WARNING !

[RFB]

As a result of a local canuck who got charged with STUNTING, because his is tail swung out, (winter) !


He is facing -
a 7 day license suspension,
7 day car impound (non appealable),
$2000 to 10,000 fine,
and up to 6 months in jail.
and probable cancellation of insurance after conviction.


So for all us ONTARIRARIANS I submit the following your edification.



Skip to content Ontario.ca

• 
• 

Français
Highway Traffic Act
ONTARIO REGULATION 455/07
RACES, CONTESTS AND STUNTS
Consolidation Period: From July 26, 2011 to the e-Laws currency date.
Last amendment: O. Reg. 360/11.
This is the English version of a bilingual regulation.
1. Revoked: O. Reg. 406/08, s. 1.
Definition, “race” and “contest”
2. (1) For the purposes of section 172 of the Act, “race” and “contest” include any activity where one or more persons engage in any of the following driving behaviours:
1. Driving two or more motor vehicles at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed and in a manner that indicates the drivers of the motor vehicles are engaged in a competition.
2. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to chase another motor vehicle.
3. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,
i. driving a motor vehicle at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed,
ii. outdistancing or attempting to outdistance one or more other motor vehicles while driving at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed, or
iii. repeatedly changing lanes in close proximity to other vehicles so as to advance through the ordinary flow of traffic while driving at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 2 (1).
(2) In this section,
“marked departure from the lawful rate of speed” means a rate of speed that may limit the ability of a driver of a motor vehicle to prudently adjust to changing circumstances on the highway. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 2 (2).
Definition, “stunt”
3. For the purposes of section 172 of the Act, “stunt” includes any activity where one or more persons engage in any of the following driving behaviours:
1. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to lift some or all of its tires from the surface of the highway, including driving a motorcycle with only one wheel in contact with the ground, but not including the use of lift axles on commercial motor vehicles.
2. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to cause some or all of its tires to lose traction with the surface of the highway while turning.
3. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to spin it or cause it to circle, without maintaining control over it.
4. Driving two or more motor vehicles side by side or in proximity to each other, where one of the motor vehicles occupies a lane of traffic or other portion of the highway intended for use by oncoming traffic for a period of time that is longer than is reasonably required to pass another motor vehicle.
5. Driving a motor vehicle with a person in the trunk of the motor vehicle.
6. Driving a motor vehicle while the driver is not sitting in the driver’s seat.
7. Driving a motor vehicle at a rate of speed that is 50 kilometres per hour or more over the speed limit.
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,
i. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing,
ii. stopping or slowing down a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates the driver’s sole intention in stopping or slowing down is to interfere with the movement of another vehicle by cutting off its passage on the highway or to cause another vehicle to stop or slow down in circumstances where the other vehicle would not ordinarily do so,
iii. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to drive, without justification, as close as possible to another vehicle, pedestrian or fixed object on or near the highway, or
iv. making a left turn where,
(A) the driver is stopped at an intersection controlled by a traffic control signal system in response to a circular red indication;
(B) at least one vehicle facing the opposite direction is similarly stopped in response to a circular red indication; and
(C) the driver executes the left turn immediately before or after the system shows only a circular green indication in both directions and in a manner that indicates an intention to complete or attempt to complete the left turn before the vehicle facing the opposite direction is able to proceed straight through the intersection in response to the circular green indication facing that vehicle. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 3.
Exceptions
4. (1) Despite section 2, “race” and “contest” do not include,
(a) a rally, navigational rally or similar event that is conducted,
(i) under the supervision of the Canadian Association of Rally Sport,
(ii) under the supervision of a club or association approved in writing by the Ministry, or
(iii) with the written approval of the road authority or road authorities having jurisdiction over the highway or highways used;
(b) motor vehicle owners engaged in a tour, scenic drive, treasure hunt or other similar motoring event in which the participants drive responsibly and in a manner that indicates an overall intention to comply with the provisions of the Act; or
(c) an event held on a closed course with the written approval of the road authority having jurisdiction over the highway, including any event lawfully using any of the trademarks “CART”, “Formula One”, “Indy”, “IndyCar”, “IRL” or “NASCAR”. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 4 (1).
(2) Despite sections 2 and 3, “race”, “contest” and “stunt” do not include any activity required for the lawful operation of motor vehicles described in subsections 62 (15.1) or 128 (13) of the Act, or the lawful operation of an emergency vehicle as defined in subsection 144 (1) of the Act. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 4 (2).
5. Omitted (provides for coming into force of provisions of this Regulation). O. Reg. 455/07, s. 5.
Français
Back to top





CERBERUS

[CBR600RR]

Jesus!

Even with all nannies on, it isn't all that easy to keep the tail from swinging out a little when taking a slow 90' turn.

IMO he should fight it.

[Wilso]

Are you serious?! There hasn't been a day in this snow where my tail hasn't come out. He must have gotten a cop who was having a bad day :/ With my front right sensor out my nannies are disabled so I'm slipping and sliding all winter until I can afford the part :O Good luck to your friend!

[jvincent]

Wow. Where was this?

[aghuman]

That blows dude, the back end comes out a lot while I drive so I can imagine how much of a bummer that must be.

Out of curiosity, was the driver trying to play around and slide, or was it just an unplanned slide?

[GotBRZ1691]

And I though being a car person and living in California was bad....

[Tcoat]

Hey FRB, is there more to the story? I can't even imagine a cop that would ticket for rear end swing out in the winter.
Would love to know how they could prove intent!

[continuecrushing]

Originally Posted by GotBRZ1691

And I though being a car person and living in California was bad....

seriously...wtf


Of course, I don't really know what this "winter" word means.

[RFB]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Hey FRB, is there more to the story? I can't even imagine a cop that would ticket for rear end swing out in the winter.
Would love to know how they could prove intent!

The section seems to skirt mens rea , by " driving in a manner THAT INDICATES " -


Indication seems to be the HTA point to prove in court for a conviction, rather than intent.
The legislation was purposely written in a draconian fashion, giving cops to much interpretive power so that a traffic court tax collector (no judges in traffic court - only government appointed toadie J.P.'s ) can easily issue a conviction.


Remember the school moms going through a school zone speed trap at normal speed who got arrested and charged !


The stunting law as written is a crime against civil rights, and normal jurisprudence for a civilized country. Many of our newest laws have been written in an unfair way so that convictions can be easily registered.









CERBERUS

[Canadian Greg]

It's all true...Most anal retentive place on the planet...
Ontario Law is by far the most restrictive jurisdiction in Canada.

It's just as bad off road too and on the trails.

[RFB]

Originally Posted by jvincent

Wow. Where was this?

GTA - Ontario Kanada.

[RFB]

A cop commits the offence as soon as he turns on the cherries to chase a speeder -

" Diving in a manner that INDICATES intent chase another motor vehicle "
I couldn't find legal exemptions for cops.

Its illegal for civilians to use a C.B. radio mike or telephone - only hands free devices. A TV visible to the driver is also illegal.
Our tail light chasers have TV's and mikes or telephone style radio mikes.
I couldn't find police exemptions for those laws either.

Perhaps its time for some GHANDI like protests ?

Or how about laying a private information against a cop charging him with stunting ?

In any case any unjust law needs a 100 grand start all the way through the supreme court before it can be ruled unconstitutional and illegal.







CERBERUS

[daiheadjai]

Originally Posted by Canadian Greg

It's all true...Most anal retentive place on the planet...
Ontario Law is by far the most restrictive jurisdiction in Canada.

It's just as bad off road too and on the trails.

I almost feel that is sometimes justified by the amount of clueless drivers on our roads.
But then I realize the clueless drivers will never ever be charged by these draconian laws (despite constantly flouting common sense driving laws like signalling lane changes or using the left lane for passing).

Almost got killed today by some older guy in a RAV4 who turned out of a sideroad and cut across 3 lanes without shoulder-checking (I already moved over one lane to dodge the first 2 lane cut).

[wparsons]

The stunt driving law has been called unconstitutional by a number of judges, and some refuse to prosecute anymore because of that.

That said, even if you win in court the suspension and impound fees are still stuck to you.

You don't even need to slide, just simply spinning the tires is enough to qualify as stunt driving. Or if you're on a bike, one wheel coming off the ground over a bump is technically enough.

Most cops aren't that huge of jerks about it, but the way the law is worded they can be if they want.