“Bill 117”

BILL 117 put forth by MPP Helena Jaczek, discuss please!

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit the driving and operation of motorcycles with child passengers

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts as follows:

1. The Highway Traffic Act is amended by adding the following section:

Prohibition of passengers under 14 years old on motorcycles

38.1 No person shall drive or operate a motorcycle on a highway if another person under the age of 14 years is a passenger on the motorcycle.

Commencement

2. This Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent.

Short title

3. The short title of this Act is the Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Child Passengers on Motorcycles), 2008.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The Bill amends the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit driving or operating a motorcycle on a highway while a person under the age of 14 is a passenger on the motorcycle, with a view to promoting safety on Ontario's roads and protecting youth from preventable injuries.

Every law must have a purpose, commonly known as it pith and substance. This one is allegedly to promote safety on Ontario's roads and protect youth from preventable injuries.

How does this law exactly promote safety or protect youth from preventable injuries?

In my city, these same youths are prohibited from riding their skateboards on the sidewalk, they must ride them on the roadway, with traffic speeding pass them.

What about sidecars?

Excellent point, CT.

Yes this would include sidecars!

"motorcycle" means a self-propelled vehicle having a seat or saddle for the use of the driver and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground, and includes a motor scooter

I sure hope that this bill gets voted down (although my opinions seemingly aren't too popular in the Queen's Park). Just another cash grab more than anything. Why stop at motorcycles? Why not have "no kids under 14" in all "Vehicles" on all "Highways"?

This Bill is over a Divorce, and it made it past the second reading!

December 13, 2008 09:22 AM

By Keely Grasser

Staff Reporter

A private member's bill seeking to ban children under 14 from riding on the back of motorcycles has passed second reading.

The bill, introduced by Markham-Oak Ridges MPP Helena Jaczek, was debated in the House of Commons on Dec. 4.

"As a family physician working in the emergency room, one of the most tragic cases I ever saw was a boy of about 10 who had been run over by a car," Ms Jaczek, a doctor and former York Region medical officer of health, recounted to the House. "He was conscious and in extreme pain as we removed his clothes to examine his torso, where the tire marks were clearly visible and had done severe damage to his internal organs. Happily, he survived after emergency surgery, but it is an image I will never forget."

Ms Jaczek laid out some statistics in support of her bill. She said that from 1995 to 2005, 199 motorcycle passengers 15 or younger were injured.

But motorcycle enthusiasts have been rallying against the MPP's bill, saying not only is the bill unneeded, but would take away a valued family tradition.

"I would like to explain what this bill is not about," Ms Jaczek told the house. "It is not about questioning the love that those parents who have ridden motorcycles with their children as passengers have for their own precious children ... However, unfortunately, the numbers speak for themselves. Children are being hurt, and seriously."

MPPs spoke both for and against Ms Jaczek's bill.

Frank Klees, MPP for Newmarket-Aurora, said he's been a rider since age 17, but added at no point did it cross his mind to put a young child on the back of a motorcycle.

"The arguments of protecting people against harm can evolve into reductio ad absurdum. Yes, a motorcyclist is more vulnerable in the event of an accident, because there is no cage around him or her, than is a person in a car. But I put to you that you in your tiny little cheap Toyota Tercel are far more vulnerable than I am in my Chevy pickup truck in the event of an accident," said NDP house leader Peter Kormos, speaking against the bill.

Thornhill MPP Peter Shurman said Ms Jazcek is proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

"What is the motivation of the proposal, then? If you ask me, the member for Oak Ridges-Markham has overdosed on the Liberal nanny-statist Kool-Aid and is suffering from the father-knows-best hangover that ails her party and stems right down from Premier Dalton McGuinty, a.k.a. Big Daddy. Another ban - kill me now," he said.

"Denial of risk is a very common human reaction," Ms Jaczek countered.

"In my career, I've seen young girls who thought they could never get pregnant and smokers who thought they were somehow magically protected from the dangers of tobacco."

She said she sees motorcycle passengers under 14 as an unnecessary risk.

The house voted to send the bill to the justice policy committee, albeit with some nay votes.

Don't know why the choice of age of 14.....would rather see it consistent at 16yrs of age. Where the minimum to obtain an M1. I think the thought behind is kids are not of mindset to hang on or do not have the strength to hang on in an defensive manouver.

