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.
I'm not sure by what you mean about having the police on the island "put up with me".
The only interaction I've ever had with a police officer (aside being allowed to proceed through roadblocks) was when I had someone try to use a fake credit card in my store. ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry
You're not an IRSU member, are you? I somehow don't think they let 95% of the infractions go free.
And on what, exactly, are you basing this number, considering you've never had any interaction with any police officers other than being waved through roadblocks and dealing with a single credit card fraud call?
Translation: sebberry is 95% full of shit (and fittingly, that's a number I just pulled out of my ass... it's probably closer to 100%).
Really, if you're going to contradict yourself so blatantly, at least try to make sure it's on two separate pages...
Advertisement
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
A total of 76 homicides were reported in 2013, 5 more than the 71 recorded the previous year BTW, homicides include deaths that are not natural. Although the term homicide is sometimes used synonymously with murder, homicide is broader in scope than murder.
Meanwhile, the same year, 2013, 95 killed by impaired drivers, 115 killed by speeding, 91 by distracted drivers...and these were solved "murders" .
Yep, lest take guys away from investigating and attempting to prevent 303 "murders" in 2013 alone and focus on 290 over a 12 year period. If you taked a rough estimate, there are 10 killed in crashes for every 1 murder. Just a thought?
You list some pretty serious infractions as justification for putting 5 IRSU cops on intersection duty looking for drivers doing a rolling stop at a stop sign with nearly no traffic around. Or for peering into cars to make sure the cell phone playing music is "securely mounted to the dash of the vehicle"
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
How I wish I can fail you. I see so many people not stop at stop signs. I see some that think that the 4-way stop doesn't apply if they are turning right.
Sure, it looks like a cash grab but stopping them for doing a rolling stop with nearly no traffic around will also give a chance for the officer to 'educate' them cause who knows if that's how they drive at all stop signs regardless of whether it's a busy intersection or not.
Also, I have no issue with the cell phone crackdown. I have my phone in my pocket just so there is no temptation to use it. I've heard of many more serious infractions caught by doing simple things as peering in to do the cellphone check or seatbelt checks.
You might think it's useless doing these but I think this is a good thing. However, if the cell phone is not 'securely mounted', I would be more in favour of the person just getting a warning, but then again, not being stopped for not 'securely mounting your phone that's playing music to your dash', I wouldn't know if the officer didn't just gave the person a warning for doing that if they did get stopped for that.
Have you seen the news when they are following officers doing the cell phone check? You see people blatantly lying and saying they weren't on the phone when you can clearly see them on the phone just before that from news footage caught by the camera crew. I can see why cops tend not to want to believe people.
No, I didn't see that video but I wouldn't be surprised that people make up all sorts of excuses. Prior to these laws I hated using my phone in the car. Before my smartphone I never talked much on the phone so it wasn't much of an issue anyway, but I think I can recall using it about 5 times in total while driving and that was to say "hold on, I'm pulling over". Never dialed a number. Hated the distraction.
So it pretty much goes without saying that while I have music playing form my phone about 40% of the time I drive, I couldn't care less about what the law says because I never pick it up. While I can't speak for the Snapchat addicts, having a phone sitting loosely in a cup holder playing music is in no way a danger and shouldn't be the subject of enforcement action.
As for the rolling stop lesson, maybe someone should have a chat with this guy:
As for IRSU doing their job - they appear a lot less likely to use discretion than you. Zoom in on the offence and ignore the bigger picture. OMG, that car was doing a 0.7kph rolling stop into the intersection nobody else was at - ticket him now!
I can't speak on behalf of IRSU because I don't know much about them or know anyone in that unit.
So if no one is around, you can do whatever you want right? You can go 150km/km in a school zone at 4am because no kids will be around the area right? Cool. Let's say the average driver commits 5 traffic infractions per day (a ridiculously low estimate). Whether it is from speeding or traffic sign/signal infractions... Even if you assume every driver has received ONE VT a year, sounds like a pretty good deal..... Over 1000 infractions a year, yet they receive one ticket, let's say 167 bucks.... 13 cents an infraction... GOOD DEAL MAN!
So easy to armchair quarter back everything the police do from the comfort of your own home eh?
From my understanding, no electronic devices allowed while driving.
It's not just a matter of talking on the cell while driving. It's all about paying attention when to go when the light changes.
__________________ __________________________________________________ Last edited by AzNightmare; Today at 10:09 AM
Sure, it looks like a cash grab but stopping them for doing a rolling stop with nearly no traffic around will also give a chance for the officer to 'educate' them cause who knows if that's how they drive at all stop signs regardless of whether it's a busy intersection or not.
Let's take a page from Saskatchewan's book and install yield signs at quiet intersections to legalize the rolling stop at low-risk intersections. https://goo.gl/maps/yza5j
Last edited by ancient_510; 12-19-2014 at 11:45 AM.
Reason: Rambling nonsense :(
Let's take a page from Saskatchewan's book and install yield signs at quiet intersections to legalize the rolling stop at low-risk intersections. https://goo.gl/maps/yza5j
Exactly. Many stop signs could safely be replaced with yield signs, especially where the sight lines are good. Half the time you have to stop where the sight lines aren't great, move forward again to where they're good, stop to look again then safely proceed.
You end up getting more caught in in the formalities of ensuring you've stopped, which IMO is more of a distraction from the task at hand.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
Every time I do something in traffic, I think, "What would sebberry do?" And then I get into an argument with myself, and the next thing I know, six cars behind are honking at me.
Now THAT is distracted driving!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
seriously what is wrong with most of the people that is arguing against the law? the law is in place for a reason. follow it and be on your merry way and there would be no problems. yet here you are arguing.
you are driving for a reason, to get from point A to point B. why not reach point B and then read? whats the big rush to read whatever it is you are reading.
as for seb, god damn it, reading your posts enrage me. the amount of idiocy crying out is immeasurable. if you were focused on driving, you can assess and see everything that is happening. all it takes is a split second and boom, accident. that split second could have easily been taking your eyes off the ipad and looking at the green light and go vs scanning your surrounding constantly instead and seeing the guy speeding trying to beat the red. yea you might not have been at fault, but do you really want to get into an accident and deal with it? i rather be proactive and avoid it even though it wouldn't have been your fault.
Sebberry does make some valid points about what drivers should/shouldn't be doing while driving (mostly common-sense stuff), however because a large number of drivers aren't/are doing these things amd don't seem to be able to exercise common-sense, laws need to be enacted to try and drill the point home to those people. The laws aren't made for the well behaved in life. Those people dont need to be told that its not right to smash someone over the head with a hammer, or rape someone, or steal someone else's things. Something must be done in an attempt to curb the people that don't know/care about whats right or wrong and dissuade and/or punish the behaviour.
__________________
"Never give a match up halfway through. Never say that you do not feel up to it, that your condition is bad, and throw in the towel. Fight to the very end, always looking for your chance to break through." - Kazuzo Kudo
I don't think that people should be playing Angry Birds on their iPad in the middle of downtown traffic, but if someone texts me directions to an address I fail to see the difference between reading it off the phone and reading a screenshot printed on paper.
It's my opinion that the regulations should apply to drivers operating a moving vehicle as that's where the primary dangers are.
The irresponsible people these laws are targeting will continue to break them.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
Even if your car isn't moving you are still operating the vehicle and there are still risks. What if your foot slips off the brake pedal while using your phone? What if there are emergency vehicles coming up from behind and you don't notice to move your car?
There are no perfect laws as there are always exceptions. Laws are created to provide at least some consequences to certain behaviours. Unfortunately we do not live in a world where everything is fair and rules and laws can be customized for every individual.
At the end of the day you may disagree with the law but it is your choice to break them and there are consequences. I personally don't agree with ticketing people at red lights using an electronic device but it is the rules and I plan to follow them.
Exactly the same thing could be said about reading directions from a paper note.
If you have to do something in the car while stopped, survey what's going on around you first - what are the lights doing? Do I have time to get my gloves out or read the directions before the other lights go red? Do I hear any emergency vehicles? Is my car out of gear so I don't somehow mysteriously slip off the brake and clutch at the same time?
Where do we stop? Let's have laws that make anything that takes your hand off the wheel, stopped or moving, illegal. Sneeze with eyes open. Don't take a sip of coffee either.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
but its that moment after you survey you decide its safe to do whatever it is you plan to do. what if something happens then? all it takes is a few secs for everything to turn upside down.
The driving behaviour of someone lost and looking down at a map book/paper for directions (or trying to re-program a GPS, etc etc etc) often (not always, but often) mimics the driving behaviour of someone impaired. I have pulled over many people suspecting that they might be impaired but instead just lost and trying to figure out where to go. The consequences can be equally devastating as being impaired by drugs or alcohol, as is shown in recent fatal collision numbers.
The logical person would pull over, stop and stop driving around in circles, then figure out where they needed to go and how to get there.
When the method of distraction is not an electronic device, I select an appropriate alternate ticket to issue to these people causing issues on the road.
__________________
"Never give a match up halfway through. Never say that you do not feel up to it, that your condition is bad, and throw in the towel. Fight to the very end, always looking for your chance to break through." - Kazuzo Kudo
The driving behaviour of someone lost and looking down at a map book/paper for directions (or trying to re-program a GPS, etc etc etc) often (not always, but often) mimics the driving behaviour of someone impaired. I have pulled over many people suspecting that they might be impaired but instead just lost and trying to figure out where to go. The consequences can be equally devastating as being impaired by drugs or alcohol, as is shown in recent fatal collision numbers.
The logical person would pull over, stop and stop driving around in circles, then figure out where they needed to go and how to get there.
When the method of distraction is not an electronic device, I select an appropriate alternate ticket to issue to these people causing issues on the road.
I agree here. If you are lost pull over and re-orient yourself and then figure it out. You shouldn't try to be stealing a glance at your directions, regardless paper or electronic just cause you're at the light. I"ve seen so many people driving slowly cause they are lost and trying to figure things out and it's quite irritating following them.
I also see people who are not paying attention (ie. looking down at something) and see the car in the left turn lane with an advanced left turn light move forward from their peripheral vision and then they just gun it and run the red light without even looking. They think it's green due to them not paying attention and seeing the car beside them go on their advanced left turn light. Luckily, everyone I've seen so far, the person realizes in time and slams on the break before hitting the left turn cars on the other direction.
The officer fills out a certificate of service on the back of the VT and it is 100% legal. In some jurisdictions the driver is required to sign but not in BC.
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!
