|
|
I only read a few of these posts, but I can tell you from EXPERIENCE, that it IS illegal to use your high beams. You can listen to al the people on here who say "maybe this, or maybe that", or you can hear stories about there "friends, or others" who have done this, but I was charged by Durham Regional Police after I did this. I was driving down Taunton Rd and I saw a cop doing radar, so I flashed my high beams at all the comming cars to "warn" them. Turns out with my luck, that one of the approaching cars was another officer. He turned around and charged me with "failing to lowe high beams". I fought this in court and was still convicted. It was $125 and TWO POINTS. My insurance company laughed at this because they have never even heard about it before. It sucked. I hardly think that taping your helmet would constitute ANY HTA charges, but using your headlights DOES.
Moderator
Yes, failure to reduce your high beams or turning them on at approaching traffic is an offence. That's not the issue. The point of this thread is the legality of warning fellow riders that they are approaching a speed trap or oncoming cruiser. This is generally done with hand signals, not high beams.Originally Posted by yamahar1
Morally Ambiguous (submissions welcome)
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." - Oscar Wilde
It is not illegal at all to do this... There is no charge period that can be laid on a driver for doing this.. I know this from being around members of the policing profession my whole life... It is no different than radio stations warning of speed traps....
As far as lights go... you can turn your lights ON and OFF to warn. but the actual act of warning is not illegal.
Moderator
Ummmm.... that was my point.
Morally Ambiguous (submissions welcome)
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." - Oscar Wilde
As far as lights go... you can turn your lights ON and OFF to warn. but the actual act of warning is not illegal.[/quote]
isint it illegal to not have a headlight ???im assuming yes..so turning them on/off is still illegal no?im sticking to hand signals.screw the cagers that dont understand :P thanxs guys!
I think of it doing a service for the po-po's and at least keeping the roads a bit more safe. Wouldn't you?
What's wrong with abiding by the law after being reminded of the consquences?
The headlight issue is irrelevant. During daytime, you do not need headlights on. DRL's only come on some newer cars because of this stupid safety stint. It's only illegal at night time to not have your headlights on.
What? if by " some newer cars" you mean every car sold in Canada since Dec 1st 1989 then ya... All those rare "new" cars out there have DRL.
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
01001001 00100111 01100100 00100000 01010010
01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010
00100000 01000010 01100101 00100000 01010010
01101001 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111
No kidding.
If police will set up a spot check just outside the "Ride For Sight" location, to, of all things, inspect the legality of the helmet worn by the rider (who was riding for a charity that day), than YES. Riders always have things to worry about. I know there are police out there, who are don't specifically target any piticular vehicle. But I also know some have no shame.
Technically it is illegal. Obstruct justice but it is next to impossible to prove in court (officer I was working the cruise control or the wippers I didnt mean to flash you) that is why the cops give tickets like fail to lower high beam ect
Bikes R what unite us, what kind should not matter!
ummmmmm, no it is not obstruct justice in any way, shape, or form... it boils down to whether the cops want to charge you with flashing highbeams, which is only applicable at night..... Turning lights on and off is not illegal
There is a traffic course case in Texas where an individual was charged for warning other drivers of a police speed trap a number of years ago.
The judge threw it out of court stating something along the lines, that if anything, the driver who signaled was promoting safe driving on roads and was actually conveying a message in accordance with the law, therefore should not be charged for wrong doing.
Jason
Moderator
Criminal Code section VI.139 (Obstruct Justice) refers to perverting the course of justice in a criminal proceeding. Unless you're flashing your high beams in court to distract the magistrate, I doubt that it would apply.
To my knowledge, there is nothing against the law in telling someone to stop breaking the law.
Morally Ambiguous (submissions welcome)
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." - Oscar Wilde
My point exactly..... but it will still be debated.
i had a cop trailing me a while back for a good 15 minutes on a nice twisty road, i was just riding a good 50 meters ahead of the cop and tapping my helmet to all the fellow riders, i ran across about 30 riders who slowed down, probably only a couple of them didn't have a clue.
but i always done it and always well.
Nas
Dont you mean CITIZEN?
R e a d S l o w l y ! - Children at Play.
Then they wonder where the attitude comes from at times
R e a d S l o w l y ! - Children at Play.
Moderator
Had that happen to me while I was leading a ride through Halton. After about 10 minutes of that I pulled the group off to the side of the road and waved to the cop as she went by, then 5 minutes later, once we were under way, I waved to her as we passed her in the spot she'd set up to wait for usi had a cop trailing me a while back for a good 15 minutes on a nice twisty road, i was just riding a good 50 meters ahead of the cop and tapping my helmet to all the fellow riders, i ran across about 30 riders who slowed down, probably only a couple of them didn't have a clue.
but i always done it and always well.
Nas
Morally Ambiguous (submissions welcome)
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." - Oscar Wilde
Oh really. My 92 Mustang didn't have DRL's. I've seen several new vehicles between 2000 and 2006 without DRL's. My 91 Isuzu pickup doesn't have DRL's. It was sold here in Canada in 91. What else... RX7s didn't have them, Miatas, Ford Probes, most cars with pop-up lights didnt have them.
I think you need some more merit to your claim.
maybe you should learn what Daytime Running lights means.
And I think the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Act is enough MERIT don't you think?
http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations...0/mvsr108.html
and yes, all those vehicle you mentioned have DRL on them in Canada.
And you must of had a VERY special mustang without DRL since even the 91 mustang had them... or maybe YOUR special... hahahahahahhahahah
http://www.mustangforum.net/showthread.php?t=70
Even my Tacoma Has them
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
01001001 00100111 01100100 00100000 01010010
01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010
00100000 01000010 01100101 00100000 01010010
01101001 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111
Moderator
Also keep in mind that some stick-in-the-mud type people are known for disabling daytime running lights for whatever mysterious reason. It usually isn't all that hard to do.
All passenger vehicles sold in Canada since 1991 were originally equipped with daytime running lights. PERIOD. Can't be sold without them. (By the way, the pop-up headlight argument is a joke. Such vehicles have *other* lamps that act as daytime running lamps - i.e. the front turn signals, or dedicated separate bulbs, or whatever.)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks