Looks like Photo Radar is coming back..! | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Looks like Photo Radar is coming back..!

Forum Sponsor
I'm not too worried. They install it, every other party going promises to get rid of it, and blamo, it's gone and everybody but our resident hall-monitor PP is happy. Isn't Rae a Liberal now
 
Neil_V said:
I'm not too worried. They install it, every other party going promises to get rid of it, and blamo, it's gone and everybody but our resident hall-monitor PP is happy. Isn't Rae a Liberal now
Click to expand...

Once it's in, and they become reliant on the money, it's going to hard for any political party to just get rid of it. Sort of like closing the Beer Store and letting corner stores sell it.
 
Roadghost said:
Once it's in, and they become reliant on the money, it's going to hard for any political party to just get rid of it. Sort of like closing the Beer Store and letting corner stores sell it.
Click to expand...

You have a point; I just wanted to say rae, okay.

But seriously, The PC would jump all over this and ride it right into office, and last time they did, they kept their promise.
 
In school zones
With warning signage

Im okay with that.
 
mxs said:
The Libs really need to go ... everything they touch is just a peach .... you said that before the last election, eh?

Should we start ... "You know how many people die from playing sports every year?" .....??? Like their reasoning really matters.

I expect these "reduced-speed-limit zones " will be popping like mushrooms .... why not? If they can put 50km/h zones on three lane main streets, just because there's a few intersections with no direct driveway or house entrance adjacent to it, surely the revenue will be hard to pass on .... Let's hope the bill doesn't get traction before she's voted out, but I have a feeling it will be too late for that.
Click to expand...
Why do I get the feeling that if Wynne were to come up with a bill forbidding municipalities from deploying photo radar (exactly the opposite of what this bill does), you'd be complaining about that instead?
 
Neil_V said:
I'm not too worried. They install it, every other party going promises to get rid of it, and blamo, it's gone and everybody but our resident hall-monitor PP is happy. Isn't Rae a Liberal now
Click to expand...
Parties are banned from Ontario municipal politics.
 
V-Tom said:
I'm against it because it is never about safety but rather is a revenue generation scheme masquerading as a safety tool.

Here is some interesting information:

http://nophotoradar.ca/


..Tom
Click to expand...

I've added my name in support. Not sure if this will work with Mother Kathleen now getting air time standing with a bunch of kids claiming how this will save the children and balanced reporting like this (not!) covering both sides of the issue.

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=990064
 
Neil_V said:
I'm not too worried. They install it, every other party going promises to get rid of it, and blamo, it's gone and everybody but our resident hall-monitor PP is happy. Isn't Rae a Liberal now
Click to expand...


Just more $$$ wasted in the end.
 
fastar1 said:
Why do I get the feeling that if Wynne were to come up with a bill forbidding municipalities from deploying photo radar (exactly the opposite of what this bill does), you'd be complaining about that instead?
Click to expand...

Because your spidy sense is broken. The majority of Ontarians will hate this, regardless of political allegiance.

fastar1 said:
Parties are banned from Ontario municipal politics.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with my comment? If you're implying the municipalities will be able to keep using photo radar if an incoming party revokes the legislation which allowed it, you're probably wrong.
 
Neil_V said:
Because your spidy sense is broken. The majority of Ontarians will hate this, regardless of political allegiance.
Click to expand...
That any one person or group may hate it has nothing to do with the contradiction of someone being against it's enactment yet also, as I presume would be the case for mxs, against its banning.

What does that have to do with my comment? If you're implying the municipalities will be able to keep using photo radar if an incoming party revokes the legislation which allowed it, you're probably wrong.
Click to expand...
Because you made the comment thinking the province would benefit, as indicated by your subsequent agreement with Roadghost when he said governments won't want to get rid of it once they're reliant on the money. That clearly shows you thought the province would be reliant on the money rather than municipalities, when in fact the Province could ban cities from using photo radar without costing themselves any revenue.
 
fastar1 said:
That any one person or group may hate it has nothing to do with the contradiction of someone being against it's enactment yet also, as I presume would be the case for mxs, against its banning.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I will say however, my comment was based on a presumption that you are for it, and quite possibly attempting to discredit arguments against by attacking political leanings.. my bad if I'm off base, though I got that tingling feeling lol

Because you made the comment thinking the province would benefit, as indicated by your subsequent agreement with Roadghost when he said governments won't want to get rid of it once they're reliant on the money. That clearly shows you thought the province would be reliant on the money rather than municipalities, when in fact the Province could ban cities from using photo radar without costing themselves any revenue.
Click to expand...

My agreement with roadghost was 1 part cheeky, so I could say rae, okay; and 1 part agreement with the general consensus that this is just the small end of the wedge. The province will benefit. They always do; you do know victim surplus goes to the government for one... and don't forget the lobbies. There's always more then meets the eye, even if children are cute
 
Neil_V said:
Fair enough. I will say however, my comment was based on a presumption that you are for it, and quite possibly attempting to discredit arguments against by attacking political leanings.. my bad if I'm off base, though I got that tingling feeling lol
Click to expand...
Thank you for your honesty. Fact is I was against photo radar in it's first implementation, and now I'm still not in favour, pending new information that shows that it actually improves safety. Would much rather see the technology used on emergency vehicles to ticket vehicles that don't get out of the way.

My agreement with roadghost was 1 part cheeky, so I could say rae, okay; and 1 part agreement with the general consensus that this is just the small end of the wedge. The province will benefit. They always do; you do know victim surplus goes to the government for one... and don't forget the lobbies. There's always more then meets the eye, even if children are cute
Click to expand...
OK you're right, I see how you got there. And on reflection, giving the municipalities more freedom to tax could lighten the province's burden to a certain degree, since they share responsibility for some costs.
 
fastar1 said:
Thank you for your honesty. Fact is I was against photo radar in it's first implementation, and now I'm still not in favour, pending new information that shows that it actually improves safety. Would much rather see the technology used on emergency vehicles to ticket vehicles that don't get out of the way.
Click to expand...

You're welcome; that tingle must have just been a GTAM chub

My apologies :p
 
Flywheel said:
No kidding. Dundas Street between Islington Avenue and Royal York Road is a "Community Safety Zone". It's a 4-lane + median arterial road. Just more clawing from the Lich of Queen's Park.
Click to expand...

This is what worries me about it. I'm fine with photo radar around schools and so long as it is clearly marked (similar to Britain), but chances are they'll put them where there is the most money to be had (vs the need for more safety), and hide them in whichever way possible, just like the old unmarked vans that targeted anyone doing over 103km/h on the 401.

Also what exactly do they mean by 'municipal roads'? In theory wouldn't that be any roadway that runs through a city/municipality?
 
There is currently nothing stopping any road that isn't a provincial highway to be designated a community safety zone. The Gardiner and DVP are municipal roads. So are the Linc and Red Hill. I'm not concerned about photo radar within some reasonably short distance of a school within reasonable hours before and after school. The cash grab aspect of this is the issue.
 
Everybody's a big tech enthusiast until it comes to the law. Let's get some of that photo radar where it needs to be. The public roads aren't a racetrack, especially at school zones. So long as the photo radar is accompanied with ample signage ie; not an ambush, it's not a money grab. Should it be everywhere? No, I still want to mash the pedal in the curb lane when it rains.
 
You guys are dreaming if you think these photo radars will be turned-off in school off hours and weekends ... nobody (I beleive) is talking about racing, but 5km/h over and bang they have you. Have you endangered anyone? Hardly ... kids are gone, speed is usually in 40-50 range so doing 5 over at that rate doesn't make any kids safer, especially in off hours.

I hope Wynn (and Libs) politically "pays" for that secret gift to the society.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom