“Failing To Move, Where Possible For Emergency Vehicle”

correct

iFly55 wrote:In other countries vehicles literally mount the curb in order to give way to emergency vehicles: https://youtu.be/Z_Tl3G4sDPs?t=40s

Actually what that biker is a douche and what he is doing in the video is illegal (at least in the UK)

I know people who do that, and I've seen cars CUT up people who do.

Your not supposed to follow an emergency vehicle like that, in the UK its a fine and points,

HERE, that I don't know

BUt it sounded like that vid was in Australia

bobajob wrote:correct

iFly55 wrote:In other countries vehicles literally mount the curb in order to give way to emergency vehicles: https://youtu.be/Z_Tl3G4sDPs?t=40s

bobajob wrote:HERE, that I don't know

It's illegal here, too. You must maintain a minimum following distance of 150 metres.

Enforcement officers have to be pragmatic when it comes to enforcing laws while they're en-route to an emergency.

What's more important? Driving as quickly and safely as possible to a emergency (ie. home invasion, armed robbery, hospital, school hostage)... or stopping you for going 105 in a 100 zone?

There are plenty of decisions on CanLII where the courts and enforcement officers under oath belittle the 100km/h posted limit.

R. v. Cianchino, 2010 ONCJ 298 (CanLII)

[1] In this regulatory proceeding, Adam Cianchino, the defendant, has been charged with committing the offence of careless driving, contrary to s. 130 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 ("H.T.A."), after a pickup truck travelling at 112 k.p.h. collided into the rear of the defendants motor vehicle, which had been travelling at approximately 50 k.p.h., a speed much slower than the posted speed limit of 100 k.p.h. for the highway that those two vehicles were on. As such, the prosecution contends that the defendants conduct in driving his motor vehicle at this significantly slower speed fell below the standard of what a prudent and reasonable driver would have done in the same circumstances, and that this specific form of driving conduct engaged in by the defendant forms the basis for establishing the offence of careless driving.

(h) Speed of traffic on the 407 ETR highway

[139] For evidence on the speed of the traffic that evening, Jason Kaye testified he had been travelling at the speed limit of 100 k.p.h. as well as travelling at the same speed as the traffic around him. Kaye also said he been following the pickup truck for awhile at a distance of 100 meters behind it. The CDR device in the pickup truck recorded that the speed of the pickup truck had been 119 k.p.h. five seconds before the collision and at 112 k.p.h. one second before the collision, which is when the pickup truck would have just entered the slow lane. Accordingly, it would not be unreasonable to surmise that traffic had been moving at 105 to 115 k.p.h. at the time of the collision for the conditions that night.

Const. Vander Mark: Well he was passing vehicles. Any time there's that great of a speed discrepancy, you know, I'm not na¯ve, I understand that not everybody on the QEW is not doing 100 kilometers an hour, but I also understand that 167 is far in excess of anything that's even close to being acceptable or accepted out there. So he would obviously be affecting other vehicles. He's passing all the other vehicles on the road.

Hey if you want to move your car off centre of gravity that is your choice. There is no way to prove that anyone was NOT going to make a left turn and until it is safe, pulling onto the curb is stupid and no law also says that you MUST or are obligated to do it. If you want to prove you're a stunt driver and want to be a cowboy, go for it, but it is not a requirement of law, find me the line in the Highway act that says you MUST pull onto the curb. Please quote.

Just as totally responsible it is to ram your emergency vehicle into other people's cars? I love how biased you are being. Because driving an emergency vehicle means you are not supposed to keep a safe distance? There are safe and unsafe drivers out there - it's not the first time they've seen that and it doesn't mean they are supposed to just PRESUME they have right of way and charge ahead. EVEN IF other people are wrong, it doesn't make it right to ram into other people's vehicles. I love how people keep focusing on how people should go on curbs, still yet ignoring that maybe we shouldn't rear end other people.

Because rear ending other people actually delays you more SURPRISE from getting to an emergency. If anything, you should be MORE vigilant and the safest more responsible emergency drivers practice that. Read up cases TONS of them. SURPRISE emergency vehicle drivers are humans too and make mistakes too and CAN and HAVE gotten ticketed, charged, and killed people through negligence. You presuming that just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it can never happen - that's naive and absurd.

