Printable View
I wonder what's going on with HTA 172, off late. I see posts from 2009 but nothing newer. Has the momentum to get this law reversed been lost, or are the cops not over zealous in enforcing this right now and hence the fewer complaints? Just curious is all.
The momentum to get the law repealed has been lost somewhat. It's not going away for a while, if it all. The fewer complaints are probably result of people speeding less - I personally feel the average speed of the fast lane on the 400 has dropped by about 20 kph since the law was introduced. Cops still can and do enforce it. Even if they enforce it less, it's not a good gamble to make considering what happens as soon as you get pulled over.
Given the black eye they got on conviction rates, in the beginning, they've been very reluctant to release data. It's off the RADAR, of the media.
I personally resent the fact that it's out there to be used by law enforcement as and when they see fit. I'd personally hate to be on the receiving end of it, like most others here, were something to go wrong.
Rob - Is there any way one can have them release the information under the freedom of information act?
Yes; with a Freedom of Information Request form :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterider
You'd have to know what to ask for, and the cost wouldn't be fixed. That's what has stopped me from submitting a request.
At first there were very few first hand posts of being charged, recently there have been more I think. I also think the number of vehicles blasting by in the left lane has dropped a fair bit. Not sure if it is fear, or just a cycle type thing. Sort of like the lynx to rabbit type thing..
Interesting. I thought that the request in itself would be free, but they would take their own sweet time in responding depending on what the political agenda of the hour is. But I guess you're right as to the specifics; Can't really make a broad request asking for all HTA 172 arrests and subsequent convictions and/or plea bargains, can you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob MacLennan
Why not do 50+ over by a cop and let us know? Im just curious, that's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterider
http://www.ipc.on.ca/english/access-...c-information/Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterider
Note the section where it says, "As well, you may be charged for the time required to locate and prepare records containing the information, photocopying and shipping costs."
Lol. Won't be surprised when if you were to get dinged for $5 per page of a 1000 page BS report that probably wont' contain anything really informative anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob MacLennan
I've requested documents from another gov't agency and got the information pretty much for free, along with a phone number and name of a person to talk to if I needed more information; who I did call btw. They were quite courteous. And I didn't have to pay a cent. Too bad that it's not the same here.
Wouldn't need to ask other folks in this forum now if I really wanted to experiment now, would I?Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnY S
Again, one cop might let me go while another might not.
The real question is what would a cop do in this scenario:
If I was in the right lane, boxed in by 3 cars on the 407 all doing 150+.
The first car coming from an on ramp, switches to the last but one lane from the left shoulder, proceed to ramp up to, oh let's say about 150, with another car deciding to floow real close behind him. While this happens another car simultaneously comes up real fast behind me.
While I don't want to hijack the passing lane, and try to maintain a faster clip than the rest of the traffic I prefer to take the "safer" choice in my opinion and boost close to 170 -180, passing the two ***** in their cages, and proceeding to make it across to the lane that's safest and then drop my speed to the rest of the traffic, and let those folks pass. A cop then proceeds to clock me at between 160-170 during that time.
hmmmm ... not sure If I'd like to repeat that experiment again with a cop watching the whole thing. Bear in mind, it's not the cop that I'd be worried about at that stage.
I must add that I was guilty of doing 140-150 to pass another vehicle moving at about 120 to get to a relatively light patch ahead of me when the scenario develops.
The above scenario being hypothetical of course ;)
oh ok. I think I read a few posts but mostly from 2009. I might've missed the others. I was more curious on the law being applied to evasive defensive maneuvering. I've had to blast past other traffic on the left lane. Not too comfortable with the way thing were panning out traffic wise, so I jsut decided to pick a safe spot ahead and keep a buffer between the traffic ahead and behind me for as long as I can. I've read horror stories of folks getting booked under the racing law for passing tractors etc.. at 130 in an 80 zone ni a car. A safe maneuver if you ask me as long as there are no intersections or driveways ahead and if you can see a fair bit down the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by bear22099
Why can you not just follow the bad situation at a good distance? You would be hard pressed to prove you MUST go more than 50 over the limit at any time. Stopping on the side of road is the option the judge will suggest.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterider
As for having to go more than 50 over to pass even a transport is also not necessary. If you want to see how long it takes to pass if you just go 15km/h over the limit, find a quiet street that has a car parked. Mark off two lengths back from that car, and two lengths in front of that car, then drive down that street at 15km/h and time how long it takes you to go that distance. That is how long it will take to pass a car 15km/h over the limit. You can play with the speeds, but you will quickly see that if you have sufficient time to pass, you do not need to go that fast to get it done. I found a really effective way to not accidentally go more that 50k over the limit when passing on my 150hp sport bike, don't go WOT.
Generally speaking, it's safer to pass faster than slower, again with the risk of getting caught because of this braindead law I would have to reconsider unless it's in the hairiest of situations. If you look at my example a couple of posts above, I would concur that in most situations you don't have to speed up too much to pass. But it's my dumb luck that situations have come up where I've been boxed in from all sides except the front by really aggressive drivers. To explain, I do a full sweep every 5-8 seconds. In that time I've had two cars come up really quick behind me and to my right in a span of a couple of seconds. one passing a car about 20 feet behind me in the next lane, and the only place I presume they could've come from is the on ramp (that was just behind me during my earlier traffic check) after sweeping across 3 lanes of traffic. The other car simultaneously decides to pass the same vehicle that I was passing at a speed I gauge was probably 20-30 clicks over what I was traveling. It is rather disconcerting to see something creep up that quick on your rear end (pun intended), especially when another vehicle magically appears in a spot that they should never have been in, in the first place. I do run what if scenarios all the time, trying to evaluate the worst possible moves someone could make and find an out in such situations. But this was all the more unexpected. Rather than mull over a situation taking place at these speeds the safest way out is in front and the only way then is by twisting the throttle.
There really was no option of me backing out of this one, which I do time and again to maintain a safe buffer between cordons of traffic in front and behind me.
Just for the record leaving only 2 car lengths, on either side of a car during a pass, would be considered unsafe. Now go and redo your demonstration ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by bear22099
A cop would not cut you any slack in this scenario. You do not need to do 170kph at any time on the 407 unless you see a 737 in your mirrors trying to land on the highway. Here's the important thing to keep in mind - once you are into HTA 172 territory, there are not many extenuating circumstances where a cop would not charge you. Sportbikes on the highway in particular do not elicit any sympathy from the police.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterider
That's what I thought. Which is why I wanted to know if cops have been executing more common sense when charging people and actually evaluating a situation. Well I figure that given a bad enough situation, I'll take my chances with HTA 172. Unfortunately hwy speed limits are a whole other issue and have to side with Jim Kenzie on that, but that again is a pointless discussion and probably won't result in any positive changes.
What's "legal" and what's "safest" are not always the same things - and this is nothing new, it's only that the stakes have been raised which tilts the balance towards us having to do what"s "legal" AS OPPOSED to doing what's "safest" in certain scenarios.
I wouldn't count on any cop cutting ANYone any "slack" with regards to this.
The opinion of the police and courts is that you can always pull off to the side of the road ... even if, reality means this would requlre braking on a sketchy gravel surface (almost guaranteed crash at highway speed with normal street tires) or getting run over from behind (not your fault - but you're still dead).
You just read my mind. I couldn't say it any better!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian P
I think when you had Fartino and Wooley spouting off, the media would look into things a bit. Of course, the reports would slanted but, some stats would get released that didn't always support what was being said by law enforcement.
So, I think a little less grand standing by the cops translates to less media reports. A recent report of OPP blitz for distracted drivers this week? I've been on the 402, 403, 401, 407 and haven't noticed much of a blitz. Maybe I'm just not paying enough attention????