Search results

At my Detachment, there are approximately 15 marked cruisers (cars/SUV's), and exactly two unmarked vehicles. We also have one motorcycle. Our primary purpose is traffic safety through visibility, not sneaky enforcement. Personally I think it's good to supplement the front line patrols with one...

Do you have a high beam setting too? or just a low beam? If I were to see the bike on the road I would want to see a headlight operating anytime the bike is running, and the ability to turn on high or low. MacGruber... lol

No, by all means, haul the dead bodies... just don't do it with a radar detector. Haha

As previously mentioned, radar detectors are illegal in Ontario. Not mentioned, was that it is one of very few circumstances that allow an officer to search the motor vehicle WITHOUT A WARRANT. That means anything that is in the vehicle that isn't supposed to be there is fair game if the officer...

If there was no contact, it's not a collision as per the MTO. The other driver will not have to give his/her insurance info and particulars to the OP. At most, the driver of the truck is 'indirectly involved'. They could still be charged for offences under the HTA/CC if the witnesses have enough...

If implemented, AMPS will change my job in a big way. No more sitting in traffic court, for people who are just waiting to see if I show up, before taking their guilty plea. No more testifying for 'minor' offences, which is where I get practice for testifying in criminal court. As a coach...

As far as I know, the LTI 20-20 is a lidar device. It is primarily a stopwatch that measures distance, so it gives out a distance reading ie. 208.8m. It will take many distance measurements in very quick succession and it plots the measurements using the average of least squares to calculate...

I've only ever dealt with the Environmental Protection Act with respect to emissions, but that's more for cars and catalytic converters. I'm not aware of anything that would prohibit a swap like this... but I'd be interested to find out, in case anyone turns anything up!

Signal for left or right turn 142. (1) The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before turning to the left or right at any intersection or into a private road or driveway or from one lane for traffic to another lane for traffic or to leave the roadway shall first see that the...

The MTO has done quite a bit of research into sound testing motorcycles. Currently, the equipment required to test is expensive, and the courts don't require that level of precision. Until the law actually changes on a Provincial level, there will be no pressure to buy new gear to enforce the...

No, it wouldn't be considered flight. There could be a charge for failing to stop for emergency vehicle at nearest edge of roadway/curb (depending on the type of road). This would also need to be explained, the distance that the driver was followed after being signaled to stop, the speeds at...

Close - it's 115km/hr.

Failing a roadside screening device test, refusing to provide a sample, or blowing over 80mgs at the station all result in a 7 day impound. Yet, impaired by drug does not... loophole anyone?

That's pretty risky, putting a sticker on a cop car... we all know stickers make things faster. He could have had a real race on his hands.

Now that's commitment. I can't imagine the embarassment this guy must have been feeling.

How about 216(3)? Some might find that useful...

For the snow load situation, I've used s. 84 (unsafe vehicle) to cover that one. The snow load and the way it becomes unstable creates an unsafe condition for other users. It's not a part of the load so s. 111 isn't really appropriate. The snow and ice coming off can, and has, caused real damage...

I laid a charge for stunt, based on the wheelie that I witnessed. On the trial date, the prosecutor amended the offence to following to closely, under pressure from the paralegal defence and a full docket with not enough time for a trial. The fine was assessed at $500 (which is more than the...

No, probably because 99% of our officers would delete it before reading it. And to be honest, stats analysis is probably way above my pay grade anyway. Interesting point earlier by Rob though, distracted driving in all its various forms should be easily covered by the careless driving section...

I had a wheelie charge plead down to 'follow too closely' in Newmarket court. The paralegal and prosecutor didn't like my suggestion that there was no appropriate amendment.