"Speed limiters are unsafe, arbitrary and violate the principles of justice according to a recent precedent-setting ruling by an Ontario trial judge."
Story here
More here
Story here
More here
Last edited:
Canada Interesting Canada Court Decision on Speed Limiters
- Thread starter ATeam
- Start date
moose
Veteran Expediter
Just one more tiny rezone to join OOIDA.
ooida did not provide financial aid to this member, but did worked closely with OBAC to provide legal consultant help.
& it worked. just like in other cases, instead of taking on claims that made seance at the time,(in this case flow of traffic economy impact & privacy, which was the original concerns of OBAC back in 2008), they won the case by choosing winning arguments.
this is also a great example how one determine trucker, felt the law was on his side, and took it all the way for years in courts to prove his innocent .
great win for safety advocates, motorists, patriots and small business truckers.
ooida did not provide financial aid to this member, but did worked closely with OBAC to provide legal consultant help.
& it worked. just like in other cases, instead of taking on claims that made seance at the time,(in this case flow of traffic economy impact & privacy, which was the original concerns of OBAC back in 2008), they won the case by choosing winning arguments.
this is also a great example how one determine trucker, felt the law was on his side, and took it all the way for years in courts to prove his innocent .
great win for safety advocates, motorists, patriots and small business truckers.
It has a long road to the Supreme Court....A JP is like a traffic court judge...the lowest form of judge out there...
moose
Veteran Expediter
Only IF they decide to challenge the case in a higher court,
which they have 30 days to do so.
so far they did not.
AND for a rezone.
in his decision the court said the Gov. did very bad in presenting their case.
seams like they really did not had a leg to stand on.
on 'Canada Calling', OBAC explained that if no challenge is filed by 30 days, then such rolling becomes the law of the land .
which they have 30 days to do so.
so far they did not.
AND for a rezone.
in his decision the court said the Gov. did very bad in presenting their case.
seams like they really did not had a leg to stand on.
on 'Canada Calling', OBAC explained that if no challenge is filed by 30 days, then such rolling becomes the law of the land .
It may be a low level judge but at least THIS judge is smart enough to recognize that limited the ability of a truck in any way is unsafe. Only fools think otherwise. It it BEYOND obvious that elected government officials are fools.
Moose and OVM both comment on the impact of the ruling and the status of the court that made it relative to higher courts.
I am unfamiliar with the Canadian justice system. How does this work exactly? What happens if the ruling is allowed to stand? What happens if the ruling is appealed?
I am unfamiliar with the Canadian justice system. How does this work exactly? What happens if the ruling is allowed to stand? What happens if the ruling is appealed?
The Ontario Gov....could ignore the decision as it is not binding at that level...The Ont. Crown Attorney pretty much ignored this case it seems, by not making much of a defense...IF they don't challenge the ruling the next step for the driver, would be to take it to a higher court...Ontario Appeals court or the Supreme court....This could get interesting....
A little more research partly answered my question. The law continues to be enforced, at least for now:
"Bob Nichols, spokesman for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, told TruckNews.com that while the group would not comment on the specifics of the case, he noted that, 'This case doesn't change the law, and we'll continue to enforce the law.'"
More here
I see nothing in the stories cited above and others online that says the province of Ontario appeared in court to argue their side of the case. I also see that the driver's attorney plans to use the ruling to fight similar cases. The province has issued just under 3,000 tickets since 2009 for not having working speed limiters. I'm sure many of those traffic tickets have been paid by the violators and those cases are closed. But a number of others remain open.
OOIDA is funding this attorney. As far as I am concerned, the money I contribute to OOIDA's PAC and litigation funds is being very well spent. Already an OOIDA lifetime member, this is exactly why I provide additional financial support.
"Bob Nichols, spokesman for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, told TruckNews.com that while the group would not comment on the specifics of the case, he noted that, 'This case doesn't change the law, and we'll continue to enforce the law.'"
More here
I see nothing in the stories cited above and others online that says the province of Ontario appeared in court to argue their side of the case. I also see that the driver's attorney plans to use the ruling to fight similar cases. The province has issued just under 3,000 tickets since 2009 for not having working speed limiters. I'm sure many of those traffic tickets have been paid by the violators and those cases are closed. But a number of others remain open.
OOIDA is funding this attorney. As far as I am concerned, the money I contribute to OOIDA's PAC and litigation funds is being very well spent. Already an OOIDA lifetime member, this is exactly why I provide additional financial support.
Last edited:
Keep in mind any change would only effect Ontario...there is still Quebec
How would the winning driver do that? It's the losers who appeal cases, not the winners, right? Could an appeal even be made by a winner?
Just resubmit the case to a higher court for their ruling....
BUT...
I have no doubt Ontario will file intent to appeal within the 30 day window...and then ask for time to prepare.....and then come with guns loaded this time...
I heard on the OOIDA show that the drive in question, for the time being, is NOT required to have a limiter due to this ruling.
With zero science behind the law, what guns do they have to load? This was all about which minister is in the pocket of the Canadian version of the ATA, nothing more.
With zero science behind the law, what guns do they have to load? This was all about which minister is in the pocket of the Canadian version of the ATA, nothing more.
B.S. can fill a lot of chambers...LOL
You got that right! It has filled our government till it is over flowing!
Last I looked the max speed limit in Ontario and most other provinces is 100 kph, the speed limiters give the drivers 105 kph. Therefore, beef from the drivers comes down to not. Wing able to speed anymore in parts of Canada.
Looks to me that going the speed limit keeps you from getting speeding tickets in Canada, looks to me that the only speeding tickets will be for car drivers from now on in Ontario.
Just because a vehicle is speeding doesn't mean he will crash into the rear of a slower moving vehicle since there has been no study that can prove that claim. The only study I've ever seen says there a greater risk of that kind of accident. No proof that it happens a lot and I have never read or seen that type of accident.
Looks to me that going the speed limit keeps you from getting speeding tickets in Canada, looks to me that the only speeding tickets will be for car drivers from now on in Ontario.
Just because a vehicle is speeding doesn't mean he will crash into the rear of a slower moving vehicle since there has been no study that can prove that claim. The only study I've ever seen says there a greater risk of that kind of accident. No proof that it happens a lot and I have never read or seen that type of accident.
Yes, Speed limiters take away a drivers freedom to break the law.....imagine that..
So whats the court argument? Your honour my client feels restricted because they can not break the law and speed?... Do you think that will really go over in the courts....???
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Yes, Speed limiters take away a drivers freedom to break the law.....imagine that..
So whats the court argument? Your honour my client feels restricted because they can not break the law and speed?... Do you think that will really go over in the courts....???
If that's the case, then why not do it to cars also? Why stop there? There is a little known natural right, ya know... the right to be stupid. It's called Darwin. Here, we call it liberty. And more and more, the government wants us widdo babies to suck on the teet, so we wont hurt our widdow taxpaying bodies.
Why make a law if you're going to make another law saying you can't break the first law? Isn't that sorta redundant or retarded or something?
Last edited:
Yep, like No left lane for you big guys..another stupid law IMO....Dual speed limits...another stupid law that we have to live with....tons of silly laws on the books....
The reasoning used by the [Canadian] judge is exactly what makes split speed limits unsafe: traffic is safest when most vehicles are moving at approximately the same speed. The lower limit for trucks forces constant lane changes, many of which are done improperly, and some are actually impulsive. It's a perfect example of unintended consequences of laws, and a good argument for requiring laws to be evaluated after a year to determine whether they're working as intended.
Beachbum: it's not about being allowed to speed [though that's a valid right, IMO], it's about the ability to accelerate if that's what would avoid a collision or danger. Removing that option could cause an accident, while mandating it makes no one safer.
Beachbum: it's not about being allowed to speed [though that's a valid right, IMO], it's about the ability to accelerate if that's what would avoid a collision or danger. Removing that option could cause an accident, while mandating it makes no one safer.
I agree completely especially your last remark, on being able to still have some pedal left to get out of a jam.....
Btw I don't like the limiter law.....I think the OPP and local LEO's should just hammer speeders every chance they get...like Ohio does...a cruiser at every turn around...just enforce the laws on the books already......too much clutter all these unnecessary laws...
Last edited: