“Charged With Speeding 15 Kl Over In Process Of Passing”

Thanks Racer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I made a post on this topic and didnt get an answer.

So what gives guys.

If i go 151 i get impounded, screwed over royally, my rights to a fair trial taken away by having my car taken on the spot.

I could do this at 3:30 am on the 401 in no where land and not endanger anyone and going with the flow of traffic.

But some jackass in a trailer parked at 105 in the left lane purposely doing this will not get 172.?

Its a 2 way street and speeding is not the only "dangerous thing"

I see this all the time and its way more dangerous then going 150. Youll have some guy slowing everyone down. Hell stay at 105 and so wil the truck behind him and people will get infuriated!

How come these people never get 172.

And don't tell me its hard to enforce this at all.

I already know that officer will hide under bridges, or sit on the shoulder with lidar and they will check your speed.

So if your an officer and you have a constant space of cars passing, and then lets say no cars pass for 1 minute, then you look up the road and you see there is a major traffic jam behind some guy in the left lane who is doing this on purpose as a STUNT!

So why not go give him 172 for purposely blocking other vehicles and trying to slow them down?

I guess most of our officers today and the rest of the public along with Julian Fantino would say nothing but would add the fact that all the cars behind this inconsiderate person who is dangerously doing this mustall be really aggressive tailgates right?

Nothing angers me more!!!. These people really od make the road hell. At least on the autobahn they will give major tickets for doing this.

It is not funny when it happens.

There has been a few times going up to Barrie on the 400 where the flow of traffic in the left lanes can easily get up to 130-140 and then some guy in a Prius will sit there at 105 going the same speed as the truck behind them.

This guy is causing road rage, messing with the flow of traffic, refusing to let others pass, making the road very dangerous, infuriating every driver behind him, and causing the drivers behind him to swerve around lanes and cut others off to get around this inconvenience.

And this it not a stunt or dangerous !!!! ya right.

I am not referring to this truck but come on maybee some paint and a new sign?

I mean i always see those big blue signs right "50 over and well tow your ass, impound your car and fine you a ton of money."

How about some signs reminding us to "Move right except to pass."

"Driving in left lane prohibited."

""8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,

ii. stopping or slowing down a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates the drivers sole intention in stopping or slowing down is to interfere with the movement of another vehicle by cutting off its passage on the highway or to cause another vehicle to stop or slow down in circumstances where the other vehicle would not ordinarily do so, ""

Well i know the 50 over law works cause when the flow of traffic is at 140-145 they all know it to.

Maybee those people who deliberate do this behavior should also be notified that they can be towed.

We never see this on the news.

"Man clogging passing lane on hwy 407 causes 1 km traffic jam and has car towed under under 172 as stunt driving."

It's not fair, you speed and the whole world thinks your some dangerous reckless nut and you lose out big time.

But you can get away with behavior like this on our roads?

I wonder how many cops would actually apply 172 to someone doing this. We know most will for going 50 over.

Hwybear you say though there is no excuse to go 50 over, ill agree but there is also no excuse to be purposely trying to slow down others or block traffic from passing.

I think this happens alot more then people who drive 50 over the limit aswell.

Ya I hear you tdrive2. Just looking at the OREG455/07 makes you ask a lot of question, one for each the definitions.

Why is "Marked departure from the normal flow of traffic" means 50 over the speed limit? Someone doing 151 when everyone else is doing 149 is by no means a "marked departure"? Tapp proved that in court apparently.

Why is that when someone is overtaken, they step up on gas to avoid it? If they weren't too slow before that they wouldn't be overtaken, and that is normal behaviour?

Why is it the 50 over that gets all the attention and enforcement, and the rest of a semi-decent act with some good points in it (I am talking everything else but the roadside trial) gets ignored?

The list goes on and off-topic.

Squishy wrote:So when I drive 80 or 90 km/h on a two-lane highway, I'm being a problem?

WAIT! Let me clarify...

If there's a long line of cars all packed up behind you...

Bookm wrote:

Squishy wrote:So when I drive 80 or 90 km/h on a two-lane highway, I'm being a problem?

WAIT! Let me clarify...

If there's a long line of cars all packed up behind you...

Then...there's a lot of cars on the road?

Squishy wrote:

Bookm wrote:

Squishy wrote:So when I drive 80 or 90 km/h on a two-lane highway, I'm being a problem?

WAIT! Let me clarify...

If there's a long line of cars all packed up behind you...

Then...there's a lot of cars on the road?

Unless there's nobody in front of him.......

Squishy wrote:So when I drive 80 or 90 km/h on a two-lane highway, I'm being a problem? Oh noes.

In Which Lane?

The right or the left.

In the left lane, yes you would indeed be the problem.

On a second though Racer i thought of something.

Maybee they would only use 172 on a person blocking a lane if it was a tim hortons truck plugging the middle lane and stopping others from using it. Can you imagine them impounding a whole tim hortons truck + trailer. boy ohbboyyyy ( are the contents of the trailer evidence to )

tdrive2 wrote:I made a post on this topic and didnt get an answer.

.

tdrive2 wrote:Hwybear you say though there is no excuse to go 50 over, ill agree but there is also no excuse to be purposely trying to slow down others or block traffic from passing.

I think this happens alot more then people who drive 50 over the limit aswell.

Nor should one driving at 105km/hr passing another be forced by some knuckle head to exceed the speed they are not comfortable with to pass someone quicker, so knuckle head can blast down the highway. b/c that driver has a poor sense of time management.

