Jump to content

PERSONAL opinions of an OPP SAVE officer


odot1

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Boered said:

it does violate the charter, that is a fact accepted by all. It is allowed under the notwithstanding clause in the charter.

 

The courts have deemed that it does not violate the charter at least as far as defence goes.  Again, driving is not a right,,,its deemed a priviledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2017 at 1:09 PM, reelpro said:

"Alcohol is another serious issue.  By engaging the driver and watching as he/she retrieves documents gives an officer a chance to asses fine motor skills.  Simply having booze on your breath does not mean you are impaired.  Most helmets have pieces covering the mouth and nose making it difficult to detect the odour as well."

I guess this is my "beef"

Officers are using the "document check" to get time to evaluate each sledder for impaired. At least in a lot of areas I ride. 

If it is a RIDE check - says its a RIDE check - ask the sledder to pull their helmet off .

We do not have "document checks" on our roadways for vehicles. To have these on our trails is BS. 

If the sled has trail permit, licence numbers and val tag displayed correctly it should be waived on.  To ask for all paperwork with no visible cause to suspect an otherwise "LEGAL" sledder is HARASSMENT !

"At least 50% are riding without documentation, proper insurance, proper validation tags etc as well as no trail pass,"

I think your numbers are wacked. Perhaps 25 years ago when I was a groomer operator and Trail Warden, helping to build the network of trails we have today, we saw numbers in that range, as groomed trails and trail passes were kind of a new thing in a lot of areas, but in 2017 I would say numbers are way less than that. 

From the LINEUPS I go through every other day - I see about 1 in 15 or 20 pulled aside and ticketed.

 

The percentage comes from my own personal experience and are not whacked.  An expired or missing insurance card counts as not having proper documentation.  As for 1 in 15 or 20 ticketed...  Most likely..  many more warnings are issued than tickets.  On average for every ticket I've written I've given at least 10-15 warnings.  RIDES are meant for highways and motor vehicles, thats why they are not called RIDES.  The support to ask riders for documentation exists in the Motorized Snow Vehicle Act.  Perhpas your "beef" should be with the MSVA and legislators. And yes, docuemtations do exist under the HTA.  Every vehicle and driver are subject to being stopped and required to produce proof of insurance, licence and registration.  You may not see it.  But it does exist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2017 at 8:14 PM, Puzzleboy said:

They also might have pulled 02 over because even though he was wearing the requisite helmet, etc..... there was no indication of registration numbers or a trail pass on his snowblower. 

:lol:Sorry, but this has not gotten old yet. Truly a classic FS memory that will be around for a while, and for that, thank you 02sled :bc: 

On 1/8/2017 at 1:09 PM, reelpro said:

"Alcohol is another serious issue.  By engaging the driver and watching as he/she retrieves documents gives an officer a chance to asses fine motor skills.  Simply having booze on your breath does not mean you are impaired.  Most helmets have pieces covering the mouth and nose making it difficult to detect the odour as well."

I guess this is my "beef"

Officers are using the "document check" to get time to evaluate each sledder for impaired. At least in a lot of areas I ride. 

If it is a RIDE check - says its a RIDE check - ask the sledder to pull their helmet off .

We do not have "document checks" on our roadways for vehicles. To have these on our trails is BS. 

If the sled has trail permit, licence numbers and val tag displayed correctly it should be waived on.  To ask for all paperwork with no visible cause to suspect an otherwise "LEGAL" sledder is HARASSMENT !

"At least 50% are riding without documentation, proper insurance, proper validation tags etc as well as no trail pass,"

I think your numbers are wacked. Perhaps 25 years ago when I was a groomer operator and Trail Warden, helping to build the network of trails we have today, we saw numbers in that range, as groomed trails and trail passes were kind of a new thing in a lot of areas, but in 2017 I would say numbers are way less than that. 

From the LINEUPS I go through every other day - I see about 1 in 15 or 20 pulled aside and ticketed.

 

You really either need to find a new place to ride or slow down with the drugs.

Where is it you ride that you are checked that often & with line ups?!?!

I don't like it either, but enforcement on the trails is a must, especially with what seems to be a decreased club presence on the trails....and of course with the continual decrease in common sense that people have or use these days... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FyI ,,,,,,I got off my red light camera ticket. Showed proof that I was not driving the vehicle with witness statements and visa statement proving I was in another province at the time of the occurrence. Thanks odot1

Cheers!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yarddawg said:

FyI ,,,,,,I got off my red light camera ticket. Showed proof that I was not driving the vehicle with witness statements and visa statement proving I was in another province at the time of the occurrence. Thanks odot1

Cheers!

AWESOME!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

Ok, I have one. Twice in the last week I have heard similar tales from different people that are related kinda.

One story is that, if you have your phone in a cradle you can't be charged under the distracted driver law because the law refers only to "hand held devices". If its not in your hand, there is no offense.

