed cameras and enforce them to the limit and have zero avenue to fight it in the courts.....if you are caught on camera or your licience plate was caught.....you are guilty.....even if you weren't driving. You gave permission to that driver hoping they would obey the laws. It's your responsibility to judge who will obey and who will not, so it's your responsibilty to decide who uses your vehicle at all times......making the fine your problem also. Like it or lump it! Plain and simple....now just enforce it and give the powers to be the power to do just that. No questions....a pic is worth a thousand words and also proof of guilt. Once again plain and simple. Same goes for cell phone charges......as said above, stake out a oocation with a camera and shoot a pic of them on the phone while driving....done. guilty pay up! And here's your sign and points!
The only way you hurt people is in their wallet. If the penalty is steep enough we will sooner or later get in line. Look at seat belts.....we all whined and complained....but after a few either close calls or fines we all started buckling up.......we had to.....now it's second nature to buckle up before starting the car. Just do the same for other issues....stop the mamby pamby attitude to giving out fines and sentences.

IF the cops need a secretary sitting shotgun in the squad car, put one it to get through the amount of paperwork needed to deal with the fines.....so be it!
Just stop this mentality of.....cry baby way of dealing with issues....start dropping the hammer and ghet the country back on track to strong morral standards once again. It will make the whole place a better place to live in the end.

People in the fifties still had bags of fun.......before we gave in to all mannor of BULLSHIT!
__________________
willys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 10:45 AM   #17
bigbadandugly
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Oddometer: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by sparklr View Post
Take for example the minor penalty awarded to you for your indiscretion. From the onset of that officers shift to the time of your REWARD, there are his/her wages, vehicle costs, data entry clerks, and the list goes on.
These are all fixed costs the government has elected to absorb whether the cop hands out tickets or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sparklr View Post
The costs associated for writing that one minor ticket far exceeds the amount of your penalty.
Not true. The marginal cost of the cop handing out the next ticket is the paper the ticket is printed on. I think most police departments are computerized now (a fixed cost) so there is very little data entry that goes on now.


So the government has so much investment in fixed costs that it needs to hand out many tickets (at close to zero marginal cost) to recover the fixed cost. the more tickets handed out, the more tickets to spread the fixed cost over and each ticket absorbs less fixed cost. Basic economics.

Therefore rather than revenue collection is has to be deemed as a deficit and the only way a windfall can be obtained is to raise the ticket premium to cover all costs. I would probably have to give up riding/driving altogether to avoid the risk if I had to foot the bill on the ACTUAL cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sparklr View Post
So can you imagine what the actual cost is when some pissant fights a ticket in the hopes of having it dimished on a technicality.
Valid point here. But the government should discourage this by adding a costs charge to every failed defense. Even $50 - a small portion of the cost of the government's actual cost in enforcing tickets in court - would discourage "hail Mary" defenses. Especially absolute charges (like speeding) vs. judgement charges (careless driving).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve G. View Post
And don't get me started about the 40km/hr instant impound roadside judgement
I'm sure many roads in BC have conservative speed limits, but I doubt they are 40 kmh conservative. Remember - not every rider may be as skilled as you are or have the same reaction as you. The speed limits are most likely determined based on someone below the median speed/reaction time and not above the median.


Here in Ontario they brought in no-cellphone laws a couple of years ago where talking with your mobile was only permitted in a hands-free mode. You still see people talking on their phones, even though 95% have speakerphones nowadays. All the law does is provide a charge for the police to give you after an accident.

I once interviewed an ex-RCMP beat officer in northern Alberta for a position and over dinner he was mentioning that he laughed at all the people he would see panic and start attaching their seatbelt once they see him on the road. He said the BS involved in pulling someone over for such a minor infraction discouraged cops from doing so. I suspect it is the same here in Ottawa with police not pulling over people using cell phones. Too much hassle.
__________________
BigBadAndUgly
Current: 2012 R1200GS
Past: 2009 Moto Guzzi Stelvio, 1979 Suzuki GS750L, XR350R, DT125, CT70
Dyno testing of a PC-V + Full Akropovic system on an R1200GS
bigbadandugly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 11:27 AM   #18
squonker
Eat my shorts
 
squonker's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: Bee Cee
Oddometer: 3,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by willys View Post
I would love to see you loose the phone until fine paid.
I love it! Couldn't agree more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willys
your licience plate was caught.....you are guilty.....even if you weren't driving... It's your responsibility to judge who will obey and who will not, so it's your responsibilty to decide who uses your vehicle at all times......
Couldn't agree less. It is not my responsibility to dictate how anyone else drives. The driver should be insured, not the vehicle.
__________________


Ride Report: Canada North to South 2008 here
Drive Report: Ice Road Trucking 2005-2014 here

squonker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 06:05 PM   #19
willys
Beastly Adventurer
 
willys's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Oddometer: 2,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by squonker View Post
I love it! Couldn't agree more.



Couldn't agree less. It is not my responsibility to dictate how anyone else drives. The driver should be insured, not the vehicle.
This or my comment was for offences caused by someone driving your vehicle......if you can't trust the person who you lend the vehicle to to drive according to the law....then perhaps you need to not give your permission to use your vehicle.
This goes for all offences such as speeding or if they bring into law the great idea of taking your pic on the phone while driving same as speed cameras. Just send the owner of the vehicle a copy of the pic and it's up to you then to pay up and stop the driver from using your vehicle again. Poor judgement on your behalf and a loss of a vehicle on thier after you stop them from using it again. Also to get the funds etc from them to pay for the fine. They could do it on a no point fine the first time and points on the second and more offences. I'm sure you will learn not to let others who don't drive accordingly use your vehicle. Sure it's nice of you to allow someone else to use your vehicle if they don't own one, but......on the other hand it's not fair they don't obey the laws while doing so causing you to get the fines......no?

Seems like a fair way to deal with it......that is unless you are one who doesn't follow the laws also.....no offense to each their own.

Here's another pet peeve of mine now I have started driving very close to the speed limit......people who flash their lights to warn of a cop hiding. Sure it also reduces your speed until you find said cop and altimately slows the traffic down.....but it also just enforces the lets beat the system mentality.
Yes I was a speeder also in my younger days and drove similar to being in a ralley car....old habits die hard.....but after time.....it really doesn't get you there that much sooner.
__________________
willys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 06:25 PM   #20
squonker
Eat my shorts
 
squonker's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: Bee Cee
Oddometer: 3,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by willys View Post
This or my comment was for offences caused by someone driving your vehicle......if you can't trust the person who you lend the vehicle to to drive according to the law....
As I said, I couldn't agree less.
__________________


Ride Report: Canada North to South 2008 here
Drive Report: Ice Road Trucking 2005-2014 here

squonker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 09:16 PM   #21
Commuter Boy
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Burnaby, BC
Oddometer: 2,704
Have the police hold the phone as evidence until you deal with the charge. Not too unreasonable, related to the offence, and no bullshit with destroying property without a conviction.
Commuter Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 05:26 AM   #22
wos
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: beside the cool pool
Oddometer: 1,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commuter Boy View Post
Have the police hold the phone as evidence until you deal with the charge. Not too unreasonable, related to the offence, and no bullshit with destroying property without a conviction.
That is a brilliant idea. If they can take your drivers license and your car for a .05 over (punishment without legal conviction) then taking a phone for a month or 6 until the court date might teach these idiots something.
I've thought about building a jammer but the chaos it would cause as everyone freaks out looking for signal would be worse than that caused by the phone use in the first place.
wos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 07:35 AM   #23
BOBMUNZ
In jail for a while.
 
BOBMUNZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba
Oddometer: 484
Here in Manitoba there is a law about cell phone use while driving ( hands free/speaker phone only) and the police will place a speed trap in the usual spots and have a plain clothes officer up the road a ways standing on the sidewalk or on a pedestrian overpass radioing ahead to the speed trap which cars have the law breakers in them. Quite sneaky and the local paper caught a photo of this operation in action and I must say they did a good job of blending in. So watch out.