Sounds similiar to the proposed restrictions in beginners licence...just grasping for an age, such as 21, 14 for no apparent reason

WHAT??? I rode a motorcycle with my uncle behind me at the age of 12. Why not dig up some statistics as to how many kids injure themselves while playing (soccer, footbal, baseball, hockey,....you get the idea) and ban THAT TOO until the age of 18 when kids are responsible for themselves...

Turns out its not over a divorce, mommys letter was just a little helper!

These DEATHS could have been prevented too!

I am so sick of these politicians who have way too much time on thier hands, whom put forth BILLS with Soaked Shoulders!

Child Killed while toboganing

Child killed in auto accident

Shocking stats on drowning

Ontario Government Introduces Sweeping Child Safety Legislation

QUEEN'S PARK, ON, December 16, 2008 /CNW/ -

Childrens Safety Minister Alice Munro tabled new legislation today to safeguard Ontarios children. "We're on the side of young families who want to keep their kids safe," said Munro.

Bill 401 will amend the Child Care Act to legally require parents and caregivers to cover their children in bubble wrap.

"All parents want to protect their kids, yet nearly 90 per cent of young children involved in a fatality were not covered in bubble wrap," said Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson.

Legislative changes include severe penalties for individuals who attempt to pop the bubbles.

"These amendments build on our impressive record of child safety and welfare," said Premier McGuinty.

Previous legislative changes proposed or already proclaimed include:

- a ban on children riding motorcycles;

- automatic license suspensions for teenage drivers convicted of speeding;

- a ban on smoking in vehicles with children;

Watson said the ban on smoking in cars sends a strong message to parents. "Parents who want to expose their children to second hand smoke should do it at home," said Dennis Miller, President of the Ontario Lung Association.

McGuinty said, "Eventually parents are going to realize that most activities needlessly endanger childrens lives. The best way to keep kids safe is to never let them outside."

-30-

I wish my dad was able to give me a bike ride.

I gave my son one but he started crying at 55 mph.

Cheers

Viper1

More proof that, collectively, the government of Ontario fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down. "Bantario" in action again. "Denial of risk is a very common human reaction," according to Ms. Jaczek. Denial of one's own stupidity is even more common.

How many children get injured or killed by kitchen accidents every year? We should ban children in kitchens, or ban kitchens, or ban children... yeah, let's do that. Well at least through all of their super-moronic actions, I know who I'm NOT voting for in the next provincial election.

ticketcombat wrote:

Ontario Government Introduces Sweeping Child Safety Legislation

QUEEN'S PARK, ON, December 16, 2008 /CNW/ -

Childrens Safety Minister Alice Munro tabled new legislation today to safeguard Ontarios children. "We're on the side of young families who want to keep their kids safe," said Munro.

Bill 401 will amend the Child Care Act to legally require parents and caregivers to cover their children in bubble wrap.

"All parents want to protect their kids, yet nearly 90 per cent of young children involved in a fatality were not covered in bubble wrap," said Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson.

Legislative changes include severe penalties for individuals who attempt to pop the bubbles.

"These amendments build on our impressive record of child safety and welfare," said Premier McGuinty.

Previous legislative changes proposed or already proclaimed include:

- a ban on children riding motorcycles;

- automatic license suspensions for teenage drivers convicted of speeding;

- a ban on smoking in vehicles with children;

Watson said the ban on smoking in cars sends a strong message to parents. "Parents who want to expose their children to second hand smoke should do it at home," said Dennis Miller, President of the Ontario Lung Association.

McGuinty said, "Eventually parents are going to realize that most activities needlessly endanger childrens lives. The best way to keep kids safe is to never let them outside."

-30-

TC

Please don't give them any ideas or we could see another PMB coming down the pipes!

Does this look like a stunt driving charge could be laid, she's not sitting in the seat, looks more like she's sitting on the trunk

or is it just simple seat belt infraction?

BelSlySTi wrote:Does this look like a stunt driving charge could be laid, she's not sitting in the seat, looks more like she's sitting on the trunk

or is it just simple seat belt infraction?

I think the fashion police should get first crack. What's the rule? Don't wear upholstery after Labour Day?