The plane got me

[Avi Singh]

It is impossible to follow all driving rules 100% of the time. Since you and smoke seem to be on your high horse, perhaps you should turn in your licenses? Who decides to what degree the rules should be followed/enforced? Are you saying if the police started ticketting people for 1kph over the limit that we should just accept that because we're guilty of breaking the law?

I disagree with your notion that we should just accept things and bear it cause 'the rules are the rules'. I feel it is our fundamental right to fight injustice in whatever (NON-VIOLENT) means we can. If you feel a ticket is wrong, do whatever you can to prevent harm being done to you so long as you realise there could be further consequences for your actions.


Obeying the rules doesn't necessarily prevent you from getting a ticket, there are numerous examples on this forum of people who were ticketted unjustly.

I don't believe lying in court is the right way to do things but I also can see how an individual when faced with the injustices that run rampant in our provincial offenses process, would take to desperate measures justifyibly.

High horse???? Excuse me, but you know what the rules are, you passed a test based on those rules and signed that you would adhere to them.

Go back and re read what I wrote, I said that though I don't agree with all the rules I know what they are. Following the rules won't keep you from being unjustly accused, but it will reduce your chances of being stopped altogether.

At no time did I say we should grin and bear anything. If you've got an issue with the rules then have the rules changed. Look I don't like paying the percentage of taxes that I do, but should I just stop paying???? Or do we lobby to have taxes reduced? Breaking the rules isn't the answer to having them changed, all you're doing is adding fuel to the fire. The more revenue that is generated by the rule i.e. speeding, the more difficult it is to change.

As far as who decides what rules are to be enforced, that is the Police's job. Thats what we as tax payers pay them for. If you don't like the way it's done run for office and change it. Until then, I maintain that breaking the rules isn't the answer to having the rules changed.

[djltoronto]

You are the typical driver/rider. We don't mind paying a penalty (say $100) but we should not be penalized year after year by a private corporation. The mere notion that minor tickets increase 'risk' is absurd. Everyone speeds, only some don't get caught. Are the 'elusive' ones less risk than the ones who get caught in a speed trap?

Damn right.

*** EDIT***
Damn right I Agree with the post.

Not Damn right about the last sentance. lol

[kellen]

Not really. They're not idiots (even though sometimes it seems that way)... they pick a large enough distance so that even a normal allowance for delay in reaction time, etc., won't throw the numbers off too far. For example, you can argue that the officer could have been off by half a second, or even a second, but it won't bring your speed down that much.

--- D

do you realize how much diffrence a half a second makes on a speed around 130km/h? jesus, this is why we still have these laws because of people like this

[MeHow]

Half a second would make a huge difference in distance covered...at 130km/h 1/2 second is slightly over 132km/h and a full second puts you at 135km/h. So if the cop starts timing u late and anticipates the end line too early you can easily get screwed. Assuming that the cop is consistently fast by a second ... the faster u go the more off he will be, let's say your going 149-150, hes fast by a second, that puts you at about 156km/h!!! Sure he can be slow and that works in your favour, but somehow I have a feeling that these monkeys start that watch late and stop it early lol

[bear22099]

It is impossible to follow all driving rules 100% of the time. Since you and smoke seem to be on your high horse, perhaps you should turn in your licenses? Who decides to what degree the rules should be followed/enforced? Are you saying if the police started ticketting people for 1kph over the limit that we should just accept that because we're guilty of breaking the law?

I disagree with your notion that we should just accept things and bear it cause 'the rules are the rules'. I feel it is our fundamental right to fight injustice in whatever (NON-VIOLENT) means we can. If you feel a ticket is wrong, do whatever you can to prevent harm being done to you so long as you realise there could be further consequences for your actions.


Obeying the rules doesn't necessarily prevent you from getting a ticket, there are numerous examples on this forum of people who were ticketted unjustly.

I don't believe lying in court is the right way to do things but I also can see how an individual when faced with the injustices that run rampant in our provincial offenses process, would take to desperate measures justifyibly.

It is not an injustice if you actually did what you were accused of. Nor is it an injustice that speeding is against the law. It is the price you must pay to drive fast. How difficult is that to understand? It is not new, it is not something you were not aware of, you make the choice to do it, then you pay the price for doing it. Instead of typing all day about how bad it is, get off your *** and do something about it. I think you already know you can't win, and that is why you choose to just type tough about it.

[mat2312]

It is not an injustice if you actually did what you were accused of. Nor is it an injustice that speeding is against the law. It is the price you must pay to drive fast. How difficult is that to understand? It is not new, it is not something you were not aware of, you make the choice to do it, then you pay the price for doing it. Instead of typing all day about how bad it is, get off your *** and do something about it. I think you already know you can't win, and that is why you choose to just type tough about it.

I think you fail to understand that justice isn't necessarily what's written in a law book. When have I ever said that people should speed unsafely? I've never advocated dangerous driving. Any ****** who wheelies through a school zone @ 4pm should be hit hard with punishment. Speed enforcement isn't the injustice, it's the manner at which it's done AND the unfair, excessive penalties. Do you not see the problem when people of all walks of life are challenging this?

I just feel that our HTA laws/practices are unjust in both their intent and their deliverence. Violating peoples rights in order to instill your will contravenes everything our society stands for. Setting up speed traps in transition zones, busting people heading off to the cottage for keeping up with traffic, bogus tire tickets, handing someone an insurance ticket cause they were on a stretcher.

Why wait for a cop to give you a ticket Bear, you should march down the station and hand over your savings account. You're guilty of speeding like the rest of us, but you seem to be more of a man cause you're always preaching about 'owning up' or does that only happen if you get caught by the cops? Hypocracy


Do you not find something wrong with your last statement. If a man's legitimate struggle has zero chance of success, isn't there something wrong with his democratic society? The sad fact is, there are thousands of others out there with more or less the same view as me, we'll never get heard because guess what?

[mat2312]

High horse???? Excuse me, but you know what the rules are, you passed a test based on those rules and signed that you would adhere to them.

Go back and re read what I wrote, I said that though I don't agree with all the rules I know what they are. Following the rules won't keep you from being unjustly accused, but it will reduce your chances of being stopped altogether.

At no time did I say we should grin and bear anything. If you've got an issue with the rules then have the rules changed. Look I don't like paying the percentage of taxes that I do, but should I just stop paying???? Or do we lobby to have taxes reduced? Breaking the rules isn't the answer to having them changed, all you're doing is adding fuel to the fire. The more revenue that is generated by the rule i.e. speeding, the more difficult it is to change.

As far as who decides what rules are to be enforced, that is the Police's job. Thats what we as tax payers pay them for. If you don't like the way it's done run for office and change it. Until then, I maintain that breaking the rules isn't the answer to having the rules changed.

So how do you get the rules changed? You know as well as I do that it is a futile struggle. The only way things get overturned in this country is through drastic actions. Our politicians don't wake up until the matter hits them straight in the face. If everyone started going over 150kph on the highway, there'd be pandemonium in the courts.

Why do you think the Natives have taken the actions they have? The government has screwed them every which way and the only way anyone pays attention to their struggle is by occupying or causing a 'scene'.

[Duster929]

do you realize how much diffrence a half a second makes on a speed around 130km/h? jesus, this is why we still have these laws because of people like this

Yes, I do realize how much difference it makes. I learned all about it in basic mathematics, some time around Grade 5 or Grade 6. MeHow in the post immediately following yours demonstrates the difference with real numbers (although I haven't checked his accuracy). It seems half a second would make a difference of about 2kph, and intuitively that sounds about right. Do you think that's a big difference? If so, I'm sure you can convince the court to convict you of going 28kph over the limit instead of 30kph over the limit.

--- D

[Snobike Mike]

A half a second is way more than 2 kph at the close to impound speeds.

They measure over 500 metres, the difference between 140 kph and 150 kph over 500m is .86 seconds. (at 150 you cover 41.66 m/sec and at 140 you cover 38.88 m/sec, total time to cover 500 m at 150 is 12 seconds, 140 is 12.86 seconds)

The question is can the officer in a plane be accurate within TENTHS of seconds consistently and I would argue the answer is NO.

If the start a little late and end a little early the difference could be thousands in fines, and put in you the impound lot. Of course, by the time you get to court, if you did get impounded it's all way to late for you anyways as you've already been screwed.

[djltoronto]

A half a second is way more than 2 kph at the close to impound speeds.

They measure over 500 metres, the difference between 140 kph and 150 kph over 500m is .86 seconds. (at 150 you cover 41.66 m/sec and at 140 you cover 38.88 m/sec, total time to cover 500 m at 150 is 12 seconds, 140 is 12.86 seconds)

The question is can the officer in a plane be accurate within TENTHS of seconds consistently and I would argue the answer is NO.

If the start a little late and end a little early the difference could be thousands in fines, and put in you the impound lot. Of course, by the time you get to court, if you did get impounded it's all way to late for you anyways as you've already been screwed.

Check your math dude.
The difference 0.5 seconds makes does change with speed, as per the table below.

Distance between markers	Timed seconds	Calculated speed	Difference made by 0.5 seconds
0.5	10	180.0	9.5
0.5	10.5	171.4	8.6
0.5	11	163.6	7.8
0.5	11.5	156.5	7.1
0.5	12	150.0	6.5
0.5	12.5	144.0	6.0
0.5	13	138.5	5.5
0.5	13.5	133.3	5.1
0.5	14	128.6	4.8
0.5	14.5	124.1	4.4
0.5	15	120.0	4.1
0.5	15.5	116.1	3.9
0.5	16.0	112.5	3.6
0.5	16.5	109.1	3.4
0.5	17.0	105.9	3.2
0.5	17.5	102.9	3.0
0.5	18.0	100.0	2.9
0.5	18.5	97.3	2.7
0.5	19.0	94.7	2.6
0.5	19.5	92.3	2.4

[djltoronto]

A half a second is way more than 2 kph at the close to impound speeds.

They measure over 500 metres, the difference between 140 kph and 150 kph over 500m is .86 seconds. (at 150 you cover 41.66 m/sec and at 140 you cover 38.88 m/sec, total time to cover 500 m at 150 is 12 seconds, 140 is 12.86 seconds)

The question is can the officer in a plane be accurate within TENTHS of seconds consistently and I would argue the answer is NO.

If the start a little late and end a little early the difference could be thousands in fines, and put in you the impound lot. Of course, by the time you get to court, if you did get impounded it's all way to late for you anyways as you've already been screwed.

Actually, sorry about my last post, there is nothign wrong with your math!

But 0.5 seconds of error in timing at impound threshold speeds has about 6 km/hr of an effect on the calculated speed.

making a 0.5 second error in stopwatch timing is pretty significant. But it's wide open to interpretation. The timer could make errors on purpose just for fun. The evidence is very quesationable in my opinion, but the judge might not find the LEO's timings questionable.

[eastcoast_gsx]

Getting clocked at 137 when the average flow of traffic is 130 really sucks man.

OPP... spending millions to protect you from the big bad racers