New Distracted Driving Laws Jan 1 2019? | GTAMotorcycle.com

New Distracted Driving Laws Jan 1 2019?

nobbie48

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I picked up a bit somewhere that more things were being thrown in to the DD category, eating for example. I can understand a plate of lasagna with a side salad but how about a donut, chocolate bar or coffee?

A donut in one hand and a coffee in the other doesn't sound good.

Can't program your GPS but how about checking it for traffic?

Stiffer penalties as well including suspensions but apparently not roadside.

I'm all for responsible driving laws. How far do we take this considering the lack of common sense about these days?
 

ungoloth

Well-known member
My buddies and I refuse (within reason) to ride in cities or 400 series hwys for the above reason. Not may folks on their cell phones on hyw 507 or they become part of the rock-cut.
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Clearly people aren't getting the message, i have no concerns with them nuking all fiddling/eating/drinking if that what it takes to get people to concentrate on doing something many are inherently bad at to begin with.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I have no issues with including other items which take the focus of driving. In reality, however, is there is no justification in the distracted laws. Back even in the 70's and 80's if someone was doing something, (Example eating, while behind the wheel), I still had avenues available to me to correct the behaviour, I would simply lay the charge of careless driving, (which back then was understood as being careless, actually meant something).
 

sburns

Well-known member
Clearly people aren't getting the message, i have no concerns with them nuking all fiddling/eating/drinking if that what it takes to get people to concentrate on doing something many are inherently bad at to begin with.
Agreed! The situation has already gotten out of control the more they slack off this the more people are going to try and get away with it or do more things they shouldn't. I hope this also targets the num numbs who put their GPS's right on the windshield and impeding their visual focus and range of the road.
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Agreed! The situation has already gotten out of control the more they slack off this the more people are going to try and get away with it or do more things they shouldn't. I hope this also targets the num numbs who put their GPS's right on the windshield and impeding their visual focus and range of the road.
If memory serves planting a GPS in the middle of your windshield is already a violation. I would be surprised to hear of it being actively enforced though.
 

basmn

Well-known member
Site Supporter
My fav was the hotti behind the wheel putting the makeup on in the visor mirrior while driving down the rd.
Last week driving home from the cottage i see a private courier van on the 401...we r moving at aprox 40 - 60 k in traffic..he is weaving....alot....i notice he is on his tablet...and cell...dummy has his phone # plastered on his truck....so i call him lol... ( i have hands free voice comand )... he picks up....i tell him to put away the toys and keep his eyes on the road where they belong or im gona call it in...i tell him to do the right thing...then hang up....u should have seen the look on his face...f $#$ en hilarious... needless to say that corrected his issues lol
 
Last edited:

nobbie48

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I have no issues with including other items which take the focus of driving. In reality, however, is there is no justification in the distracted laws. Back even in the 70's and 80's if someone was doing something, (Example eating, while behind the wheel), I still had avenues available to me to correct the behaviour, I would simply lay the charge of careless driving, (which back then was understood as being careless, actually meant something).
The problem is the lack of judgement. Is a coffee OK?

What if it's a coffee from home in a ceramic mug prone to spilling on the little fellas?

Is a Timmies in a paper cup OK because it has a lid but then the theoretical McD's $5 Million coffee spill is mentioned.

A coffee in a screwed on lid sippy cup may be the best.

A french fry may be ok but not with ketchup because of the risk of a stain if dropped.

How detailed does the law have to be?

At some point a cop has to use his judgement and the driver has to accept that he can't steer and juggle at the same time.

The GPS issue is a problem in that properly used, detour for example, could minimize traffic hazards.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Really doersn't matter WHAT the item is. What IS iof importance is the effect it is having on the operators ability to focus and operate said motor vehicle in a responsible and safe manner.

The problem is the lack of judgement. Is a coffee OK?

What if it's a coffee from home in a ceramic mug prone to spilling on the little fellas?

Is a Timmies in a paper cup OK because it has a lid but then the theoretical McD's $5 Million coffee spill is mentioned.

A coffee in a screwed on lid sippy cup may be the best.

A french fry may be ok but not with ketchup because of the risk of a stain if dropped.

How detailed does the law have to be?

At some point a cop has to use his judgement and the driver has to accept that he can't steer and juggle at the same time.

The GPS issue is a problem in that properly used, detour for example, could minimize traffic hazards.
 

Allistonfjr

Well-known member
Possibly the laws going to far. Most distraction a driver can experiance is children in the car. Ban them as well?
 

LBV

Well-known member
Doesn't matter what laws are put in place if there's no enforcement.

I see it almost every day in Brampton, they just don't obey the laws and take chances because there's no repercussion ... This morning leaving my street at 7 am , there's a guy about 6 car lengths behind me. I make the stop to turn right. As I look in my rear view mirror, he just went right through the stop sign (likely did a quick look left and right, saw no cars, so through it he went).
 

