Got a ticket for wearing a DOT helmet | Page 4 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Got a ticket for wearing a DOT helmet

sucks for the OP... ticket does not appear warranted and it sounds like the cop put you through the gears.

question, not sure if it was noted anywhere... Were you just pulled over for this and the check of exhaust, lights, etc? or did you get puled over for an infratcion where the cop was just looking for add ons?
 
so what it needs to have a,b,c,d or just e

I don't see an or after a,b,c,d

they way it's worded and written, the first 4 must be there, or just the last one

I think not
The semi-colons at the ends of A, B, C and D take the place of the word 'OR', as it is used to qualify the last list item. It is grammatically correct and legally accurate, meaning that at least one of the five listed certifications must be satisfied.
 
sucks for the OP... ticket does not appear warranted and it sounds like the cop put you through the gears.

question, not sure if it was noted anywhere... Were you just pulled over for this and the check of exhaust, lights, etc? or did you get puled over for an infratcion where the cop was just looking for add ons?

He stopped me because of the exhaust, then went into his tirade about everything else that was wrong with my helmet and bike, it was sheer non-sense. I was coming down a residential street, on my way to see a girl and he was stopped there already, i think he had been called because there was a party going on across the street from where he was stopped, the minute i passed him he lit up his lights and pulled me over.
 
Last edited:
Depends on what the success criteria for the career is. Is it justice or revenue generation...?

Right again. Met my quota I'm good to go. Doesn't matter if the majority of the charges get tossed.
Does anybody actually know if the police forces actually track the ratio of tickets given to see how many actually stand up in court? That should be the real measure of the officer doing their job correctly.

If this happened to me I'd be in to file a complaint in writing. Why should I have to waste a day fighting a charge that should have never happened in the first place.
There should be a system where the police force and cancel the ticket before it hits the courts and soaks up everybodys time and money. The system is full of waste as it is.
 
The semi-colons at the ends of A, B, C and D take the place of the word 'OR', as it is used to qualify the last list item. It is grammatically correct and legally accurate, meaning that at least one of the five listed certifications must be satisfied.
xxx
 
Last edited:
Right again. Met my quota I'm good to go. Doesn't matter if the majority of the charges get tossed.
Does anybody actually know if the police forces actually track the ratio of tickets given to see how many actually stand up in court? That should be the real measure of the officer doing their job correctly.

If this happened to me I'd be in to file a complaint in writing. Why should I have to waste a day fighting a charge that should have never happened in the first place.
There should be a system where the police force and cancel the ticket before it hits the courts and soaks up everybodys time and money. The system is full of waste as it is.

I'm debating making a stink over this because it's total BS, my concern is if i make noise and this ******* sees me he's going to lay into me again, and I frequent this area or have been often cause i'm seeing a girl there, it's in the beaches area.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The French text includes the "one of" phrase which is the way the English text also read until the latest change in 2012 to add the ECE standard. It seems clear that the English version has not been proof-read for consistency with the French version or checked for clarity of intent. Adding "one of the following standards..." to the English version makes it consistent with the French text and also makes it conform to the wording, and intent, of the previous versions which date back over 40 years. As I recall, the original intent was to require the CSA (Canadian standard) as the only permitted standard until it was realized that the CSA was not an approved standard anywhere in the USA (where, at the time, most states required a DOT helmet) and riders touring Canada and the USA would be required to carry two different helmets. It was also finally realized by the Ont. Dept. of Transportation that the helmets generally in use by riders at the time they began to make helmets mandatory were designed and certified to USA (USDOT, SHCA Z-90, Snell) or British (BSI 1869 or BSI 2001/56) standards. Hence the number of standards written into the regulation back then.
It was also found, at the time, that the OPP motorcycle patrol officers - the "Golden Helmets" - were wearing helmets which were not approved by any standard, nor, as designed, were capable of meeting any of the standards mentioned above. All this was discussed in detail in public hearings by a Select Committee of the Ontario Legislature on Traffic Safety back in or around 1976, at which several Canadian Vintage Motorcycle Group members appeared in order to put forward their views on improving motorcycle safety with reasonable, sensible legislation.

AFJ

I'm not a legal expert, so I can't speak to that aspect of it, but I am a technical writer of many years, for both private and public enterprises. It's not always possible to maintain a parallel structure when creating French and English versions of material; the languages provide for discreet variations. That said, the English version (with the semi-colons) is an acceptable way of enumerating a list of choices, where the selection of any one will satisfy the requirement. And I may well be wrong on this, but I believe that there was a Supreme Court ruling some years ago that stated the law need not be described exactly the same in both official languages. There was some legal gobbledegook attached to that, but that was the gist of it.
 
I think there's a lot of guesswork and assumptions being posted in the thread. Request disclosure, get the officer's notes and see exactly what he observed.

I also agree, if you show up to court unprepared and thinking this ticket is a joke... you might be surprised that the prosecution/officer may convince the JP to get a conviction. Just the transcript costs for the appeal process will dissuade you from it. You may ultimately require representation which will outweigh the increased insurance premiums you'll face on conviction.

edit: if he stopped you for the exhaust and other equipment offences, he can still charge you through a Part III summons within six months of the alleged offence.

So filing complaints at his workplace, will most likely open a can of worms to the other equipment offences.
 
Last edited:
I'm debating making a stink over this because it's total BS, my concern is if i make noise and this ******* sees me he's going to lay into me again, and I frequent this area or have been often cause i'm seeing a girl there, it's in the beaches area.

If this guy works for the OPP in the GTA he probably sees 40,000 vehicles a day. He would have to really be spiteful to find you in all that. Besides, assuming he is a professional police officer -- he should respect your right to go to court. He did swear an oath to uphold the laws which includes your rights.

Cops aren't perfect. They can make mistakes like anyone else.
 
So I just looked into this alleged CSA approval for helmets coded as "D230". SSC declares it as WITHDRAWN.
https://www.scc.ca/en/standardsdb/standards/1838

Essentially, this means that the CSA approval is no longer in effect. THEY NO LONGER CERTIFY HELMETS.

Also if you take a look at their 2012 consideration to allow ECE only helmet, this page specifically specifies that it will accept the certification.
http://www.ontariocanada.com/registry/view.do?postingId=8502

"to the list of recognized standards in Regulation 610 under the Highway Traffic Act..."
RECOGNIZED, not REQUIRED. The government of Ontario describes it this way themselves.
In other words, any of those certifications would qualify as RECOGNIZED.

In other words, ONLY ONE of the Certifications mentioned in Section 2 of Regulation 610 are needed to be RECOGNIZED..
CSA is no longer a valid certification.
Regulation 610 has to be rewritten.

Anyway, take it to court and surely they'll give you your money back, if it was made by any decent manufacturer.
 
Last edited:
Last time I was in the beaches they are under Toronto Police jurisdiction, (the OP stated it happened in the beaches so definitely a TPS officer NOT OPP).

Copper read the regs wrong, (or more than likely misinterpreted it, look how many interpretations there have been by members in this thread). It happens. I guess many posting have never made an error in their job? Although it will be an inconvenience for the OP he gets an email form GP bike s and Zox saying the helmet IS certified. He goes to first attendance. Charge is dismissed. End of story.

As has been stated by me and others requesting a trial and not being FULLY prepared, could easily result in a JP also misinterpreting the regs and a conviction.

Going to complain to his Sgt will not result in much, (but it could lead to additional charges). I have been there at best Sgt will say "what were you thinking?" while they laugh over it. Not like they are going to bring Police Act charges and toss this officer over this. Could have been the copper was having a bad day. Does that mean he should take it out on the public?? NOT at all but it happens. Does it make him a bad cop? Nope it makes him human.



If this guy works for the OPP in the GTA he probably sees 40,000 vehicles a day. He would have to really be spiteful to find you in all that. Besides, assuming he is a professional police officer -- he should respect your right to go to court. He did swear an oath to uphold the laws which includes your rights.

Cops aren't perfect. They can make mistakes like anyone else.
 
Last time I was in the beaches they are under Toronto Police jurisdiction, (the OP stated it happened in the beaches so definitely a TPS officer NOT OPP).

Copper read the regs wrong, (or more than likely misinterpreted it, look how many interpretations there have been by members in this thread). It happens. I guess many posting have never made an error in their job? Although it will be an inconvenience for the OP he gets an email form GP bike s and Zox saying the helmet IS certified. He goes to first attendance. Charge is dismissed. End of story.

As has been stated by me and others requesting a trial and not being FULLY prepared, could easily result in a JP also misinterpreting the regs and a conviction.

Going to complain to his Sgt will not result in much, (but it could lead to additional charges). I have been there at best Sgt will say "what were you thinking?" while they laugh over it. Not like they are going to bring Police Act charges and toss this officer over this. Could have been the copper was having a bad day. Does that mean he should take it out on the public?? NOT at all but it happens. Does it make him a bad cop? Nope it makes him human.

Perhaps but when I cop makes an error in interpretation of law, or takes his 'bad day' out on a citizen, the results are potentially far greater than if the barista at Starbucks gets pissy with you.

What it might actually do, if the OP goes to the local, is get the issue clarified so that no one else has to get this bogus charge. There's still a lot of riding season left and a long time before the officer is corrected in court.
 
Last time I was in the beaches they are under Toronto Police jurisdiction, (the OP stated it happened in the beaches so definitely a TPS officer NOT OPP).

Copper read the regs wrong, (or more than likely misinterpreted it, look how many interpretations there have been by members in this thread). It happens. I guess many posting have never made an error in their job? Although it will be an inconvenience for the OP he gets an email form GP bike s and Zox saying the helmet IS certified. He goes to first attendance. Charge is dismissed. End of story.

As has been stated by me and others requesting a trial and not being FULLY prepared, could easily result in a JP also misinterpreting the regs and a conviction.

Going to complain to his Sgt will not result in much, (but it could lead to additional charges). I have been there at best Sgt will say "what were you thinking?" while they laugh over it. Not like they are going to bring Police Act charges and toss this officer over this. Could have been the copper was having a bad day. Does that mean he should take it out on the public?? NOT at all but it happens. Does it make him a bad cop? Nope it makes him human.

If I have a bad day and decide to leave work during a build/deploy cycle and the cycle fails (leading to a broken server), I'm going to get fired.

Having a bad day doesn't mean you inconvenience other people around you...definitely not people you don't know. OP now has to waste time (probably pay) to go to court. If we followed your logic, cop could throw an HTA172 charge for no reason, charge doesn't stick, OP pays impound fees, loses 7 days of pay, might lose job, while the Sgt and cop laugh.

And this, btw, is why I hate cops.
 
guess you didn't read the second part so let me high light it for you...

RIF = Read IS fundemental

Could have been the copper was having a bad day. Does that mean he should take it out on the public?? NOT at all but it happens.

Of course your going to throw out the HTA 172. Did anyone say it was ok? Did anyone suggest the OP just pay the ticket? Not sure why your comparing your job and "leaving work or the building" did the cop stop him and say stay there then just leave work??? LOL I am going to "guess" that your job is slightly less stressful, then a cops job. Could be if as the OP suggested he was just dealing with an unruly party, it made his day even worst.

I also said it could be he MISINTERPRETED the reg, as a few in this thread have done so they can read it wrong but he can't? I guess your perfect and comprehend EVERYTHING you read the first time? Must be tough to be perfect congrats your the FIRST human i know who can say that.

You likley don't have to interact with other people when your having a bad day at work, it kind of sucks when you only work with servers all day.

油井緋色;2205718 said:
If I have a bad day and decide to leave work during a build/deploy cycle and the cycle fails (leading to a broken server), I'm going to get fired.

Having a bad day doesn't mean you inconvenience other people around you...definitely not people you don't know. OP now has to waste time (probably pay) to go to court. If we followed your logic, cop could throw an HTA172 charge for no reason, charge doesn't stick, OP pays impound fees, loses 7 days of pay, might lose job, while the Sgt and cop laugh.

And this, btw, is why I hate cops.
 
Actually, I'm replying specifically to the red part and the "he's human" part.

Software development, at the higher levels, involves as much communication as any other business related job. Deriving business logic often comes from understanding a business through executives and higher ups; can't do that without communicating and asking for feedback on a regular basis.

I threw out the HTA172 because I'm applying your red text and "he's human" logic with a kantianistic ethical view, which makes your statement implode on itself.

You also fail to see that the example I used results in the same result the cop did: random people get affected based on the worker's mood. The cop should be held accountable if they're having a bad day and take it out on tax paying citizens; we know they won't so we ***** on forums.

.............you're also adding to my experience that the majority of cops I've spoken/talk to have an average or below average IQ. Stop it.
 
So you have no reasoned argument so rather than just say so you feel the need to resort to a personal attack? Classic. I also stated it could be merely that he MISINTERPRETED the regulation. I also stated as is evidenced by a few members that they too misinterpreted the same section so I guess they too are below average intelligence, (In your view).. Have a great day at the keyboard.

油井緋色;2205759 said:
Actually, I'm replying specifically to the red part and the "he's human" part.

Software development, at the higher levels, involves as much communication as any other business related job. Deriving business logic often comes from understanding a business through executives and higher ups; can't do that without communicating and asking for feedback on a regular basis.

I threw out the HTA172 because I'm applying your red text and "he's human" logic with a kantianistic ethical view, which makes your statement implode on itself.

You also fail to see that the example I used results in the same result the cop did: random people get affected based on the worker's mood. The cop should be held accountable if they're having a bad day and take it out on tax paying citizens; we know they won't so we ***** on forums.

.............you're also adding to my experience that the majority of cops I've spoken/talk to have an average or below average IQ. Stop it.
 
He stopped me because of the exhaust, then went into his tirade about everything else that was wrong with my helmet and bike, it was sheer non-sense. I was coming down a residential street, on my way to see a girl and he was stopped there already, i think he had been called because there was a party going on across the street from where he was stopped, the minute i passed him he lit up his lights and pulled me over.

If it's loud enough to draw the cops attention you're on thin ice and you should know better. If you don't want the attention, don't ask for it.
 
A little off topic but I am offended by people wearing these Nazi style helmets whether they are DOT legal or not.
 
A little off topic but I am offended by people wearing these Nazi style helmets whether they are DOT legal or not.

Thank God we live in a free country, then :cool:

P.S. I'm totally anti-Nazi - got ancestors who fought'em and even a camp survivor in the family tree
 
If it's loud enough to draw the cops attention you're on thin ice and you should know better. If you don't want the attention, don't ask for it.

This guy was looking for trouble, that's why he was there, nothing else was going on so lets stop the guy on the bike cause i'm bored. Do ou think i didbn't see him? I was coasting down the street in neutral. Believe me, my bike is no louder than any other sport bike with an exhaust, or any other cruiser/chopper type bike. His first thing was i could hear your bike, ya, like you could hear any other vehicle passing by, the second reason was my helmet, it went down from there.......
 

Back
Top Bottom