And of course after I make valid points, there is "nothing more to say". Of course. Anyway just remember to stand by your points the next time some emergency vehicle driver without a conscious regard for you or your loved ones on the road puts their lives at risk to get to another emergency. If every emergency driver acted like that, who would be left to clean up their messes?

And that case is completely irrelevant and parallels nothing. There is no guidance for those rules - so a reasonable driver can not be expected to keep speeding ahead. If you've ever taken a driving exam (obviously you need a refresher), it's OBVIOUSLY wrong to keep speeding ahead of an emergency vehicle. That does not make any sense even if you are trying to switch lanes. Again, asking people to break laws and Ontario highway traffic act is irresponsible on the Internet and bad form.

At the end of the day, rear end is rear end. People should always pay attention to what is ahead of them and not ram their vehicles into other vehicles ahead. Just because there is an emergency doesn't mean you should put the lives of other innocent people on the road at risk. What if it's an elderly person or vulnerable population in the car? No reasonable emergency driver does that. If I or a loved one had an emergency, I would want the person coming to my rescue being a level headed calm person who can deal with acute situations without putting anyone else's life at risk. If they can't handle that and make careless moves on the road to get to me, maybe their judgement when handling my acute situation won't be optimal either.

Wow, you're really defensive and angry, aren't you?

Neither iFly55 or I said you are legally obligated to go on to the curb. However, where there's nowhere else to go, that's what I would do, and it's safe. Your enraged challenge just made me shake my head.

Your posts, and your bellicose responses here with exaggeration and hyperbole, seem to suggest that you have some sort of personal involvement - e.g. you frequently get in the way of emergency vehicles. If that's the case, I suggest you learn how to drive properly. Further, going up on the curb slowly to clear a path for an emergency vehicle, when there's no other place to go, does not make you a stunt driver or a cowboy. But, if you want to believe that, it's a free and democratic society.

I'd rather see motorists take responsibility for their actions, pay attention and clear the way as soon as possible rather than getting all bent out of shape about the fact that emergency vehicles need to get somewhere fast. Good grief.

EDIT: The other amazing thing here is that neither iFly55 or myself at any point justified emergency vehicles acting recklessly. You carried on with that, and seemed to think that we said it was okay for them to drive dangerously. We didn't. They do have to go quickly. We did, however, criticize people for not getting out of the way.

I love how you automatically abuse your moderator powers, lock up threads you are PERSONALLY involved in - maybe ask an objective other moderator to take a look? And if that's any example of hyperbole, that is it. If anyone wants to use your company for tickets, I would certainly warn them. I love all these accusations as if you know me in real life. If that's how your company defends people, then good luck to anyone who uses you. You are the one getting bent out of shape about random things like driving on curbs.

AGAIN, that is terrible advice and irresponsible. I would still caution anyone against it and if they get ticketed, then read the disclaimer from the guy above - he isn't responsible when you're talking to the cops. Then again, you obviously have a separate agenda and want people to get tickets so they can use your company who usually just gets people the same things they would anyway if they went themselves. Disgusting.

Disclaimer - I do not work for or are associated with any ticket fighting heroic agency. I believe in everyone following laws - including emergency vehicles, civilians based on the Ontario highway act and driving safely. Do anything outside of that, then sure, go find these agencies, but do so at your own risk. Why put your driver's license and insurance at risk? More important, why put your life and other people's lives at risk? You think about what is right.

If you say so. Just for the record - I'm not a paralegal. I only give advice on here. When I say I've been involved in helping traffic tickets - that's been on here.

hmmmm.....

(back home and even here) I always try and get outta the way for an EV, that is SAFELY, I don't swerve recklessly nor mount curbs at speed.

One day that EV could be coming to save my life or wife or daughters.

EV drivers in the UK are TAUGHT how to drive through and around traffic, (I assume here as well) so IN a worst case scenario, if you can not move out, STAY PUT and the EV will manouvre around you.

In the UK, we DONT have to leave a lane when passing an EV like here

you get douchebag EV drivers just as you get douchebag civi drivers

I smell OP trolling. That or the OP simply should not be on the road of inadequate knowledge of the law.

hahaha true

what the old adage

Please dont feed the troll

k I'm outta here

lmrj0030 wrote:I smell OP trolling. That or the OP simply should not be on the road of inadequate knowledge of the law.