Poncho Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 Well we missed a big opportunity.....the only way to stop this sort of thing is to hit the owner of the company....... Sure the driver fucked up and IMO should be gone for life; however, the company owner is the accountable executive, and as such should be held accountable.....$5,000.00 fine. He will reopen and continue under another name. Are Canadians really that stupid......sad day https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-owner-of-truck-in-humboldt-broncos-bus-crash-pleads-guilty-to-safety/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irv Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Poncho said: Well we missed a big opportunity.....the only way to stop this sort of thing is to hit the owner of the company....... Sure the driver fucked up and IMO should be gone for life; however, the company owner is the accountable executive, and as such should be held accountable.....$5,000.00 fine. He will reopen and continue under another name. Are Canadians really that stupid......sad day https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-owner-of-truck-in-humboldt-broncos-bus-crash-pleads-guilty-to-safety/ I don't know all the deets but I also believe the MTO out there needs to get tougher as well. I watched a program on how easy it was to obtain an AZ license and I couldn't believe what I was watching. Friggin scary knowing some of these truckers can barely drive a car let alone 40 tons down the hwy at 100+ kms/h!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poncho Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 47 minutes ago, irv said: I don't know all the deets but I also believe the MTO out there needs to get tougher as well. I watched a program on how easy it was to obtain an AZ license and I couldn't believe what I was watching. Friggin scary knowing some of these truckers can barely drive a car let alone 40 tons down the hwy at 100+ kms/h!! Like I said Irv. The cancer is at the source, these company’s pop up everywhere, notice the name...s.....Trailtard love these guys, as does Justine......As a Canadian we watch this just go by....ever wonder why so many trucks crash.....try looking at how that company even came to be....... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sksman Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Poncho said: Like I said Irv. The cancer is at the source, these company’s pop up everywhere, notice the name...s.....Trailtard love these guys, as does Justine......As a Canadian we watch this just go by....ever wonder why so many trucks crash.....try looking at how that company even came to be....... Unfortunately they have decimated the trucking industry nd ran prices way down. No money left for the honest guys 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poncho Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 Just now, Sksman said: Unfortunately they have decimated the trucking industry nd ran prices way down. No money left for the honest guys Yes they have......however know one in Canada gets it. Sad.....the Tards rule the country... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 16 hours ago, Poncho said: Well we missed a big opportunity.....the only way to stop this sort of thing is to hit the owner of the company....... Sure the driver fucked up and IMO should be gone for life; however, the company owner is the accountable executive, and as such should be held accountable.....$5,000.00 fine. He will reopen and continue under another name. Are Canadians really that stupid......sad day https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-owner-of-truck-in-humboldt-broncos-bus-crash-pleads-guilty-to-safety/ LIFE? seems harsh for a mistake I was surprised he got 8 years Imagine a business not giving a fuck eh! - we hate workers instead - Yet we hate the Liberal Government in Ontario for making up so many costly rules around trucking - I remember the outrage here as a WYNNE ATTACK ON BUSINESSES ONEWAYS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poncho Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 7 hours ago, 1trailmaker said: LIFE? seems harsh for a mistake I was surprised he got 8 years Imagine a business not giving a fuck eh! - we hate workers instead - Yet we hate the Liberal Government in Ontario for making up so many costly rules around trucking - I remember the outrage here as a WYNNE ATTACK ON BUSINESSES ONEWAYS We all knew you would miss the point. No surprise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Blackstar Posted March 29, 2019 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 29, 2019 http://www.heartfm.ca/news/local-news/truck-driver-charged-with-stunt-driving/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokin george Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 They don't catch enough of the assholes. Its brutal out there 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 14 hours ago, Blackstar said: http://www.heartfm.ca/news/local-news/truck-driver-charged-with-stunt-driving/ lol Stunt driving for following too close Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 51 minutes ago, 1trailmaker said: lol Stunt driving for following too close 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. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
04nightfire Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 and fail just takes a massive left hook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 2 minutes ago, odot1 said: 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. I know the law, I just find it funny how they name shit closer than 30 meters going over 100k/hr LAME for a 7 day impounding IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 2 hours ago, 1trailmaker said: I know the law, I just find it funny how they name shit closer than 30 meters going over 100k/hr LAME for a 7 day impounding IMO Not for tractor trailers... way too close, no chance of stopping in time. IMO and experience at the collision scenes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 6 minutes ago, odot1 said: Not for tractor trailers... way too close, no chance of stopping in time. IMO and experience at the collision scenes. giving him a ticket should be good enough unless he is purposely tailgating that rig for some sort of road rage. Impounding seems a high price to pay for getting too close without causing any accident Just my opinion on a so flawed Stunt Law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 1 minute ago, 1trailmaker said: giving him a ticket should be good enough unless he is purposely tailgating that rig for some sort of road rage. Impounding seems a high price to pay for getting too close without causing any accident Just my opinion on a so flawed Stunt Law Many others greatly disagree. Easiest way to avoid this, don't tailgate excessively in a large commercial motor vehicle. The stunt law has withstood many charter tests... Just my opinion on a law that's saving lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 1 hour ago, odot1 said: Many others greatly disagree. Easiest way to avoid this, don't tailgate excessively in a large commercial motor vehicle. The stunt law has withstood many charter tests... Just my opinion on a law that's saving lives. I feel there is a big difference between doing 150 on an open highway then doing 90 in a 50 zone - The law is full of flaws like this One guy loses his car for a few days the other guy gets a ticket and moves on its not about lives ODOT this law was a reaction to an accident where two cars racing caused death to that transport driver. With all the high speeds we see daily this law is doing nothing IMO to save lives - for the most part people don't speed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokin george Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 Half the fkrs dont care about the 60 metre law. I'd like to see a stat on accidents prior to the 105 limit vs the amount of accidents after the 105 limit. I won't disclose how fast I've driven in a big truck and you'd be shocked if I told you lol. One thing I'm proud of is I've never tailgated or cut anybody off. I believe the 105 has made it tough to pass,caused road rage and put drivers to sleep behind the wheel 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 21 hours ago, 1trailmaker said: I feel there is a big difference between doing 150 on an open highway then doing 90 in a 50 zone - The law is full of flaws like this One guy loses his car for a few days the other guy gets a ticket and moves on its not about lives ODOT this law was a reaction to an accident where two cars racing caused death to that transport driver. With all the high speeds we see daily this law is doing nothing IMO to save lives - for the most part people don't speed Go do a ride along with a traffic unit.... Stop a vehicle at the side of the 401. You have your opinion and I have my years of experience. You'll never agree, that's fine. Doesn't mean you are right however... The 401 is not exactly an open highway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 1 minute ago, odot1 said: Go do a ride along with a traffic unit.... Stop a vehicle at the side of the 401. You have your opinion and I have my years of experience. You'll never agree, that's fine. Doesn't mean you are right however... The 401 is not exactly an open highway... You missed the point not sure how you can think driving 150 on a highway is the same as doing 90 in a 40 zone I will never agree to this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Just now, 1trailmaker said: You missed the point not sure how you can think driving 150 on a highway is the same as doing 90 in a 40 zone I will never agree to this I didn't miss the point at all. I didn't argue that 90 in a 50 is unsafe. The truth however is that you see far more 150+ in a 100 than you'll ever see 90 in a 50. I'm not sure how you think doing 150 on the highway is safe? The beauty of this is that you do not have to agree ever... Because it really doesn't matter. The laws exist regardless of your thoughts on them. Either way...don't exceed the limits and you'll never have to worry about being ticketed, losing your veh or your licence. It couldn't be any simpler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 1 minute ago, odot1 said: I didn't miss the point at all. I didn't argue that 90 in a 50 is unsafe. The truth however is that you see far more 150+ in a 100 than you'll ever see 90 in a 50. I'm not sure how you think doing 150 on the highway is safe? The beauty of this is that you do not have to agree ever... Because it really doesn't matter. The laws exist regardless of your thoughts on them. Either way...don't exceed the limits and you'll never have to worry about being ticketed, losing your veh or your licence. It couldn't be any simpler. never said doing 150 was safe I said it isn't the same for the BLANKET STUNT FLAW LAW I drive the highways daily for 30 years and have a valid opinion, the people doing 135 in the fast lane are rarely the problem. At a certain point speed does matter for control of your vehicle - 100k/hr isn't that point AS for Tickets I don't get them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 13 minutes ago, odot1 said: I didn't miss the point at all. I didn't argue that 90 in a 50 is unsafe. The truth however is that you see far more 150+ in a 100 than you'll ever see 90 in a 50. I'm not sure how you think doing 150 on the highway is safe? The beauty of this is that you do not have to agree ever... Because it really doesn't matter. The laws exist regardless of your thoughts on them. Either way...don't exceed the limits and you'll never have to worry about being ticketed, losing your veh or your licence. It couldn't be any simpler. Pretty sure we won't have to worry about Fail driving +150, his car would fall apart before ever hitting that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odot1 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 1 minute ago, 1trailmaker said: never said doing 150 was safe I said it isn't the same for the BLANKET STUNT FLAW LAW I drive the highways daily for 30 years and have a valid opinion, the people doing 135 in the fast lane are rarely the problem. At a certain point speed does matter for control of your vehicle - 100k/hr isn't that point AS for Tickets I don't get them Yet... like I said..try a ride along with a traffic guy. Attend some major collisions and help clean up body parts and do some next of kin notification... Speed is fine while in control. your injuries at 130 are quite a bit more substantial than at 100. It's not only about vehicles traveling safely at speed.. the result of vehicles coming to sudden stops from various speeds is also factored in. You may think you are safe at 135.. and you may be. But not everyone around is safe at that speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1trailmaker Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 10 minutes ago, odot1 said: Yet... like I said..try a ride along with a traffic guy. Attend some major collisions and help clean up body parts and do some next of kin notification... Speed is fine while in control. your injuries at 130 are quite a bit more substantial than at 100. It's not only about vehicles traveling safely at speed.. the result of vehicles coming to sudden stops from various speeds is also factored in. You may think you are safe at 135.. and you may be. But not everyone around is safe at that speed. Hitting a tree at 100km/hr compared to 50km/hr on a sled is going to hurt more, everyone knows this... I doubt anyone thinks driving a sled at 100km/hr is unsafe Just another flawed traffic law - IMO Personally I think if you can't drive 135 on a highway comfortably you should be allowed on it - lack of skill and just plain scared drivers are more of an issue. You seem to be taking this personal for some reason - We still love you Sean 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.