Something needs to be done | GTAMotorcycle.com

Something needs to be done

black_CG2

Well-known member
Over the weekend, there has been fatality of a couple in Haliburton. Few weeks ago, another rider has died because of a car's negligent U turn. Yet in every case I read that police have yet to lay any charges.

I am tired and sick of police and legislation for not taking our safety and lives seriously. Folks, we need to do something.

We ride to charity events, burrito, treats and motosocial events. However, have we done anything to make our voices and concerns heard? Can we do something?

I am open to ideas. Also, if there are members here who are known in media and/or politics, please get involved.

Enjoy your week and please give it a thought. Ride safe, everyone.
 
From what I have seen in the past, in most of these cases, charges get laid, but police want to get everything lined up first to ensure the appropriate charges are brought forward.

It would be great if left(and u) turns that caused a crash could be won in court as careless or something more, but "turn not in safety" or "failure to yield" are the ones that stick. Could political pressure and a few good cases (eg helmet cam showing bike was riding reasonably and at the speed limit before impact) change the standard to careless being the charge that is presented and won in most cases? I don't know.

I don't think we need more laws, we just need the court system to support harsher (existing) charges when things go wrong. I am sure police aren't happy attending fatal accident scenes and giving the offending driver a $90 ticket. That being said, the police won't lay charges that they know won't stick. It looks bad on their stats and wastes their time.
 
I don't think higher penalties would change anything. People just don't notice the bike. It's not fair but it comes down to rider to avoid accidents. Increasing visibility and defensive riding are the only way to reduce the risk of such accidents.

Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
 
I don't think higher penalties would change anything. People just don't notice the bike. It's not fair but it comes down to rider to avoid accidents. Increasing visibility and defensive riding are the only way to reduce the risk of such accidents.

Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
Agreed. Unfortunately the onus is on us to keep ourselves safe. Higher penalties have done little to stop cell use etc.

Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
 
I don't think higher penalties would change anything. People just don't notice the bike. It's not fair but it comes down to rider to avoid accidents. Increasing visibility and defensive riding are the only way to reduce the risk of such accidents.

Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk


I haven't mowed down a bike with my car in years... just lucky I guess.
 
I haven't mowed down a bike with my car in years... just lucky I guess.

No it's in the mind set. When I first started riding, people I knew suddenly saw a lot more bikes on the road. Of course there wasn't, it's that they now had a reference with me and noticed them more.
 
I'll take the extreme view....I don't know why they don't try to stick a manslaughter charge on some of these idiots. That's what I see it as in some cases, not an "oh sorry, was distracted, didn't see you, sorry I killed you, my bad...won't happen again" kind of thing. One or two high profile manslaughter charges with commensurate prison sentences and I think you'll see a mindset change pretty quickly. Once people associate driving with ownership and usage of a potential deadly weapon they might pay a little more damn attention.
 
According to StatsCan, there were ~220,000 "motorcycles and mopeds" registered in the province of Ontario in 2016. It's a good bet a large number of those registrants are voters, and you might be able to effectively double that if you consider the parents, spouses, adult children and extended family members of motorcyclists who also care about their safety.

So let's be generous and say a something like half-million votes might be available as a political lobbying force in the province. Consider that in the 2014 provincial election the popular vote gap between Wynne and Hudak was around 350,000 votes; it's possible that an effective and politically meaningful lobby could be established in this province to advocate at the highest levels on our behalf. This would be important for issues involving Ontario-specific legislation (e.g. the HTA and how its use by enforcement and the province often endangers us despite empirical evidence from other jurisdictions that practices like filtering are safer...)

In Canada as a whole the number of such registrations was 716,000: using the "family and friend" extension logic, you we could say that a lobby of more than a million voters could, in theory, be constructed Canada-wide. This would be important for strengthening penalties for criminal code of Canada offenses such as dangerous driving.

If you want to make real change for us it's not going to come about from bake sales and social events. It's going to be lobbyists walking into candidates offices and saying "I have half a million voters in my pocket. Here is what they're looking for. ... How can you help them and earn their votes?" It's a concerted media campaign showing motorcyclists as family people, brothers, sisters young and old being mashed daily by careless and distracted driver and essentially shaming police for focusing on loud pipes instead of going after those using their "devices" while driving (distracted driving now the leading cause of fatal road crashes in Ontario).

The problem is any political "organizations" we have are feckless and/or just useless clubs of poseurs wanting patches on their assless chaps or full-race suits. The problem is us: we suck for being too loosely associated, too "independent" and too lazy to do anything. Media campaigns and lobbyists aren't cheap. Who wants to pony up "dues" to support this cause? Such an effort could be in the tens of millions of dollars with no assurance of a positive outcome; how much are we each willing to pay to such a group?
 
I don't think any law changes will do a damn thing. People look at us, but don't see us. They see a whole lot of pavement, and think they are good to go.
 
I don't think higher penalties would change anything. People just don't notice the bike. It's not fair but it comes down to rider to avoid accidents. Increasing visibility and defensive riding are the only way to reduce the risk of such accidents.

Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
Agreed with this as well. We're small and coming straight at them. For the most part I don't actually blame them, they're not doing it intentionally, and I guarantee they don't feel good about it either. This is for drivers that aren't distracted. The ones that are too busy on their phones, that's a different case altogether and should be charged as though they were drinking.
 
