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 disagree with what this guy is trying to tell everyone but agree with the intentions. Just my 0.02 because there is nothing else to do during the quarantine period.
First off MVA/MVAR rules are provincially governed. This means that the province makes their own guidelines on vehicle regs. I know its conflicting vs the federal standards but ultimately the Federal government has given the power to the provincial gov to make their own guidelines and rules.
Just curious has anyone even consulted a lawyer for the precedent of excessive noise violations? Looks like a lot of the public is uneducated and is complaining at certain officers using amazon db sound meters. It does not even matter how they administer the roadside test in the end to secure a conviction. It looks like lots of mis-information is being spreaded. Police officers do NOT need to use a proper DB meter to measure the noise and sound of a vehicle for a VI or an excessive noise violation ticket.
Look up R. v. Tootil (Former MLA driving Harley.) https://bcdrivinglawyers.com/can-you...VjMAGqrH55BCZU
Case law precedent: the DB test is just a objective measure to corroborate the subjective opinion of an officer's view that it's loud and unecessary.
If you think that the officers are applying the legislation wrong then what is your argument to the supreme court judge who have used the provision to convict Mr. Tootil of Div. 7. (This is being used as precedent on CAR regulations as well as motorcycle)
I think the real definitive problem here is that the threshold for a VI is very very low. The usage of Vehicle inspection orders are too discretionary as it only requires a suspicion.
They don't need to tell you what they suspect you to have because that's will be written on the ticket.
Example in Quebec they have written in writing: "A police officer who has doubts about the safety of a vehicle can order it to undergo a mechanical inspection, even if the SAAQ had already deemed the vehicle in compliance, because it might have been modified again since the last inspection. Furthermore, if the police officer notices modifications for which you cannot provide a certificate of inspection from the SAAQ, your vehicle could be taken off the road if the officer believes it necessary due to the nature of the modifications." (https://saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/road-safe...modified-cars/)
P.S Yes I'm against the notice and orders on stock vehicles. Yes I understand that there are modifications on cars that are factory performance or oem equivalent. It all depends on how you are driving the car. At the end of the day have a dash cam. Shift gears normally don't go above xk rpm in the city especially where it echos. Don't rev your lambo in the city. Don't be on corsa/track/track mode or whatever it is that opens up the valves in your car.
Argument is that sport mode and other modes holds higher RPMs for longer periods = unnecessary noise. Sport mode suspension in some modern cars makes it stiffer.
I'm all eyes n ears tell me if i'm wrong.
Who are you, what are your intentions, and how come you deleted all of your previous posts in this thread?
Who are you, what are your intentions, and how come you deleted all of your previous posts in this thread?
I drive a frs daily. .... who has some extra time on his hands. Does it even matter who I am?
I'm just saying you guys should probably start stating real concrete facts that are backed by law/precedent rather than what your interpretation is of certain MVAR/MVA. Think like a lawyer use some precedent on mvar/mva to back up some facts.
If you got a problem with my posts then I won't chime in my thoughts on this topic.
Overwhelming the OPCC/PSS with the same complaints that got dismissed (Last year complaints made on certain officers) is not going to do anything without concrete proof of wrongdoing. It sounds like certain officers are taking advantage of the MVAR/MVA vagueness and providing less discretion.
I'm sure the Aboriginals/FN people of Vancouver has put in more REAL complaints than the car community with significant proof of wrongdoing before changing police procedure/legislation/law. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Isn't the whole point of this thread to change the VI system? I'm sure the thread is not to just point fingers at who's doing it and when. In my opinion, the best course of action here is to lobby against those who can revise the MVAR/MVA.
It's interesting that the community thinks that VPD's traffic unit is "targeting" sporty cars. Would you say that the statistics show that sporty car drivers are more likely to engage in behaviour that is against the mva/mvar? What about the VPD's BET team? Would you say VPD's BET team "targeting" the aboriginal population in the DTES? I'm sure the aboriginal/FN community thinks that they're being systematically targeted for enforcement on a daily basis.
I'm intrigued on what kind of response I'm going to get. Probably negativity but what can you do?
It's interesting that the community thinks that VPD's traffic unit is "targeting" sporty cars. Would you say that the statistics show that sporty car drivers are more likely to engage in behaviour that is against the mva/mvar?
I'm intrigued on what kind of response I'm going to get.
I'll tell you who I see spend the most time on their phones at traffic lights when I'm walking dt. Boomers in expensive SUVs.
The people I see driving 40+ over the speed limit? People in their early 20s in their parents shitty 5 year old base model c class/3 series. Sometimes N on the back, more often a Z because they are so edgy.
I was pulled over going 7KM/h in rush hour traffic, at 800 fucking RPMs in a car that is quieter than any new BMW. It had nothing to do with behaviour and I can list off plenty of people in the exact same situation.
I'm likely to engage in that behaviour? My driving record would determine that is a lie.
__________________
98 technoviolet M3/2/5
Quote:
Originally Posted by boostfever
Westopher is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsy82
seems like you got a dick up your ass well..get that checked
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkwax
Well.. I’d hate to be the first to say it, but Westopher is correct.
I'm intrigued on what kind of response I'm going to get. Probably negativity but what can you do?
