“Roadblock Question”

I came to a red light at an intersection where a police cruiser was blocking the left lane just past the intersection by parking across it. The right lane was still open. 200-300 meteres down the road was what appeared to be an accident.

For some reason i figured I could still go through. So once the light turned green I cautiosly proceeded thorough the intersection in the right lane. The officer jumped out of his cruiser. I came to a stop and asked if i could go through.

He yelled at me took my licence and registration threatning with a ticket, went back to his cruiser. Came back in a few minutes, told me i was lucky i didn't go any further and he will let me go this time. All the while really being upset over what i did. I honestly expected more respect from an officer, no harm was done, honest mistake just ask me to turn around, problem solved. But that's another topic. To serve and protect, right?

Anyway, my question is what is the proper way for police to close the road temporarily let's say in this situation for an accident cleanup?

Would a parked cruiser with lights on do just fine? Should the officer be out directing traffic or sitting inside will do?

I couldn't find it in the HTA coming only with section 134 where it says: "a police officer may close a highway or any part thereof to vehicles by posting or causing to be posted signs to that effect, or placing or causing to be placed traffic control devices as prescribed in the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 134 (2)"

Where can i look up these regulations? It seems a parked cruiser is not enough to consider the road closed. There were no signs or devices. Could there be some other section I violated?

The ticket i was threatened with carried a fine of 110$ and 4 demerit points from what the officer mentioned.

Direction of traffic by police officer

134. (1) Where a police officer considers it reasonably necessary,

(a) to ensure orderly movement of traffic;

(b) to prevent injury or damage to persons or property; or

(c) to permit proper action in an emergency,

he or she may direct traffic according to his or her discretion, despite the provisions of this Part, and every person shall obey his or her directions. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 134 (1).

Highway closing

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a police officer may close a highway or any part thereof to vehicles by posting or causing to be posted signs to that effect, or placing or causing to be placed traffic control devices as prescribed in the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 134 (2).

Driving on closed highway prohibited

(3) Where signs or traffic control devices have been posted or placed under subsection (2), no person shall drive or operate a vehicle on the closed highway or part thereof in intentional disobedience of the signs or traffic control devices. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 134 (3).

Found the control devices in question here: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/ ... g-599.html

I think the officer didn't properly close the road. I bet that's why i didn't get the ticket.

If he's only blocking the left lane, a driver could make the argument that it appeared the officer was only trying to prevent left turns, not all traffic. There's also the wording of subsection 134(3), where it says "intentional disobedience." There appears to be nothing intentional in your actions. Inadvertent, perhaps, but not intentional.

I would suggest that the road isn't closed in the meaning of the Act. This is a temporary situation hence no signage. It comes under failing to follow directions of a police officer and then the discussion is whether a cruiser with lights on is enough of a direction. personally I always angled my cruiser with the lights on and was out of the car to provide specific direction. Sucked when it was raining/snowing.

Zatota wrote:If he's only blocking the left lane, a driver could make the argument that it appeared the officer was only trying to prevent left turns, not all traffic. There's also the wording of subsection 134(3), where it says "intentional disobedience." There appears to be nothing intentional in your actions. Inadvertent, perhaps, but not intentional.

He was parked after the intersection i was crossing and insted of blocking both lanes he was only blocking the left one. When i pointed out that on the other side of the accident another police cruiser was blocking both oncoming lanes by parking in the middle the officer mentioned he moved his cruiser as someone passed him on the left just before and was given a ticket. So he moved it and obviously created more confusion.

argyll wrote:I would suggest that the road isn't closed in the meaning of the Act. This is a temporary situation hence no signage. It comes under failing to follow directions of a police officer and then the discussion is whether a cruiser with lights on is enough of a direction. personally I always angled my cruiser with the lights on and was out of the car to provide specific direction. Sucked when it was raining/snowing.

Well this makes sense, one has to be out of the cruiser directing traffic and if he is not i can't find anything in the HTA that says i can't pass a stopped police cruiser with lights on. Section 159 says proceed with caution if anything.

This didn't happen to be in Burlington, did it? I saw a very similar situation there, I think it was on Wednesday.

whaddyaknow wrote:This didn't happen to be in Burlington, did it? I saw a very similar situation there, I think it was on Wednesday.

No, KW area.

Even on this forum i found a couple of simillar situations.

I expect the officer to help rather than punish every time there's no real harm, intent or danger. The goal was to divert traffic as they were cleaning up the accident. So if sombody gets confused, help him out. Don't disrespect the person and threaten with a ticket. Abuse of the law in my opinion. Should have probably filed a complaint for the officers outburst. Talking about road rage incidents on the news. Police should be setting example.