REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-13-2010, 09:23 AM   #26
Banned (BBM)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,146
Thanked 627 Times in 368 Posts
^

welcome to vancouver, where a lot of bullshit happens


speed limite in certain area dont make any sense, and the cops expect everyone to follow the set rules. Pfff what a joke
Advertisement
Mugen EvOlutioN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2010, 10:27 AM   #27
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by slammer111 View Post
The 60km/h roads around the Golden Ears bridge really does make me scratch my head. It's way less twisty than the S2S yet the limit is lower? 80-90 imo including the bridge sections would be a lot more reasonable.
Lougheed actually goes to 80 before and after, they just haven't taken down the "construction speed zone" over the bridge yet... I suppose technically there are still bits of construction going on here and there, but the bridge is effectively finished.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 02:22 PM   #28
Proud to be called a RS Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 114
Thanked 28 Times in 14 Posts
Was just reading yesterday's paper, and happened across the story about a Cabby who hired a temporary driver to cover his shift.

Driver gets pulled over going 40km/h+ and the Cab Owner looses his car for 7 days, while the driver is just going to walk off with a ticket.

http://www.theprovince.com/Cabbie+lo...755/story.html

This got me to realizing that this law is even more of a cash grab and more poorly implemented than I originally thought.

Heck, if your vehicle gets stolen, and the perp is caught speeding over 40km/h, the officers are obligated to impound YOUR vehicle. Absolutely ludicrous!

Exactly what justification is there that warrants punishing the vehicle, and thus vehicle owner, over the individual who knowingly disregarded the law (aka the driver).

If the government, law enforcement and attorney general were actually serious about reducing problematic DRIVERS, and not merely money, then a license suspension for the same time frames of the impoundments would be a far more appropriate punishment would it not?

I challenge you to think of ONE scenario or reason how impounding a vehicle is MORE likely to reduce poor driver behaviour than temporarily suspending the license of the problematic individual.

You pull a car off the road for 7 days, and a person can still rent a vehicle, borrow a vehicle, use their second vehicle - What ever the case may be.

This law is only punishment through financial burden and in no way encourages rehabilitation or works to eliminate the the actual problem (poor drivers).

To adjust a common saying;
Cars don't speed and kill people, (unless its a Toyota), people speed and kill people.



Now granted, a suspension rule would be more unfair to the general law abiding citizens who just had a bit of a lead foot, or who was in a hurry. This is the reason I have a problem with the entire structure of the law - but my focus here is more in the impoundment vs. suspension as an adequate punishment.

Last edited by Bainne; 10-14-2010 at 02:30 PM.
Bainne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 06:34 PM   #29
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
That was bad luck for the cabbie, but the police were right to do that. If the Cabbie loses wages, he needs to go to small claims court to get money from the other driver.

Same goes for anybody. If you lend your car to a friend, and he gets the car impounded, you would think that your friend would compensate you.... no?

I don't understand why people are so upset over this law? How often do you actually drive 40+ over the limit?
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 07:02 PM   #30
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gars View Post
That was bad luck for the cabbie, but the police were right to do that. If the Cabbie loses wages, he needs to go to small claims court to get money from the other driver.

Same goes for anybody. If you lend your car to a friend, and he gets the car impounded, you would think that your friend would compensate you.... no?

I don't understand why people are so upset over this law? How often do you actually drive 40+ over the limit?
We're opposed to it because innocent people can get screwed by it and it takes away the opportunity for a fair trial before the penalty is handed down. It also doesn't really target people with more than one car or who have the means to rent a car for a week.

What if the laser gun was acting up? What if it wasn't used correctly? Not all operator or gun errors favor the driver.

There was a clip on A Channel news the other day - police barely had room for all the cars they were pulling over on the Malahat, and the police were using the laser gun without a tripod - here's what can happen when one is used handheld:

I may not be driving 40 over the limit, but what if I am clocked at 40 over? Should I lose my car for that?

A Channel also interviewed a lawyer who likes this law. He said that this law exists partly because the court system is so clogged up with people contesting their tickets.

If there are so many people clogging up the system that we need to enact a law that allows police to completely bypass the court system then I think we need a review of the speed limits.

As a side note - I never hear of high-speed motorcycle chases in BC on the TV. Since this law came into place, it happened twice.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 08:43 PM   #31
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
If there are so many people clogging up the system that we need to enact a law that allows police to completely bypass the court system then I think we need a review of the speed limits.
do a search on Revscene, and you will find hundreds of posts of people who are asking for instructions on how to dispute tickets, with some people giving instructions, saying that even if they ARE guilty, they should still dispute.

only a small percentage are actually innocent, and deserve to have their ticket thrown out.

the courts are clogged up because most of the guilty people don't want to pay for the ticket, and they are told by idiots that police officers don't show up, thus allowing them to have their tickets thrown out.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 10-14-2010, 09:10 PM   #32
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bainne View Post
Was just reading yesterday's paper, and happened across the story about a Cabby who hired a temporary driver to cover his shift.

