| brian001 |
that believes photo radar goes against the canadian constitution?
i know the law states (160(1)) that the owner of a vehicle responsible for an infraction is responsible for any fine, but is that not presuming me guilty without valid evidence? should the crown not have to prove that i was the infractor instead of assuming me guilty and sending me a fine? as far as im aware it is not against the law to own a vehicle that may exceed speed limit. I dont believe it is fair to be charged as an owner of a vehicle that was recorded exceeding speed limit. Am i not entitled to cross examine my accuser...in this case a machine which may prove to be difficult.
In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal". is this right not infringed upon by the statement: (and i quote from the ticket)
"On or about the (date) at or near (location). Campbell, Brian D. (Address) Did contravene act 160(1) of the traffic saftey act - owner of a vehicle involved in a contravention (aka: breaking a rule or law) of section 115(2)(p) of the traffic saftey act - exceed maximium limit
I believe on reasonable and probable grounds and certify the person named above committed the offence as indicated"
is that not saying sans legal mumble jumble you were involved in your car exceeding the speed limit, and I, being an officer say you are guilty?
last time i checked, im innocent till proven guilty. so is it not thier job to prove beyond reasonable doubt i broke the law? or am i off my rocker? |
|
|
| STiPWR |
quote:
Originally posted by brian001
that believes photo radar goes against the canadian constitution?
i know the law states (160(1)) that the owner of a vehicle responsible for an infraction is responsible for any fine, but is that not presuming me guilty without valid evidence? should the crown not have to prove that i was the infractor instead of assuming me guilty and sending me a fine? as far as im aware it is not against the law to own a vehicle that may exceed speed limit. I dont believe it is fair to be charged as an owner of a vehicle that was recorded exceeding speed limit. Am i not entitled to cross examine my accuser...in this case a machine which may prove to be difficult.
In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal". is this right not infringed upon by the statement: (and i quote from the ticket)
"On or about the (date) at or near (location). Campbell, Brian D. (Address) Did contravene act 160(1) of the traffic saftey act - owner of a vehicle involved in a contravention (aka: breaking a rule or law) of section 115(2)(p) of the traffic saftey act - exceed maximium limit
I believe on reasonable and probable grounds and certify the person named above committed the offence as indicated"
is that not saying sans legal mumble jumble you were involved in your car exceeding the speed limit, and I, being an officer say you are guilty?
last time i checked, im innocent till proven guilty. so is it not thier job to prove beyond reasonable doubt i broke the law? or am i off my rocker?
You are innocent till proven guilty. That is why there is a court date on your ticket. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by brian001
that believes photo radar goes against the canadian constitution?
i know the law states (160(1)) that the owner of a vehicle responsible for an infraction is responsible for any fine, but is that not presuming me guilty without valid evidence? should the crown not have to prove that i was the infractor instead of assuming me guilty and sending me a fine? as far as im aware it is not against the law to own a vehicle that may exceed speed limit. I dont believe it is fair to be charged as an owner of a vehicle that was recorded exceeding speed limit. Am i not entitled to cross examine my accuser...in this case a machine which may prove to be difficult.
Under the TSA the registerd owner of a motor vehicle is responsble for it. Just like any ticket like StiPWR said, there is a court date you are not presumed guilty till proven. It is not against the law to own a vehicle that may exceed the speed limit, however it is against the law to exceed the speed limit, as the registered owner you are responsible for that vehicle. That is the risk you take when you lend it to douch.
quote:
Originally posted by brian001
In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal". is this right not infringed upon by the statement: (and i quote from the ticket)
"On or about the (date) at or near (location). Campbell, Brian D. (Address) Did contravene act 160(1) of the traffic saftey act - owner of a vehicle involved in a contravention (aka: breaking a rule or law) of section 115(2)(p) of the traffic saftey act - exceed maximium limit
I believe on reasonable and probable grounds and certify the person named above committed the offence as indicated"
is that not saying sans legal mumble jumble you were involved in your car exceeding the speed limit, and I, being an officer say you are guilty?
last time i checked, im innocent till proven guilty. so is it not thier job to prove beyond reasonable doubt i broke the law? or am i off my rocker?
The Radar is not the "person" sending you the ticket, the "person" sending you the ticket is the special constable who is trained to operate the equipement and insure it working properly, from the information provided to him by the radar, which he has calibrated and tested he has formed the opinon that you have contravined the law, and therefor has sent you a ticket for it. in otherwords he has made an allegation. The responsibilty is now yours to prove that you are A) not the owner of that vehicle B) the vehicle was not speeding.
No, photo radar tickets are not a violation of your charter rights, and no you are not guilty until proven innocent... |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
Fight that shitz YO!
I have tin foil hats for sale. They are custom fit for $10.00. they protect you from harmfull government mindreading FM waves that infringe upon your right and VIOLATE your charter of rights.
Respectzzzz.... |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
On that note is there really any way to prove you weren't speeding?
