Is HTA 172 really THAT unsuccessful?

[knowledge]

They have a low conviction rate, but can you really say that the effect of the law has been unsuccessful?

How many people here are afraid to go 50 over for that very reason - how many of you guys are kept in check by the fact that you could lose your license for going 50 over the limit?

Sort of curious, tbh.

Btw, even if you only run sometimes, it would still count as a no.

 

[sarky]

i try not to go 50 over as much anymore, so its kinda working

 

[PLau]

I set my max on highways at 110-130 (depending on traffic speed) just cause I dont need another minor conviction on my record making that 2 =/

 

[Lickety-Split]

Yes, unfortunately. Good or bad, I very rarely do more than 50 over now......before the law I VERY often found the 200's on my speedo.
That's life. Probably better for me at the end of the day. Of course those 200's were never on public roads ;o)

 

[Nick_f]

i get more worried about the cop being in a bad mood that day and taking it out on me for 'stunting'

 

[sizemik_p]

I gotta say it's definitely on my mind nowadays so the deterrent works on me **BUT** does the road ACTUALLY seem like a safer place to you? Not to me. It's just more of the mentality that brought you the G20 fiasco. "If we give the police more power, we'll all be safer." What a load of crap!

 

[Pocket]

best pole is best, I'm voting no due to the creativity put into it lol

 

[SunnY S]

i try not to go 50 over as much anymore, so its kinda working

+1. My brain automatically calculates 50 over the posted speed limit and I do my best not to pass that.

 

[LiNK666]

Need to make a living, can't do that using the TTC!

 

[dankyyz]

+1. My brain automatically calculates 50 over the posted speed limit and I do my best not to pass that.

+1.

 

[Adamant]

I rarely speed, but not because of the 50 over law, but because I feel there are just more cops trying to bust speeders now than there was say 10 or 15 years ago. I remember back in the 90's I would pass cops doing 30-40 over and they wouldn't even bother with me, now they will bite you for anything above 16 over. Plus I have 4 minor tickets all within the last 1.5 years, luckily my insurance just got renewed with no MVR Pull. Don't need a 5th. 2 of my 4 were for speeding about 25 over and got knocked down, the other two were bull **** cash grabs downtown.

So I would say no. It's more about the increase in speed traps and rookie cops looking to fill their quota.

 

[Wileo]

The biggest problem I have with this charge is even if you are found not guilty you still have to pay the impound fees(2g's$) and the 7day suspension stays on your record

 

[Brian P]

In terms of the ultimate objective "safety on the roads" I would say it is not successful. Whether it has changed riding behaviour or not is irrelevant; what matters is the bottom line.

If it were as successful as some were initially claiming, then where is my 30% across-the-board insurance rate reduction. Ummm, no, the rate keeps going up. That speaks worlds.

The conditions in which it may have made a difference in MY riding, are conditions in which I wasn't going to get in a crash anyways.

 

[matthew]

Gas prices are keeping my speeds down more then the 50 over law.

 

[dankyyz]

In terms of the ultimate objective "safety on the roads" I would say it is not successful. Whether it has changed riding behaviour or not is irrelevant; what matters is the bottom line.

If it were as successful as some were initially claiming, then where is my 30% across-the-board insurance rate reduction. Ummm, no, the rate keeps going up. That speaks worlds.

The conditions in which it may have made a difference in MY riding, are conditions in which I wasn't going to get in a crash anyways.

You think changing riding behavior is irrelevant?

 

[zeniceguy]

I got charged for 149 in an 80 ( this isnt about that so just read my thread on it)
they droped it to 49 over, cop even said at my first aperance to another guy "no, we drop 50+ to 49 over thats it"
Every time I go out Im always watching where the 50 over is.
I agree that it does slow people down and is a good idea, but unfortunetly like my situation...... It isnt always right.
When I was younger I used to drive 200+ almost every day in my car. now only on race tracks.
my bike, well it just hits 50+ over so easy (yes all my fault)

 

[promac]

Insurability and premiums have been the main deterrant for me. Even without HTA 172, you were pretty much screwed if you were convicted of going in excess of 49kph. An extra 4 - 6 grand a year for 3-6 years isn't the way I want to spend my money while getting rediculously low liability coverage.

 

[imnothng]

+1. My brain automatically calculates 50 over the posted speed limit and I do my best not to pass that.

+1.

+2.

I wouldn't have a problem with this law if you were refunded any cost incurred when found not guilty. That is really the only reason I will NOT go over 50, but if I could be refunded I would probably take the chance the odd time I felt the need to speed

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Well, it changed my driving/riding habits a bit...
1) I'm less likely to practice proper lane discipline, because I don't wanna appear to be "weaving" so I sometimes hog the left lane for a bit before moving over..
2) I'm more likely to keep an eye out for cops instead of road hazards
3) I sometimes block the left turn lane because I don't wanna appear to "intend to spin a tire" so I make my left turns extra-slow
4) I've been more likely to stay far back of a left lane bandit and just lay on my horn until he moves over or I reach my exit

So yes, this law did have some effects on the way I operate my motor vehicles. It reduced my level of lane discipline, made me a bit less careful, made me an obstacle at intersections and made me appear rude. I guess it brought me back to the norms of Ontario driving.

 

[Brian P]

You think changing riding behavior is irrelevant?

Yes, because the rare circumstances in which it changed what I do (and only to a very minor extent, at that), aren't the circumstances which account for the majority of actual collisions (left turn in front in traffic at city-traffic speeds for multivehicle, or misjudge corner for single vehicle). Offsetting whatever tiny theoretical "safety" benefit that it might have in some rare situations, is that it has removed options for me to get away from an errant or misbehaving car driver - which HAS happened from time to time in my 20+ year riding career. Net safety benefit, pretty much nil. Maybe even a dis-benefit because of forcing this experienced rider into doing what's legal instead of what's safest, in situations where the safest thing to do (for example, GTFO of Dodge) isn't the most legal thing to do.

As I said before ... if it were as successful as claimed, where is my 30% insurance premium reduction. Hasn't happened, and in fact it has gone the other direction.

High gas prices encourage slowing down and driving less. That happened in 2008 and it's going to happen again in 2011. Crappy economy with not much work encourages driving less. That happened in 2009 and 2010. Whatever statistical trends one wishes to presume, have to take these factors into account. There were reductions in traffic injuries and fatalities across North America in these years ... not just in Ontario.