Automotive

Ask me anything about fighting your traffic ticket (Speeding, Parking, etc.)

Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 27, 2013
1360 posts
361 upvotes
Winnipeg
Penrose wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 12:04 pm
I have been noticing the cops parked on the on ramps running radar. most ramps indicate a speed of 30 km/hr and some off ramps at 50 km/hr. when I try and stick to those limits I find that it seems to encourage the driver behind me to drive aggressively, either honking, flashing lights, tailing very closely, etc... question I have is, has anyone actually ever received a speeding ticket on a ramp?
Don't ramps have suggested speed limits? If something is suggested then it cannot be enforced.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 27, 2013
1360 posts
361 upvotes
Winnipeg
Phillipspastamaker wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:19 pm
If you broke the law and he's asking for your ID to write you a ticket or arrest you, he doesn't have to be polite, especially if you allegedly hit him with your side mirror and drove away. ;)
Sure.. but as I said, I am assuming that whatever is described in the original post is true. If some deranged police officer shows up at me door thinking that I hit him and starts making threats, I'll probably call 911 and ask them to send somebody. :)
Newbie
Jan 15, 2018
46 posts
9 upvotes
mbmbkop wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:27 pm
Sure.. but as I said, I am assuming that whatever is described in the original post is true. If some deranged police officer shows up at me door thinking that I hit him and starts making threats, I'll probably call 911 and ask them to send somebody. :)
You would likely get arrested at that point and if you protest you will likely eat more charges such as resisting arrest. This all comes down to the fact that the police officer believes she broke the law so he has a right to issue tickets or detain her for refusing. If not he couldn't and likely wouldn't do any of that.
Newbie
Jan 15, 2018
46 posts
9 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:16 pm
All of which could have been readily avoided if the traffic stop had not occurred in the right hand turn lane right at a corner.
I don't know why you quoted my post. None of yours answers to my point.
I'm not talking about what is. I said it's what I wish to see in future.
Precisely because you blame all that happened on the fact that the police officer was obstructing the right hand turn lane while completely ignoring the fact that this driver was supposed to merge into the far left lane but didn't because she didn't think she had to move over and leave a lane of space between her and stopped emergency vehicle.
Jr. Member
Apr 18, 2017
177 posts
75 upvotes
Phillipspastamaker wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:36 pm
Precisely because you blame all that happened on the fact that the police officer was obstructing the right hand turn lane while completely ignoring the fact that this driver was supposed to merge into the far left lane but didn't because she didn't think she had to move over and leave a lane of space between her and stopped emergency vehicle.
I'd suggest you reread my post without the chip on you're shoulder.
I did not, and am not blaming anyone for anything.
Best wishes dude.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 27, 2013
1360 posts
361 upvotes
Winnipeg
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:44 pm
I'd suggest you reread my post without the chip on you're shoulder.
I did not, and not am blaming anyone for anything.
Best wishes dude.
+1
It's starting to sound like we are being trolled.. :) Hence, I am no longer sure if I want to continue to respond to his posts..
Newbie
Jan 15, 2018
46 posts
9 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:44 pm
I'd suggest you reread my post without the chip on you're shoulder.
I did not, and am not blaming anyone for anything.
Best wishes dude.
This is what you wrote
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:16 pm
All of which could have been readily avoided if the traffic stop had not occurred in the right hand turn lane right at a corner.
Sr. Member
Jul 25, 2015
613 posts
334 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 6:02 pm
I'll inject a bit of my own reality, or wishes for reality anyway.
Police should not be pulling people over just anywhere. People should be required to drive to a parking lot, exit ramp, or side road where they will not impede traffic, before pulling over.
The way it is now, it's dangerous for the police officer (which is why the move over laws were implemented )
but, it's dangerous to everyone else too by creating an unnecessary safety/road hazard and disrupting the safe and consistent flow of traffic.
"To every officer I spoke with about the scenario, including the supervisor, they told me I should have stopped and waited"
Being required to stop and wait, should rarely ever be a necessity if traffic stops are done proficiently and competently.
So when the police are trying to pull you over on the highway, they'll just have to wait for X amount of KMs until theres a off ramp? Riiiiiiiiiight.

You do know police officers try and stop vehicles at the safest spots possible. There have been plenty of deaths and injuries from people hitting police cars, thats why theres the move over law.
Jr. Member
Apr 18, 2017
177 posts
75 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 6:02 pm
I'll inject a bit of my own reality, or wishes for reality anyway.
Police should not be pulling people over just anywhere. People should be required to drive to a parking lot, exit ramp, or side road where they will not impede traffic, before pulling over.
The way it is now, it's dangerous for the police officer (which is why the move over laws were implemented )
but, it's dangerous to everyone else too by creating an unnecessary safety/road hazard and disrupting the safe and consistent flow of traffic.
"To every officer I spoke with about the scenario, including the supervisor, they told me I should have stopped and waited"
Being required to stop and wait, should rarely ever be a necessity if traffic stops are done proficiently and competently.
This is what I wrote, to which you wrote a lengthy reply that did not see how it spoke to my point.

I'll try to be as precise and plain as I can here.

My point being, that things can and should be made safer for everyone.
Blame is entirely irrelevant in identifying root cause and making meaningful change to procedures. The goal is to minimise the probability of recurring deleterious incidents.

There will be accidents, and situations where it's unavoidable and necessary to impede traffic. Here, the move over law is rightly and obviously a necessity.

I'm bringing forth the idea that the move over law should not be the only thing police need to rely on for their safety, when a simple change in driver expectations on a traffic stop, would mitigate and or minimize the danger to both the officer and the public at large.

This was and is my point, and I think is where you see it as me "blaming" the officer.
I'm not. The officer was following protocol in the stop. I'm describing what i see as a more beneficial protocol to the traffic congestion problem being caused by the traffic stop.

Even If everyone followed the rules in this situation, there still presents a condition where 3 lanes are down to one, with the commensurate congestion and confusion that really is unnecessary with a simple change in behavioural expectations.

I hope that's clear enough.
Jr. Member
Apr 18, 2017
177 posts
75 upvotes
Sinasta wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 10:28 pm
So when the police are trying to pull you over on the highway, they'll just have to wait for X amount of KMs until theres a off ramp? Riiiiiiiiiight.

You do know police officers try and stop vehicles at the safest spots possible. There have been plenty of deaths and injuries from people hitting police cars, thats why theres the move over law.
Yes I do. Even 10km is only 10min to the next exit, and well worth the added safety to the officer.
If you think about it they well both pass that exit eventually anyway, so there really is zero time wasted.
Last edited by qman23 on Feb 9th, 2018 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Newbie
Jan 15, 2018
46 posts
9 upvotes
mbmbkop wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:47 pm
+1
It's starting to sound like we are being trolled.. :) Hence, I am no longer sure if I want to continue to respond to his posts..
It's just unbelievable that you wrote this
mbmbkop wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 9:21 pm
Don't ramps have suggested speed limits? If something is suggested then it cannot be enforced.
and think that I am the troll.
Sr. Member
Jul 25, 2015
613 posts
334 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 10:31 pm
Yes I do. Even 10km is only 10min to the next exit, and well worth the added safety to the officer.
If you think about it they well both pass that exit eventually anyway, so there really is zero time wasted.
Sorry Maam your son/daughter passed away because I had to wait 10km to pull over that impaired driver.
Jr. Member
Apr 18, 2017
177 posts
75 upvotes
Sinasta wrote:
Feb 9th, 2018 11:55 pm
Sorry Maam your son/daughter passed away because I had to wait 10km to pull over that impaired driver.
Hyperbole is not constructive.
This change would be no different than when high speed chases were stopped 20 years ago.
Police officers still have the discretion to chase,
But must ask themselves,
Has a crime been committed or is about to be committed?
Is there an alternative to a chase?
And does the need to make an arrest outweigh the safety of the public?

Police could have the same discretion in any traffic stop.
Last edited by qman23 on Feb 10th, 2018 12:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sr. Member
Jul 25, 2015
613 posts
334 upvotes
qman23 wrote:
Feb 10th, 2018 12:02 am
Hyperbole is not constructive.
Well theres no point in arguing with your opinion. I'm glad your opinion is just a fantasy and not reality.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
5906 posts
3164 upvotes
Edmonton
You guys are kind of derailing the thread with your personal debate. How about taking it to PM?

C

Top