That being said the law has had mixed results, I now see fewer people cutting me off while chatting. But the teens ( and some older folks too) obviously texting and driving, now instead of the phone being up in their standard driving field of view, they have it down in their crotch not looking at the road at all. Looks like a bunch of people admiring their crotches.
__________________
"Geez, all I wanted to know was if I should plan on covering 500 or 1000 kms per day. Not instructions on preparing for combat...."
BOBMUNZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 07:44 AM   #24
BOBMUNZ
In jail for a while.
 
BOBMUNZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba
Oddometer: 484
Quote:
Originally Posted by wos View Post
I've thought about building a jammer but the chaos it would cause as everyone freaks out looking for signal would be worse than that caused by the phone use in the first place.
These are strait up illegal and bring possible jail time, an individual cannot posess a device that intentionally emits a signal that can cause interference to other devices. Pretty much any jamming technology is illegal for a civilian to posess, there are designs and products online to jam radar and laser speed guns and those are very illegal in Canada too as they fit into the "interference causing device" category.

That being said, I too have contemplated the same thing but for movie theaters.
__________________
"Geez, all I wanted to know was if I should plan on covering 500 or 1000 kms per day. Not instructions on preparing for combat...."
BOBMUNZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 08:54 AM   #25
willys
Beastly Adventurer
 
willys's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Oddometer: 2,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by squonker View Post
As I said, I couldn't agree less.
Can I ask why...this is an issue for you? Just curious?

Do you lend your vehicle to others and trust those to obey the laws while borrowing your vehicle? If so isn't it then your responsibility to decide if those people are resonsible enough to obey the laws in your vehicle just out of curticy to you. Similar to damaging the vehicle.
I'm just curious as to why you feel differently about this...not looking for a war so to speak ....I personally never lend my possessions to anyone who I think would not look after them and return them to me as they found them when I handed them over. I never lend a vehicle. I have lost a friend over a frig'in 3/4" wrench.......My thought process is, if you borrow something you should return it in the very same condition you recieved it in or if this isn't possible and you damage it, then it's your responsiblity to replace the object with a new one identical to the one you borrowed. It's a simple concept in my head. If you rented the same object and returned it damaged you would be dinged with the same resulting fine, cost etc....no?
So, if you transfer this mentality to the lending of your vehicle, you are responsible for it's condition when it is returned to it's owner also. The probelms now lies with tickets etc......this is something that the owner can't control so easily can they......so the problem now falls on the owner to decide IF the person they are going to lend their vehicle will stay within the confides of the laws so there isn't any issues down the road. So, if these laws that are being suggested where the speed cameras and phone cameras are put into place, it now comes into focus that it is your plate being taken and thusly your licience that is being damaged......it only makes sense that you would take greater care to who you lend your vehicle to. This is what is tying up the courts over speed cameras etc.....we are arguing that it wasn't me who was driving etc etc and we don't like the fact it's our licience that is being affected.
I know I'm being hard to get along with....but if we accept this and allow these cameras to do their jobs....I personally think the roads would be a much safer place to ride in the end. Which is really what we want in the long run ...no?
We all break the laws, we all know this and we all try our best to get away with it. But if we just allow these laws to come to be then we would all drive with a our eyes open watching for these traps and thus see more of what is going on around us while driving. No?

Damn I talk too much.....lol.!!!

Once again, not looking for an arguement just curious.....
__________________
willys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 09:19 AM   #26
pelvis_98
Havin A Time
 
pelvis_98's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Oxford Station, Ontario
Oddometer: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by willys View Post
Can I ask why...this is an issue for you? Just curious?

Do you lend your vehicle to others and trust those to obey the laws while borrowing your vehicle? If so isn't it then your responsibility to decide if those people are resonsible enough to obey the laws in your vehicle just out of curticy to you. Similar to damaging the vehicle.
I'm just curious as to why you feel differently about this...not looking for a war so to speak ....I personally never lend my possessions to anyone who I think would not look after them and return them to me as they found them when I handed them over. I never lend a vehicle. I have lost a friend over a frig'in 3/4" wrench.......My thought process is, if you borrow something you should return it in the very same condition you recieved it in or if this isn't possible and you damage it, then it's your responsiblity to replace the object with a new one identical to the one you borrowed. It's a simple concept in my head. If you rented the same object and returned it damaged you would be dinged with the same resulting fine, cost etc....no?
So, if you transfer this mentality to the lending of your vehicle, you are responsible for it's condition when it is returned to it's owner also. The probelms now lies with tickets etc......this is something that the owner can't control so easily can they......so the problem now falls on the owner to decide IF the person they are going to lend their vehicle will stay within the confides of the laws so there isn't any issues down the road. So, if these laws that are being suggested where the speed cameras and phone cameras are put into place, it now comes into focus that it is your plate being taken and thusly your licience that is being damaged......it only makes sense that you would take greater care to who you lend your vehicle to. This is what is tying up the courts over speed cameras etc.....we are arguing that it wasn't me who was driving etc etc and we don't like the fact it's our licience that is being affected.
I know I'm being hard to get along with....but if we accept this and allow these cameras to do their jobs....I personally think the roads would be a much safer place to ride in the end. Which is really what we want in the long run ...no?
We all break the laws, we all know this and we all try our best to get away with it. But if we just allow these laws to come to be then we would all drive with a our eyes open watching for these traps and thus see more of what is going on around us while driving. No?

Damn I talk too much.....lol.!!!

Once again, not looking for an arguement just curious.....
Would you apply the same principal to company owned vehicles? While you try to hire people you believe are responsible, it doesn't always work out how you expect.
pelvis_98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 01:46 PM   #27
willys
Beastly Adventurer
 
willys's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Oddometer: 2,904
Good point, didn't think that far.....but, it would also be grounds for dismissal as long as it was predetermined in the hiring process. Also it could be stipulated that all expences would be paid for by employee even after they are let go. If they do not sign agreeing to this, then they aren't as trustworthy as you hoped. Yes all humans make mistakes and I am no different....I just would love to see these type of hard hitting laws come into effect. Perhaps when business owned vehicles it could be transfered to the employee assigned to that vehicle and not the owner....? A side clause so to speak in the law....? I'm sure there could be a way to protect the employer. For the greater good of getting the laws pushed forward so to speak.

It seems that every time a new piece of technology comes out people want to use it while driving. Damn if they could cook their meals easily while driving I'm sure some would do it!
The worste thing I have seen is some guy reading a hard covered book while driving! Not a work manual but a novel type book! I pulled up along side and he just gave me a mind your own business stare! Then when I started the usual yelling that he was a frig'in morron the fuck you lip service was very obvious! But he never dropped the book!
__________________
willys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:22 PM   #28
Warin
Retired
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Oddometer: 1,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNF View Post
If I could waste a wish it would be to un-invent cell phones.
A much simpler idea is to simply prevent the 'roaming' i.e. if on a call and it gets too far away from the cell tower the call was started at .. the call drops out. That way if you start/answer a call you get into the habit of stopping. Way simple that even the advertising executives might understand it?
Warin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:25 PM   #29
Warin
Retired
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Oddometer: 1,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelvis_98 View Post
Would you apply the same principal to company owned vehicles?
Some European companies in Europe have a policy that bans all cell phone use in company cars by the driver. That includes the salesmen. Penalty? Dissmissial.
Warin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 04:18 PM   #30
pelvis_98
Havin A Time
 
pelvis_98's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Oxford Station, Ontario
Oddometer: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warin View Post
Some European companies in Europe have a policy that bans all cell phone use in company cars by the driver. That includes the salesmen. Penalty? Dissmissial.
Thats fine, because its punishing the driver not the owner over the vehicle.
pelvis_98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 02:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014