I had a photoradar once upon a time, I know damn well I was doing 48(spedometer said 45, and I know it's out 3km at 50, speedo says 50, I'm doing 53), and I got a ticket for 65 in a 50 zone ... I didn't fight it because other than swearing under oath I wasn't going that fast I had no "proof" I wasn't so I said screw it and just paid it. |
|
|
| rp_guy |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverNeonRacer
On that note is there really any way to prove you weren't speeding?
I had a photoradar once upon a time, I know damn well I was doing 48(spedometer said 45, and I know it's out 3km at 50, speedo says 50, I'm doing 53), and I got a ticket for 65 in a 50 zone ... I didn't fight it because other than swearing under oath I wasn't going that fast I had no "proof" I wasn't so I said screw it and just paid it.
yeah, some kid in the UK proved it using GPS.. but he was tracked by his father so it was datalogging all his speed..
but on that note, are you sure it's just 3km/h at all speeds? and not a progressive difference? (like 10km/h @ 100) |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
quote:
Originally posted by rp_guy
yeah, some kid in the UK proved it using GPS.. but he was tracked by his father so it was datalogging all his speed..
but on that note, are you sure it's just 3km/h at all speeds? and not a progressive difference? (like 10km/h @ 100)
Yeah it was 10ish at 100.. so I based that if the limit was 100, I did 95, and knew I was going 5 over.
But if it's 3 at 50, it's not going to be more than 3 at 45.. maybe 2.7 or something.. But I saw the van which is why I made sure I was going slower than the limit.. and I don't have GPS recording on me all the time... don't want it either.. mind you I haven't had a speeding ticket in 2.5yrs and a photo ticket in shoot 6 years...
but it would be nice to know if there is a way an average citizen could prove they wheren't speeding, if that is the case when it comes to photo radar... |
|
|
| shorti |
Kind of off topic but I just got refunded a photo radar ticket that I payed in Jan of 07. All $163.
My only ticket in the last 5 years and it gets refunded :lol: |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by shorti
Kind of off topic but I just got refunded a photo radar ticket that I payed in Jan of 07. All $163.
My only ticket in the last 5 years and it gets refunded :lol:
Sometimes the operators have been know to set the wrong spd limit on the instrument, or do something wrong in the calibration, just because you got flashed, doesn't mean you should have... check the ticket over, they might have ticketed you as if it was a 50 zone instead of a 60 (for example) |
|
|
| brian001 |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
Under the TSA the registerd owner of a motor vehicle is responsble for it. Just like any ticket like StiPWR said, there is a court date you are not presumed guilty till proven. It is not against the law to own a vehicle that may exceed the speed limit, however it is against the law to exceed the speed limit, as the registered owner you are responsible for that vehicle. That is the risk you take when you lend it to douch.
The Radar is not the "person" sending you the ticket, the "person" sending you the ticket is the special constable who is trained to operate the equipement and insure it working properly, from the information provided to him by the radar, which he has calibrated and tested he has formed the opinon that you have contravined the law, and therefor has sent you a ticket for it. in otherwords he has made an allegation. The responsibilty is now yours to prove that you are A) not the owner of that vehicle B) the vehicle was not speeding.
No, photo radar tickets are not a violation of your charter rights, and no you are not guilty until proven innocent...
yet, they can only prove my car was speeding, not i. the ticket is in my name, not my car's. they have no proof that i was the one driving, and it is not my responsiblilty to prove i was not speeding, it is the crowns responsibility to prove that i sped. i dunno, i plan on going to my next court date and getting my ass handed to me by a judge because i signed my life away on some fine print somewhere along the line. They have obviously found a loophole or else someone would have fought it already and won. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by brian001
yet, they can only prove my car was speeding, not i. the ticket is in my name, not my car's. they have no proof that i was the one driving, and it is not my responsiblilty to prove i was not speeding, it is the crowns responsibility to prove that i sped. i dunno, i plan on going to my next court date and getting my ass handed to me by a judge because i signed my life away on some fine print somewhere along the line. They have obviously found a loophole or else someone would have fought it already and won.
The offence is "OWNER OF A MOTOR VEHICLE" you are the OWNER, and the MOTOR VEHICLE was in contravention of the act, hence you are the OWNER OF A MOTOR VEHICLE IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 115 (2) TSA, SPEEDING... whether you like it or not YOU are responsible for the vehicle even if you are not the one driving it. In the case of the photo radar, the crowns responsibility is to prove the vehicle was speeding.
Don't speed, don't lend your car to someone who speeds and you will not have a problem.
Take a look at the bottom of your licence, right under your photo, that is where you signed life away in this matter. |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by brian001
yet, they can only prove my car was speeding, not i. the ticket is in my name, not my car's. they have no proof that i was the one driving, and it is not my responsiblilty to prove i was not speeding, it is the crowns responsibility to prove that i sped. i dunno, i plan on going to my next court date and getting my ass handed to me by a judge because i signed my life away on some fine print somewhere along the line. They have obviously found a loophole or else someone would have fought it already and won.
What part of being a registered owner of the vehicle do you not understand?
Yes, they can not prove YOU were speeding. They can prove the car was speeding.
The car is registered to you, hence the ticket in your name AKA Registered Owner.
Lets expand upon this.
I rent a car from Enterprise. I decide I am going to go all Drift King on the Whitemud.
While sticking my fist out the window rocking out to the latest techno, I pass the photo buggy sideways at 30 over. At that moment the photo buggy catches a pick of the license plate.
The ticket will be sent to Enterprise as they are the registered owner. They will in turn send it to me as part of the rental agreement I am responsible for it.
Now lets say I lent the car on the next run to BLOCKER. Only this time they catch the plate and his mug.
Well same rules apply. Even thought he may have been drifting and slaloming flag girls, he got caught. The ticket goes to Enterprise, then to me as I was on the rental agreement.
What do you do… Frame that pic of BLOCKER going sideways past the photo buggy and put it on the wall. :lol: and pay for the tickets. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by GOT BOOST
What part of being a registered owner of the vehicle do you not understand?
Yes, they can not prove YOU were speeding. They can prove the car was speeding.
The car is registered to you, hence the ticket in your name AKA Registered Owner.
Lets expand upon this.
I rent a car from Enterprise. I decide I am going to go all Drift King on the Whitemud.
While sticking my fist out the window rocking out to the latest techno, I pass the photo buggy sideways at 30 over. At that moment the photo buggy catches a pick of the license plate.
The ticket will be sent to Enterprise as they are the registered owner. They will in turn send it to me as part of the rental agreement I am responsible for it.
Now lets say I lent the car on the next run to BLOCKER. Only this time they catch the plate and his mug.
Well same rules apply. Even thought he may have been drifting and slaloming flag girls, he got caught. The ticket goes to Enterprise, then to me as I was on the rental agreement.
What do you do… Frame that pic of BLOCKER going sideways past the photo buggy and put it on the wall. :lol: and pay for the tickets.
:banghead: me before your post
:lol: me after your post |
|
|
| Dan_Gyoba |
Rental cars are one area where you don't get an opportunity to fight. At all.
Rental car gets flashed, rental company doesn't fight. They plead guilty, pay the fine, and charge your credit card. No debate, nothing. Of course if the fine gets refunded later, you won't be. Of course, you're not charged with a crime, so there's no 'guilty' and 'innocent' to it.
The law is written so that (provided that the car was in fact speeding) you are guilty of the crime that you've been charged with, whether you're driving or not.
Here's a question: If the car is stolen, then are you still the owner? :D |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
| I think if you have a police report dated before the phote radar ticket was taken, then you could fight it and win as you dind't "let" the irresponsable person drive your car. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by Dan_Gyoba
Here's a question: If the car is stolen, then are you still the owner? :D
As SilverNeonRacer stated, as long as you reported it stolen, your covered, you may still get the ticket, however as long as you have your a copy of your witness statement with the file number you should be golden... |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
:banghead: me before your post
:lol: me after your post
Happy to make your day.
It looks like we will need another venue for the drift king show off since rental cars will not produce the pic. Just a bill. |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by GOT BOOST
Happy to make your day.
It looks like we will need another venue for the drift king show off since rental cars will not produce the pic. Just a bill.
So is this how BLOCKER spends his days off? :D
 |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by Inzane
So is this how BLOCKER spends his days off? :D
i am the guy in the smashed up skyline, I need a lot more practice!:thumbup: |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
i am the guy in the smashed up skyline, I need a lot more practice!:thumbup:
How many times do I need to tell you. Amatures don't use NOS! You'll blow your self up! |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by GOT BOOST
How many times do I need to tell you. Amatures don't use NOS! You'll blow your self up!
for me it's about respect, to some that's more important... |
|
|
| arabian_ryda |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
i am the guy in the smashed up skyline, I need a lot more practice!:thumbup:
thats acually a s15 silvia.:lol: |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
for me it's about respect, to some that's more important...
It's all about winning. Winning is winning weither is in an inch or a mile! |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by arabian_ryda
thats acually a s15 silvia.:lol:
shh.... Don't tell the newb! :lol: |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by arabian_ryda
thats acually a s15 silvia.:lol:
my bad |
|
|
| kevito_ |
I've been flashed about a dozen times in the last two years. Never had a ticket though. I might be cutting it pretty close. I had a red light ticket flash on St. Albert trail when the light was still amber... I was pretty puzzled but not surprised when I never got a ticket.
And yes, I've renewed my registration lately and nothing was hidden in my record. :thumbup: |
|
|
| P_D |
| what happens if you get a photo/red light ticket with expired tags?? |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
| Same thing that happens if they are valid, a ticket gets mailed to your last know address... if you don't pay it, the ticket will go against your licence, and will have to pay it when you renew |
|
|
| Dan_Gyoba |
| So, no additional charges for the expired tags? |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by Dan_Gyoba
So, no additional charges for the expired tags?
I don't know for sure, It depends if the operator catches it.... There potentially could be... |
|
|
| 2ndgenlude |
| so why then if you get a 50+ over ticket for photo they mail you a summons? ive even heard of suspensions for a photo ticket just based on a picture of the plate. (never happened to me.) im just wondering how they could pin you for a suspension if they can't prove you were driving? |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
| I will have to look into that question /\ |
|
|
|
