Stupid laws, smug cops

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Highway speed limits, more often than not, are simply revenue-gathering exercises. People in general rarely work up enough of a lather to get it changed because not enough are affected, and it's an issue that can too easily be dismissed by the unthinking majority as one of safety. Evidence be damned.

The people of Ontario should count themselves fortunate that they can go 130-140 without fear. In NZ the roads are a police state, rigged with speed cameras at every turn, and cops who won't hesitate to pull over anyone going more than 110km/h (100 km/h limit).

As I pointed out to Asher (he will no doubt take issue with it ), 120 kph is the accepted maximum. I often hear people say it should be raised to 120 and then ticket all the cars above that. While there would be no shortage of tickets written (people will always speed) the average speeding ticket will be for fewer kms over the limit than they are now. As ticket fine amounts are determined by the amount over the limit, municipalities (the province doesn't actually get this money) will get less revenue from an equal number of tickets. The disencentive is obvious.

[Kuciwalker]

Do stronger anti-speeding laws with huge penalties really help a party's popularity? Since most people speed, it doesn't seem like they would endear a party to the electorate.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Do stronger anti-speeding laws with huge penalties really help a party's popularity?

How do you think speed traps get set up?

[Asher]

Re: Re: Stupid laws, smug cops

Originally posted by Wezil
I hear your complaint but I do take issue with the 130-140 kph. If you are traveling that fast on the 401 you WILL be ticketed. 120 is the accepted limit by the cops.

What parts of the 401 have you used?

I use the 401 to go from Toronto to Waterloo twice weekly (there and back friday night, there and back sunday night). Each time, when not volume constrained, the average speed was at least 130. A handful of cars go slower in the far right lane, but they get passed by trucks (which is more dangerous IMO as well -- slow cars forcing just-in-time truckers to pass is dangerous).

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Asher

In Ontario they're talking about adding computer chips in trucks so they CAN'T ever go faster than 100 km/h.

The industry supports this change. The propsoal is to have trucks governed at 104-105 kph. If this government doesn't pass it the next government will, regardless of political stripe. Not only will there be fuel/money savings but safety will be improved by having all big rigs traveling at the same speed. It will slow down the aggresive truckers and eliminate the need for passing which is the major cause of truck accidents.

The biggest issue to be addressed is the issue of interprovincial trucking. The country is currently undergoing regulatory harmonization and I suspect the issue of speed governors will be addressed as well. That then leaves Can-Us trucking to be worked out...

Oh, and the chips are already in most trucks and have been for years. In fact many of the major companies are already using them.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Do stronger anti-speeding laws with huge penalties really help a party's popularity? Since most people speed, it doesn't seem like they would endear a party to the electorate.

Not really. Photo radar is a never ending debate. It has debatable success and raises good money for government but it is political poison.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
Not really. Photo radar is a never ending debate. It has debatable success and raises good money for government but it is political poison.

They're all the rage in Alberta. Photo radar and red light cameras have caused a fair share of accidents in the name of "road safety" -- people are cruising along and see a photo radar van, slam on the brakes --> rearended. Or people see a yellow light and slam on the brakes --> rearended.

An acquaintance of mine from back at school was rear-ended, he braked to avoid the redlight camera and he guy behind floored it. He's still got neck problems...

[Wezil]

Re: Re: Re: Stupid laws, smug cops

Originally posted by Asher

What parts of the 401 have you used?

All of it, from Cornwall to Windsor on a regular basis (how do you think I log so many kms in a year?).

In addition, my clients log millions of kms on that highway each and every year. I know it well.

I use the 401 to go from Toronto to Waterloo twice weekly (there and back friday night, there and back sunday night). Each time, when not volume constrained, the average speed was at least 130. A handful of cars go slower in the far right lane, but they get passed by trucks (which is more dangerous IMO as well -- slow cars forcing just-in-time truckers to pass is dangerous).

That stretch of the 401 is often volume constrained, as you know, particulary from TO out to the "6's". From there on you can usually make good time in the far left lane. I still dispute your average of 130-140. Many will go that fast but not the average. But even so, we're really only talking a travel time of 10 minutes (from the 6's to 182-Kitchener) which is a very small portion of the 401. TO to Kitchener total is only 70kms of a 700km stretch of highway.

I agree about fast trucks vs slow cars and the reverse. The difference of speeds causes rapid lane changes and accidents. An issue speed governors will help address.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Asher

They're all the rage in Alberta. Photo radar and red light cameras have caused a fair share of accidents in the name of "road safety" -- people are cruising along and see a photo radar van, slam on the brakes --> rearended. Or people see a yellow light and slam on the brakes --> rearended.

Yes, that was why I said the safety aspects were "debatable". Proponents will give counter arguments. I'm not one of them.

The problem with photo radar, legally, was the fact the camera doesn't identify the driver, just the vehicle. A ticket would be sent to the owner but because identity of the driver could not be proven, demerit points were not issued (unlike a speed ticket issued by a real live cop). It was, to my mind, a blatant cash grab for this reason.

An acquaintance of mine from back at school was rear-ended, he braked to avoid the redlight camera and he guy behind floored it. He's still got neck problems...

Red light cameras are only in a handful of Ontario cities, you just happen to frequent two of them - TO (of course) and KW. Same problem as photo radar - identifies the vehicle not the driver.

[snoopy369]

100KM/h (62mph) is not terribly low for a nonurban highway, and if it has a lot of traffic on it I'd say that's a reasonable limit. In the US it's mostly 45 in the cities, 55 in heavily dense areas between cities, 65 in less dense areas, and 75 in rural areas. The problem over 65 is the stopping distances start getting a lot longer (exponentially), so you end up with a lot more rear endings and such if there is a reasonable level of traffic and lane changing.

[Wezil]

Hwy 401 is a major expressway that crosses the province, akin to your interstates. 100kph is too slow. It is designed for faster as our drivers have discovered.

[Spec]

Woohoo!

191 rwhp at 5.5 PSI only. And it only weighs in at 1017 kg.

So even if I run 50 above the limit, they wont catch me even if they try. Will be running 9.5 PSI this weekend. I'm adding a boost controler. Automaticly gaining 60rwhp in the process.

So 255rwhp on a 1017kg car.

TRY AND CATCH ME COPER!!




Spec.

[Kuciwalker]

That's a fairly wide peak.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That's a fairly wide peak.

Indeed.

Normally, to get 0-60 in 5 seconds, you need approximatly 12lbs for 1 rwhp. I'm at 11.6578lbs for 1rwhp.


But Lucky me, I dont live in a province as stupid, ugly and boring as Ontario. If i ever need to go to Manitoba or beyond by car, I think I'll take the U.S. route.

Spec

[Wezil]

We will take no lectures from Quebec drivers.