JD_PICKLE

Well-known member
If memory serves planting a GPS in the middle of your windshield is already a violation. I would be surprised to hear of it being actively enforced though.
IIRC, nothing larger than quarter can be in the sweep of your wipers, including chips or cracks in your windshield.
 

nobbie48

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Really doersn't matter WHAT the item is. What IS iof importance is the effect it is having on the operators ability to focus and operate said motor vehicle in a responsible and safe manner.
I knew a guy that thought a radio was a distraction and another that spends so much time on the phone that he's late for appointments because he misses turn offs. Both think other people have no common sense.

We can practice braking and avoidance turns but who's going to practice spilling hot coffee in their lap so they can be mentally prepared for an event? Slip, spill, splash, grope then smash.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
For some a radio IS a distraction, which is why I stated what I did above. For me it wasn't why, or with what, the operator was preoccupied, it was more dependant on their ability to operate the vehicle in a safe and responsible manner, that dictated if they got an infraction, many times it was good enough to simply stop them for a friendly chat and reminder.

BUT back then the two main differing factors were that I had common sense in the level of enforcement, and they had the common sense, to listen to what the nice officer was saying, and take it to heart...lmao

I knew a guy that thought a radio was a distraction and another that spends so much time on the phone that he's late for appointments because he misses turn offs. Both think other people have no common sense.

We can practice braking and avoidance turns but who's going to practice spilling hot coffee in their lap so they can be mentally prepared for an event? Slip, spill, splash, grope then smash.
 

JTR

Well-known member
The discretion or judgement of a peace officer is not to be trusted nor relied upon. This is why there is a judicial system. Officers who try to decide and enforce what THEY think the law should be, like mentioned above, are the reason why x-copper and other paralegal services are so successful. In the case of Ontario's distracted driving law, there is no room for roadside interpretation, as it is not vaguely written in the slightest.

The OP in this thread is describing the same exact fake news(sorry, that's what it is) which was spread when the law was first introduced. Yes, in 2019 the penalties will increase, and this is a good thing. No, they are not rewriting the definition, this is also a very good thing, otherwise Constable Nothingbettertodo above would have you in prison for scratching your nose(honestly, there are some real crimes going on out there... go fetch). This happens with every new piece of legislation, the media stretches on their reporting, and then every person that passes it along adds something like a giant game of telephone. I still to this day get stuck behind morons that think every intersection in Ontario is covered by the marked crosswalk law, why? because the media reported it wrong and people are too dumb to check HTA for themselves.

Bottom line, when you hear something that might sound like a bit of a stretch, look the **** up before spreading it around ffs.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
At which point, did I say, (seeing your inferring I was the arbitrator, of what the law was), I merely stated that, I as police officer I used my DISCRETION, as to when or not to lay a charge. NEWS flash for you this HAS to happen otherwise an officer would never go more than 5" if he/she were to stop and charge EVERY person for EVERY possible infraction. Not to mention the court system would burst at the seams, with all the charges.

I was also demonstrating that there really was/is NO need for a "NEW" piece of legislation as appropriate, legislation has been in existence for decades.

I merely stated that, based upon my experience and training, I applied the law, as it was written, at NO time did I state, nor would it be possible that I were the one to make the final decision. That, as you, yourself pointed out was for the judicial system to do.

Your whining because I used my discretion, while in many other posts you ***** that officers don't use common sense, while doing their job, so WHICH way do you want it? You can't have it both ways!! I get it you feel that all officers are jack booted thugs with minimal education, and no ability to make a decision on their own, but that simply isn't the case. Today you don't even get a preliminary interview unless you, hold a MINIMUM of one degree, preferred if you have more than one.

Perhaps it is YOU who should exercise some discretion! It would have been sufficient, to point out that the story posted was a "false story" rather than belittle those who posted it and discussed it, as you did in your final paragraph. Perhaps not everyone has the ability nor the time to spend countless hours researching EACH story that is related to them. Humility is a positive trait. But apparently not one that is easily mastered.

Also IF you were paying as close attention as you direct everyone else to do, you would have noted a LONG time ago that I am NO LONGER an active, "Cst nothing better to do" Perhaps spend more of your energy on relevant things than attempting to direct others lives???


The discretion or judgement of a peace officer is not to be trusted nor relied upon. This is why there is a judicial system. Officers who try to decide and enforce what THEY think the law should be, like mentioned above, are the reason why x-copper and other paralegal services are so successful. In the case of Ontario's distracted driving law, there is no room for roadside interpretation, as it is not vaguely written in the slightest.

The OP in this thread is describing the same exact fake news(sorry, that's what it is) which was spread when the law was first introduced. Yes, in 2019 the penalties will increase, and this is a good thing. No, they are not rewriting the definition, this is also a very good thing, otherwise Constable Nothingbettertodo above would have you in prison for scratching your nose(honestly, there are some real crimes going on out there... go fetch). This happens with every new piece of legislation, the media stretches on their reporting, and then every person that passes it along adds something like a giant game of telephone. I still to this day get stuck behind morons that think every intersection in Ontario is covered by the marked crosswalk law, why? because the media reported it wrong and people are too dumb to check HTA for themselves.

Bottom line, when you hear something that might sound like a bit of a stretch, look the **** up before spreading it around ffs.
 
Last edited:

Top Bottom