Driver gets pulled over going 40km/h+ and the Cab Owner looses his car for 7 days, while the driver is just going to walk off with a ticket.
Oh boo hoo, another sob story, and in SUCH an unbiased, highly-respected publication too!

The cabbie is an idiot. Either he got another driver that he didn't know very well, which is retarded in the extreme, or he should have known the other driver well enough to know he was a risk to speed.

Either way,
Quote:
“It is the responsibility of the vehicle’s registered owner to ensure that anyone they allow to operate the vehicle has a valid driver’s licence, is not prohibited from driving and clearly understands what the rules of the road are.”
has applied to all sorts of offences since LONG before this law came in. The same happens if you let a friend drive your car, and he gets nailed for DUI, or has an accident, or commits a hit-and-run. It also applied under photo radar - the OWNER was held responsible for the ticket unless he gave up the actual driver.

Quote:
This got me to realizing that this law is even more of a cash grab ... than I originally thought.
How do you figure? The same penalties are collected whether the owner of the car is the actual driver, or not.

Quote:
You pull a car off the road for 7 days, and a person can still rent a vehicle, borrow a vehicle, use their second vehicle - What ever the case may be.
Well then, this shouldn't be THAT big a problem for the cabbies, should it? They can just rent or borrow someone else's cab... should be easy, right?

You contradict yourself so much in all your nonsensical ranting, it's not even funny.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010, 10:20 AM   #33
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
What if the laser gun was acting up? What if it wasn't used correctly? Not all operator or gun errors favor the driver.
The accuracy of these devices is usually very good, and police take a couple measurements and pick the lowest. Plus the broad categories of speeding (0-40, 40+) allow for inaccurate measurements to have little affect, and the media is already reporting officers are not impounding cars for 41 over, they are targeting 50+ which is a 25% margin of error.

Stop being a drama queen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
A Channel also interviewed a lawyer who likes this law. He said that this law exists partly because the court system is so clogged up with people contesting their tickets.

If there are so many people clogging up the system that we need to enact a law that allows police to completely bypass the court system then I think we need a review of the speed limits.
Most people who fight their tickets are guilty and are looking for ways to get out of their ticket. The law should be updated to provide less ways for them to get off - yet this in your eyes who be unfair since it wouldn't allow everyone their day in court.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010, 10:24 AM   #34
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
The accuracy of these devices is usually very good, and police take a couple measurements and pick the lowest. Plus the broad categories of speeding (0-40, 40+) allow for inaccurate measurements to have little affect, and the media is already reporting officers are not impounding cars for 41 over, they are targeting 50+ which is a 25% margin of error.
A Channel was reporting people for being stopped for 46 over, well within the error margin of the laser gun.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010, 01:40 PM   #35
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
As a side note - I never hear of high-speed motorcycle chases in BC on the TV. Since this law came into place, it happened twice.[/QUOTE]


Uh...do a bit of a search of the local media...plenty of high speed motorcycle chases before the new law came into effect...last one I remember involved a guy on a stolen bike who was riding just about like the 2 idiots that Air one caught.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...cle-chase.html


Here is the first one I got with a googler...note the date....before the new laws came into effect.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010, 01:42 PM   #36
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
A Channel was reporting people for being stopped for 46 over, well within the error margin of the laser gun.


Not any of the Lasers I ever worked with. If it was 6 kmh out then all sorts of things would warn the operator and it would not be used.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2010, 08:16 PM   #37
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Powerslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,917
Thanked 1,228 Times in 171 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post

Let's look at a driver who is caught for the first time under the new legislation traveling between 41 and 60 km/h over the speed limit. Police will issue a $368 ticket and call a tow truck. The vehicle will be impounded for 7 days at a cost of at least $210. ICBC will assign a driver risk premium of $320. If the driver has already accumulated penalty points, there will be a penalty point premium to pay as well.
Skidmark, how can the officer prove that the driver was going 40kmh over the limit and not 35kmh? Does the officer need to show the driver the laser gun readout in order to prove this? That couple kms makes a huge difference - between an impound and 7 days no driving vs a regular ticket.

If you as an officer pull me over and say I was going excessively, and I say I wasnt (and lets say in this case I was going 35 over the limit), if you cant prove I was how can you have my car impounded?

How can you prove it on the spot to change a regular speeding ticket to an impound?
Powerslide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2010, 09:02 PM   #38
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Read the previous posts...the cars are not being impounded for 41k over the limit...seems that 50 plus is the minimum. There is no legal requirement to show anybody the reading...and the initial speed reading might also not be the final one displayed. Most times you take a series of readings and the first is usually the highest...when the car is stopped, what is normally showing is the final reading, usually the slowest. So If you saw the reading, what you are seeing is the last, lowest speed calculated...and now the fight is on because the speeding driver will say that..."see I was only going 35 over the limit and not the 55k you say...and I saw the speed on the Laser so the Cop is lying". There are many the reasons Police are not required to show the speed. Police are required to swear that the statements on the impound forms are true..and on any VT they issue....under severe penalty if they lie. Not worth your career to get an excessive conviction.

Last edited by zulutango; 10-17-2010 at 08:38 AM.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 12:28 PM   #39
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
Read the previous posts...the cars are not being impounded for 41k over the limit...seems that 50 plus is the minimum.
Sorry, as reported on the news the 50 plus minimum is not true.

I'd love to see how these guns work in person. I'll buy you a coffee if you can spare a few minutes?
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 03:13 PM   #40
Retired Traffic Cop
 
skidmark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nanoose Bay, BC
Posts: 9,023
Thanked 115 Times in 66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Sorry, as reported on the news the 50 plus minimum is not true.
Remember, what is reported on the news and how things actually happened can be very different things!

Excessive speed is > 40 km/h above the posted speed limit. The laser is accurate, but like any other measuring device has a tolerance for accuracy. If the operator is satisfied that taking this tolerance into account, the vehicle speed was more than 40 km/h over the limit, the ticket and/or ticket and impound will be done.

The laser is highly vehicle specific compared to radar, making a spot about the size of an orange on the vehicle at 300 meters distance. So, you can be accurately measured even in the midst of other traffic as long as there is a clear line of sight between the device and your vehicle.

Cosine error affects the laser (and radar) reading. The speed it reads is reduced by the cosine of the angle away from straight on to your vehicle. That's a gimme for you.
__________________
Have you ever met anyone that would admit to being less than a better than average driver ??

Learn more at DriveSmartBC
skidmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 03:27 PM   #41
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Cosine error affects the laser (and radar) reading. The speed it reads is reduced by the cosine of the angle away from straight on to your vehicle. That's a gimme for you.
Sweep errors however do not favor the driver.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 03:54 PM   #42
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
Read the previous posts...the cars are not being impounded for 41k over the limit...seems that 50 plus is the minimum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Sorry, as reported on the news the 50 plus minimum is not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Remember, what is reported on the news and how things actually happened can be very different things!
Oh come on, skid, we all know the news is 100% accurate all the time! Stories are never sensationalized, nor the truth stretched or facts left out!

Quote:
Excessive speed is > 40 km/h above the posted speed limit. The laser is accurate, but like any other measuring device has a tolerance for accuracy. If the operator is satisfied that taking this tolerance into account, the vehicle speed was more than 40 km/h over the limit, the ticket and/or ticket and impound will be done.

The laser is highly vehicle specific compared to radar, making a spot about the size of an orange on the vehicle at 300 meters distance. So, you can be accurately measured even in the midst of other traffic as long as there is a clear line of sight between the device and your vehicle.

Cosine error affects the laser (and radar) reading. The speed it reads is reduced by the cosine of the angle away from straight on to your vehicle. That's a gimme for you.
One cop has already stated on the radio that traffic members (at least in his detachment) have been officially instructed to concentrate on those doing 50+ over, and have been keeping plenty busy at that.

Another that called the Bill Good Show the other day stated that they aren't even bothering with "excessive" charges for anything less than 45-over, specifically taking into account margin of error for the speed devices AND drivers' speedometers.

Of course, I suppose both could be LYING, to lull drivers into a false sense of security in thinking they can actually get away with going 40-over... we all know (well, sebberry does, anyway) what tricky deceptive bastards most cops are.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 04:28 PM   #43
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Sweep errors however do not favor the driver.
not sweep errors, just if the car isn't going directly towards or away from the laser, the reading will be lower than what the actual speed of the car is. The laser only calculates the relative speed to the operator.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2010, 06:55 PM   #44
Retired Traffic Cop
 
skidmark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nanoose Bay, BC
Posts: 9,023
Thanked 115 Times in 66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Sweep errors however do not favor the driver.
Interesting thought, so I had a Google around and found:

If the laser pulses being fired by the detector were allowed to sweep from the front grille of the vehicle to the windshield of the vehicle during the one-third of the second the pulses were being fired, the pulses reflecting back from the windshield would be four feet farther away than the pulses reflecting back from the front grille. Unless the detector has an appropriate error trapping program built into it, the detector would conclude that the vehicle traveled 33.33 feet instead of the 29.33 feet which it actually traveled, and the detector would show the speed of the vehicle as being 68 miles per hour instead of the correct 60 miles per hour. This would be what is known as "sweep" error.

Qualifiers are always interesting to consider when you read things like this.
__________________
Have you ever met anyone that would admit to being less than a better than average driver ??

Learn more at DriveSmartBC
skidmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2010, 07:21 PM   #45
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
^I would assume, since you're quoting it, that that's from a "reputable" site on such things?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2010, 11:06 PM   #46
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
I saw the same qualifiers. One has also to have all 60 measurements during the 1/3 of a second be defective and ignored by the quality verification processes designed into the instrument...without triggering an error message or refusing to display any calculated speed and with no "duck quack".
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2010, 11:14 PM   #47
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
the quality verification processes designed into the instrument....
Are such quality verification methods published anywhere?
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2010, 11:41 PM   #48
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
The manufacturer's operator manual.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net