Engaging in whataboutism using an issue that has far reaching sociological and historical issues than a traffic cop with a grudge is comparing apples to bricks.
Try again. Or are you licking boots because you don't see the demographical skew for the targeted cars? Especially since there's a perceived subjectiveness to the targeting.
I'll tell you who I see spend the most time on their phones at traffic lights when I'm walking dt. Boomers in expensive SUVs.
The people I see driving 40+ over the speed limit? People in their early 20s in their parents shitty 5 year old base model c class/3 series. Sometimes N on the back, more often a Z because they are so edgy.
I was pulled over going 7KM/h in rush hour traffic, at 800 fucking RPMs in a car that is quieter than any new BMW. It had nothing to do with behaviour and I can list off plenty of people in the exact same situation.
I'm likely to engage in that behaviour? My driving record would determine that is a lie.
There's more to meets the eye for a driving record check. There can be "driving complaints" that are automatically dismissed as per call volume/priority. There may be numerous complaints/speeding/dangerous driving that are written down through people calling 911. So you MAY not know your full driving history. You will only know what you are "guilty" of. So here may be what's pushing an officer to pull you over over another person.
Because these traffic officers are allegedly enforcing modifications on vehicles I'd say any modifications made on a car whether its factory or aftermarket will be looked at more closely by specific members of the traffic unit compared to a patrol unit whom did not take the extra traffic training course that traffic units take as reported by the opcc complaint. There's more things to pick out that is wrong on a modified car vs a stock like parts that are "off road only." A couple of interesting questions to think about is if you have an alleged aftermarket exhaust is " are police required a warrant to look under a vehicle for catalytic converters?" If NO then they can just ASSUME you have one then give you a N&O for that. If YES then they can pick at coilovers/springs. How are they going to ASSUME that your springs/coils are at an appropriate spring rate roadside without a N&O ? They can look at your tint now or your tinted lights / HIDS / Reflectors/ 4th brake light. Just nitpicking everything that may be labeled as "Off road only" or is against the MVA/MVAR.
Again I think there should be a higher threshold for N&O's.
I'd request a FOI for year/make/model of cars the traffic unit specifically vs VPD has given a traffic ticket to prove your point. I'm sure that normal patrol units will balance the possible skew in the data with a bunch of older suspicious cars compared to the traffic unit, and therefore justified as not targeting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorneringArtist
Engaging in whataboutism using an issue that has far reaching sociological and historical issues than a traffic cop with a grudge is comparing apples to bricks.
Try again. Or are you licking boots because you don't see the demographical skew for the targeted cars? Especially since there's a perceived subjectiveness to the targeting.
I may have been wrong on this comparison but I'll tell you why I have thought the way I have.
Do you not think there is a perceived subjectiveness for targeting aboriginals? It's written in literature and most of the time aboriginal folks commit crime more often than caucasians/non. Most criminology courses offered by university explains various theories that explain why aboriginal people are more likely to commit crime. It's literally engrained in 2/3 of officers whom take criminology in university to become an officer. Why else are they always at the bottom of the food chain? They're always being street checked. Imagine getting checked more than 2x a day to check if you have a warrant/ breaching conditions. Keep in mind that stopping a person has a HIGHER threshold to be identified than being in a car. It's interesting because if you look at the statistics on those who commit crime in the DTES it's mostly aboriginal people and those are the ones being targeted. Most policing agencies are based off of "problem based policing." Literally the problem needs to be policed more. If there is more resistance/ non-compliance there will be more enforcement.
I still don't know why you are still singling out "a" traffic cop with a grudge rather than multiple people are giving out and supporting VI's.
There's more to meets the eye for a driving record check. There can be "driving complaints" that are automatically dismissed as per call volume/priority. There may be numerous complaints/speeding/dangerous driving that are written down through people calling 911. So you MAY not know your full driving history. You will only know what you are "guilty" of. So here may be what's pushing an officer to pull you over over another person.
lol - what are you talking about?
these cars care getting pulled over because they're flashy, and to send the message to the automotive community to stay out of vancouver where they are not welcome.
if you've got inside info - maybe you can tell us who mandated this crack down? Cui Bono? City council and politicians? Trying to impress the point grey nimbys.
I called 911 on Westopher's car once - broke my neck when it went by
Probably too early to ask, but have motorcycles been VI'd recently?
Bikes get vi’d every year so I don’t see that as changing much. Harleys get the exhaust tickets and sport bikes get the no reflectors/fender eliminator tickets.
And of course the super dukes get all the whoolies
Do you not think there is a perceived subjectiveness for targeting aboriginals? It's written in literature and most of the time aboriginal folks commit crime more often than caucasians/non. Most criminology courses offered by university explains various theories that explain why aboriginal people are more likely to commit crime. It's literally engrained in 2/3 of officers whom take criminology in university to become an officer. Why else are they always at the bottom of the food chain? They're always being street checked. Imagine getting checked more than 2x a day to check if you have a warrant/ breaching conditions. Keep in mind that stopping a person has a HIGHER threshold to be identified than being in a car. It's interesting because if you look at the statistics on those who commit crime in the DTES it's mostly aboriginal people and those are the ones being targeted. Most policing agencies are based off of "problem based policing." Literally the problem needs to be policed more. If there is more resistance/ non-compliance there will be more enforcement.
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!
