Letter to the editor

**eastcoast_gsx** · 12-10-2007, 02:13 PM

Well, there is something wrong when you look at a show like "Canada's Worst Driver" How in the hell did these people get a license to begin with???

It was funny that the so called street racer was the second person given his license back... lol.

**Duster929** · 12-10-2007, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by eastcoast_gsx

If it makes you feel any better... the guy that stated that statement, HAS a PS Degree from McGill

I'm not surprised, as it is written like a real pro who knows how to position issues in the most effective way to get support for nonsensical positions. I also like how he signed the letter to the editor as a representative of the insurance industry, to make it seem as if he is a part of the private sector, when his other credentials (i.e. being on the safety boards and such) are as a political lobbyist. The organizations mentioned in that bio were the ones that pushed and lobbied for this new legislation in the first place.

He might have wanted to mention his involvement in the process as part of his letter to the editor or his article.

Make no mistake, this guy knows what he's doing when it comes to working the media and the political process.

As for responding with a letter of the editor, you have to realize that every letter you write, whether it is positive or negative, just reinforces the story as a "success" in the mind of the newspaper or media outlet. The absolute worst thing you can do to one of these stories is to ignore it completely. They HATE when you do that.

--- D

**Metastable** · 12-11-2007, 12:23 AM

I still think you should call him out on it. Mention what you said before, like BrianP already suggested, and at the end.... say what you just said above.

His opinion is vested in profits. It's ridiculous and exactly why insurance companies should NOT have access to ANYONE's driving records.

**Platinum Cycle** · 12-25-2007, 11:39 AM

AS I was driving along the 407 yesterday evening, with barely another car in sight, I mentioned to my wife that if I was doing the speed limit (100 km/h) it would seem like we were crawling.

As I sat comfortably in my mini van with kids sleeping in the back I had the cruise set at about 135 (careful not to get too close to that 150). The truth is however in my mini van I don't really go any faster than 135 at the best of times. My other car, well that's a story for another day.

Anyway, as I was travelling at 135 Julian Fantino's words came through my mind. He would have preferred the new legislation (the one we all hate) to kick in at 30 km/h over. I was reminded of how insane he must be. There was nothing remotely unsafe about my driving practices along the 407 last night at 135.

**KrazyBones** · 12-25-2007, 03:35 PM

Ya Fantino is messed in the brain. The new law is even way to0o harsh on stunters.... but the 50 over thing is just retarded

donut · 12-27-2007, 07:13 PM

well i dont think i'll ever get my Ranger impounded for stunting or racing, unless of course an officer see's me going down a snowy street sideways... and i dont think i'll ever pull over on the Ten.

i dunno if i could do it in the GTA, but living where i do i am not afraid to run and i'm not afraid to admit it. i dont recognize laws that are in direct contradiction to MY Charter of Rights and Freedoms, i sometimes have the urge to get a helmet cam and go around pulling over london cops for racing/stunting.

perhaps our polititians and so called "elected members of parlaiment" have forgotten what it means to live in a free country. my buddy Benny Franklin said it best.... "Those who would barter freedom for security deserve neither"

**Muchacho** · 12-28-2007, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by ddusseld

I was reading the Toronto Star wheels section this morning and noticed a letter advocating the new stunting and racing laws. The author was the President and CEO of the insurance bureau of Canada. What a shock...

He is having Christmas dreams about all of the extra money the insurance companies will be making....

When this law was passed, did anyone think of the possibility that someone might figure that if they commit this offense, it may be better for them not to stop and just continue speeding? This would increase the number of high speed police chases on roads and highways and would ultimately result in unnecessary deaths on those roadways due to the increased danger to all who are near these people trying to get away.

The point of the law is to prevent speeders, but at what cost? If people decide not to stop will they pass a law to allow police officers to shoot at them? These scenario is starting to resemble that American show "COPS".

**Rob MacLennan** · 12-28-2007, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Muchacho

When this law was passed, did anyone think of the possibility that someone might figure that if they commit this offense, it may be better for them not to stop and just continue speeding? This would increase the number of high speed police chases on roads and highways and would ultimately result in unnecessary deaths on those roadways due to the increased danger to all who are near these people trying to get away.

The point of the law is to prevent speeders, but at what cost? If people decide not to stop will they pass a law to allow police officers to shoot at them? These scenario is starting to resemble that American show "COPS".

As a matter of fact that specific point was quite thoroughly beaten to death when the law was about to come into force.

**Muchacho** · 12-28-2007, 05:35 PM

What was the conclusion?

**Rob MacLennan** · 12-28-2007, 06:40 PM

That it was likely to result in more runners.

**ddusseld** · 12-28-2007, 07:22 PM

Run Johnny run.....

Originally Posted by Muchacho

What was the conclusion?

**inreb** · 12-28-2007, 09:29 PM

I just stumbled onto this thread and only glanced it over. I guess the main thrust is the unfair speeding/stunting laws/penalties and insurance boondoggle. Hey, I'm on board, less gov't interference and all that stuff. Fantino's a dickhead +1 more. I drive a fast bike and I like to drift the tin top on occasion, it's practicaly a birth right. Who said it? George Carlin? Any body that drives faster than me is crazy and any body that drives slower than me is an idiot. I was driving on a city street recently where I was passed at a very high rate of speed. WTF!! Out of the blue and very close to me. How the f!!ck does this guy appoint himself such a large say in my personal well being! He's gonna maim me and my family because he can't play nice? Who's gonna stop him? Or should he be allowed to carry on until he finally makes a miscue? What's the answer?

**Duster929** · 01-02-2008, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by inreb

I just stumbled onto this thread and only glanced it over. I guess the main thrust is the unfair speeding/stunting laws/penalties and insurance boondoggle. Hey, I'm on board, less gov't interference and all that stuff. Fantino's a dickhead+1 more. I drive a fast bike and I like to drift the tin top on occasion, it's practicaly a birth right. Who said it? George Carlin? Any body that drives faster than me is crazy and any body that drives slower than me is an idiot. I was driving on a city street recently where I was passed at a very high rate of speed. WTF!! Out of the blue and very close to me. How the f!!ck does this guy appoint himself such a large say in my personal well being! He's gonna maim me and my family because he can't play nice? Who's gonna stop him? Or should he be allowed to carry on until he finally makes a miscue? What's the answer?

It reminds me of my favourite George Carlin quote, which is loosely applicable here:

Have you ever noticed that your **** is stuff, but everybody else's stuff is ****?

--- D