I haven't mowed down a bike with my car in years... just lucky I guess.

Just like over 99% of the population.

Therefore the thought of hitting a bike isn't something burning away in the back of the minds of over 99% of the population. At best we would get lip service.

A thought: My 1958 Chevy had about five switches and three levers on the dash and each was distinct enough that one could find it blindfolded.

My present Elantra has about 60 or 70 switches on the dash, seat, steering wheel, overhead console and doors that are indistinguishable unless I take my eyes off the road to look. Add in a touch screen to top things off.

Most drivers are fixating on their destinations, reacting to traffic lights and other cars and trucks through a motor reaction that doesn't recognize bikes or motorcycles.
 
If police were policing instead of laying speed traps for everyone maybe drivers would be more careful.

Illegal left turns and u-turns, running red lights and stop signs, not signalling, etc. They just brush it off. Easier to prove speeding in court I guess.

Allowing just about anyone to pass the driver exams doesn't help either.
 
I'll take the extreme view....I don't know why they don't try to stick a manslaughter charge on some of these idiots. That's what I see it as in some cases, not an "oh sorry, was distracted, didn't see you, sorry I killed you, my bad...won't happen again" kind of thing. One or two high profile manslaughter charges with commensurate prison sentences and I think you'll see a mindset change pretty quickly. Once people associate driving with ownership and usage of a potential deadly weapon they might pay a little more damn attention.


The only problem with your idea is you're understanding of the legal definition of "manslaughter". They don't charge these idiots with manslaughter 'cause it's not the right charge... That's like getting charged with robbery, when what you did was theft.

Read sec. 232 of the Criminal Code.

A traffic accident, however odious hardly meets the test.

A more appropriate charges would be:

  • dangerous driving causing death
  • criminal negligence causing death
  • street racing causing death
  • impaired driving causing death
  • hit and run driving causing death
 
There is absolutely no reason a motorcycle isn't visible on the road if a driver pays reasonable attention while driving and isn't impaired. If that were the case, then motorcycles would/should never have been made legal for the road. Amazing that riders think SMIDSY is a reasonable driving excuse. GTAM is one crazy place.

Of course higher penalties change behaviours. It's been observed over an over again and is the basis for many interventions and making legislation. Impaired driving penalties have gotten more severe and significant over the years and with that has been a concurrent decrease in observed related behaviours and charges. It used to not even be criminal. And this is why there has been a significant push to make distracted driving criminal as well. Distracted driving now kills twice as many people in ON as impaired driving, and both are conscious choices as well as driver responsibility.

Personal responsibility and accountability for one's action is basic jurisprudence in our system of laws.




By some logic it seems it was up to the biker to miss this.
35f9edad-3c13-47d3-a15e-91450a1b42e2_ORIGINAL.jpg
 
Last edited:
If police were policing instead of laying speed traps for everyone maybe drivers would be more careful.

Illegal left turns and u-turns, running red lights and stop signs, not signalling, etc. They just brush it off. Easier to prove speeding in court I guess.

Allowing just about anyone to pass the driver exams doesn't help either.

Pretty much it.

For starters all drivers would have to be retested to higher standards. Many would crap their pants if they had to merge in rush hour traffic.
 
A number of US states have introduced minimum penalties for right-of-way violations that lead to a collision resulting in injury or death. Example - Tennessee. The fine is still pretty small, but it's a loss of driver's license for 6 months (injury) or 1 year (death). https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/tennessee/tn-code/tennessee_code_55-8-197

Thumbs up. That person would clearly remember and i would be shocked if they didn't pay more attention in the future. After paying their $90 ticket in Ontario I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled in front of someone leaving the courthouse parking lot.
 
There is absolutely no reason a motorcycle isn't visible on the road if a driver pays reasonable attention while driving and isn't impaired. If that were the case, then motorcycles would/should never have been made legal for the road. Amazing that riders think SMIDSY is a reasonable driving excuse. GTAM is one crazy place.

Of course higher penalties change behaviours. It's been observed over an over again and is the basis for many interventions and making legislation. Impaired driving penalties have gotten more severe and significant over the years and with that has been a concurrent decrease in observed related behaviours and charges. It used to not even be criminal. And this is why there has been a significant push to make distracted driving criminal as well. Distracted driving now kills twice as many people in ON as impaired driving, and both are conscious choices as well as driver responsibility.

Personal responsibility and accountability for one's action is basic jurisprudence in our system of laws.

Reasonable attention is compromised by car safety. Bigger roof pillars for roll over protection of the driver create bigger blind spots.
Fuel efficiency comes from smaller frontal areas, smaller mirrors, and tinted glass to minimize air conditioning loads. Aerodynamic designs often cut visibility.

Turn up the theatre sound. Why listen to what's going on around you as you think about whether you should switch from Starbucks To Second Cup?

Don't worry about a crash You have a dozen airbags to protect you. Tough luck to the others.



Cars today are safer for the occupants but not the ones outside the crash cage.

Yes, dedicated drivers can spot bikes but driving has to be taken as a discipline not a God given right. The attitude has to change and the voter score is about 98 to 2 in favour of the status quo.
 

Back
Top Bottom