If everyone drove at 100km/hr or even 120km (hey I'll give you that for arguement sake right now) Or better yet the gov't speed govenor at 105km/hr and not 1km faster or slower....no one would catch anyone, no one would pass, and traffic would just flow consistently.

Back to one of my points....give me a "traffic car" to see this stuff, not a B&W billboard, not a crown vic. I would more than gladly knock off the drivers you speak of, but I need the tools to do the job.

tdrive2 wrote:

Squishy wrote:So when I drive 80 or 90 km/h on a two-lane highway, I'm being a problem? Oh noes.

In Which Lane?

The right or the left.

In the left lane, yes you would indeed be the problem.

There is no "left lane." A two-lane highway has one lane in each direction.

Mmm... wine & cheese...

hwybear wrote:Back to one of my points....give me a "traffic car" to see this stuff, not a B&W billboard, not a crown vic. I would more than gladly knock off the drivers you speak of, but I need the tools to do the job.

I think it would be worthwhile seeing if employing that sort of "traffic car" reduces collisions, injuries and fatalities over the course of a summer, traditionally the highest time of year for road deaths. Maybe it could be started as a pilot project.

hwybear wrote:If everyone drove at 100km/hr or even 120km (hey I'll give you that for arguement sake right now) Or better yet the gov't speed govenor at 105km/hr and not 1km faster or slower....no one would catch anyone, no one would pass, and traffic would just flow consistently.

We didn't successfully evolve in to our current status as the most advanced life form ever to walk the earth because we are virtual clones of one another and are comfortable being controlled and shepherded by some higher authority. It's because of our vast difference of opinions and individuality. It's this desire to explore, create, and experiment in different ways that makes a free society FREE.

You will never see a government get elected that would restrict a drivers ability to choose his own speed within a tolerance of 1 or 2 kph. To suggest that this is a reasonable proposal makes me question your grasp of society in general. Why not just say, "Just say NO", or, "Can't we all just get along". Gee, why didn't those simplistic schemes resolve their associated causes.

It has to be understood that there will always be two general speeds on the road, "faster" and "slower". Traffic engineers have always known this which is why we have multiple lanes in each direction, lane markings to assist with passing, and a plethora of statutes that relate to passing and lane etiquette. Human behavior demands it! It will never change.

Bear, your job is plenty safe!

Bookm wrote:

hwybear wrote:If everyone drove at 100km/hr or even 120km (hey I'll give you that for arguement sake right now) Or better yet the gov't speed govenor at 105km/hr and not 1km faster or slower....no one would catch anyone, no one would pass, and traffic would just flow consistently.

We didn't successfully evolve in to our current status as the most advanced life form ever to walk the earth because we are virtual clones of one another and are comfortable being controlled and shepherded by some higher authority. It's because of our vast difference of opinions and individuality. It's this desire to explore, create, and experiment in different ways that makes a free society FREE.

You will never see a government get elected that would restrict a drivers ability to choose his own speed within a tolerance of 1 or 2 kph. To suggest that this is a reasonable proposal makes me question your grasp of society in general. Why not just say, "Just say NO", or, "Can't we all just get along". Gee, why didn't those simplistic schemes resolve their associated causes.

It has to be understood that there will always be two general speeds on the road, "faster" and "slower". Traffic engineers have always known this which is why we have multiple lanes in each direction, lane markings to assist with passing, and a plethora of statutes that relate to passing and lane etiquette. Human behavior demands it! It will never change.

Bear, your job is plenty safe!

Give me a 105 governer and i'll put on bigger wheels.....'nough said.

Reflections wrote:Give me a 105 governer and i'll put on bigger wheels.....'nough said.

I see what you mean

Well i guess its just Ontario plenty of other places drive with higher limits and live to tell the tale.

What does lane discipline have to do with being in a hurry?

Don't we build super highways to get places fast?

Sure bear ill manage my time. Next time i wanna to to Waterloo ill plan our like 6 hours and take a whole bunch of 50 km/hr roads....

In fact "super highways" or controlled access highways work just fine when people use lanes properly.

Oh i forget doesn't the autobahn already do this?

Ill put a speed limiter on my car when the OPP put a speed limit on their car which turns off when they turn their lights on.

I think ill keep fast limits and a higher risk of death or some risk in my life them some sort of Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Or Obama based Socliast society.

Whos gonna pay for the limiters?

Besides when are we going to install those scales in MacDonalds that dont let obese people order food?

We could make those to. They could have a scale where you order them at Tim Hortons to. And cops that are unhealthy and would cost our health care system lives , it could measure your height and weight and if its "obese no doughnuts for you".

When are we gonna ban all Cigarettes and fast food to cause they "kill people."

Hell there is probably 1000 Times more people that die from smoking and eating then do racing or "driving to fast down the 401 at 150."

We could also install big glass bubbles around all our cars to like on the Jetsons.

Or even better if we don't want to die we could simply make all car production illegal and have the government build some sort of super green fuel efficient vehicles with speed limiters and devices to prevent tailgating like big magnets on the back of our cars.

They could also install big walls between the driver and passengers to prevent the driver from being distracted.

Maybe its the whole rest of the modern world that has it wrong or just Ontario?

Maybe i just described the Ultimae McGunity & Fantino State.

Oh guys did i mention we could install all cars with tin foil to stop those waves from the cops radar/lidar guns from giving us cancer haha.

I cant wait to see speed limiters at work!!!!

I know they are gonna work just great when your on a highway and the flow of traffic is at 130 and a bunch of slow trucks are parked in the middle of the road.

I am sure these people will all just happily slow down behind the trucks and not get to close, or try to pass on the right, cut someone off, tailgate each other in the left lane, you know thats how everyone drives in the GTA anyays.