The other story is about a truck driver being charged for grabbing his cigarettes off the dash. Because the pack was in his hand and he was lighting a smoke, he was charged under the distracted driver law.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Ok, I have one. Twice in the last week I have heard similar tales from different people that are related kinda.

One story is that, if you have your phone in a cradle you can't be charged under the distracted driver law because the law refers only to "hand held devices". If its not in your hand, there is no offense.

The other story is about a truck driver being charged for grabbing his cigarettes off the dash. Because the pack was in his hand and he was lighting a smoke, he was charged under the distracted driver law.

 

The law refers to the use of handheld devices not that it is specifically in your hand.  I've seen in court where people are convicted while their passenger was holding it but they (the driver) was actively reading it/looking at it.  If the phone is in a cradle and you are using speaker/Bluetooth their is no issue.  If you are pressing buttons on..i.e. texting then you can be charged and convicted. 

 

As for the truck driver... definitely not.  This is similar to the old story about the guy getting charged for leaving his trailer hitch in.  The media is misleading.  There is no specific "distracted driving charge".. Simply a couple of charges that address the issues that distract drivers.  I.E. the phone, in-car video viewed by the driver.  I suspect with the truck driver he was actually using his phone and charged with that but his defence was he was grabbing the smokes...  OR...its quite possible he was charged with smoking in the workplace under the smoke free act...  I've seen at least one, umm... intense officer do this

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, yarddawg said:

FyI ,,,,,,I got off my red light camera ticket. Showed proof that I was not driving the vehicle with witness statements and visa statement proving I was in another province at the time of the occurrence. Thanks odot1

Cheers!

Curious. How does your being out of province get you out of the red light ticket. From what I have read/heard the red light ticket is attached to the vehicle and not the driver. The premise being that regardless of who was driving, spouse, relative or friend the owner is responsible. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, odot1 said:

The law refers to the use of handheld devices not that it is specifically in your hand.  I've seen in court where people are convicted while their passenger was holding it but they (the driver) was actively reading it/looking at it.  If the phone is in a cradle and you are using speaker/Bluetooth their is no issue.  If you are pressing buttons on..i.e. texting then you can be charged and convicted. 

 

As for the truck driver... definitely not.  This is similar to the old story about the guy getting charged for leaving his trailer hitch in.  The media is misleading.  There is no specific "distracted driving charge".. Simply a couple of charges that address the issues that distract drivers.  I.E. the phone, in-car video viewed by the driver.  I suspect with the truck driver he was actually using his phone and charged with that but his defence was he was grabbing the smokes...  OR...its quite possible he was charged with smoking in the workplace under the smoke free act...  I've seen at least one, umm... intense officer do this\\\

Scenario, phone is secured in a cradle, you push a button to access phone book, select person to dial, hit send, is that still considered using a hand held device? Same question if you have to enter the actual phone number? If the answer is yes, how is that any different vs going through the same two or three finger actions if you had built in blue tooth through the vehicles factory media device?

Really appreciate your taking the time to reply to these kinda questions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 02sled said:

Curious. How does your being out of province get you out of the red light ticket. From what I have read/heard the red light ticket is attached to the vehicle and not the driver. The premise being that regardless of who was driving, spouse, relative or friend the owner is responsible. 

Interested in the response / also thought it was attached to the vehicle regardless of who was at the wheel OR was the defense, you and your vehicle were out of province at the time which meant it flagged the wrong vehicle all together?

Here in Scarborough, all too common to get hung out to dry in the intersection when in position to make a left turn. More common vs not,  two or more vehicles to smoke the light after it's turned red. Always on my mind the red light camera is going to glitch n tag me for something that was 100 percent out of my control.

Edited by ZRSledhead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too have been sledding around the province for more than 30 years and can count on 1 hand how many times I have been stopped by police. Once in North Bay, we actually had to do a breathalyzer. I had a beer before leaving the motel and I guess the officer smelled it. I blew .000. He was a bit of an ass, but I can only imagine what he encounters on the trail. Once I had to show paperwork in the Ganny and a couple other times it was just a slow down so they could see me stickers. I believe both of those times it was  Odot though. I will add that I try to do most of my riding thru the week.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
9 hours ago, ZRSledhead said:

 how is that any different vs going through the same two or three finger actions if you had built in blue tooth through the vehicles factory media device?

or adjusting your heat/ac, adjusting mirrors, changing radio stations, etc.

I assume it will come down to the officer and the situation as to whether you get charged, warned or nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ZRSledhead said:

Scenario, phone is secured in a cradle, you push a button to access phone book, select person to dial, hit send, is that still considered using a hand held device? Same question if you have to enter the actual phone number? If the answer is yes, how is that any different vs going through the same two or three finger actions if you had built in blue tooth through the vehicles factory media device?

Really appreciate your taking the time to reply to these kinda questions.

Thanks for the appreciation!!

As for your question...there is some differing case law out there.  But what SEEMS to be acceptable in a number of courts is, in your example... a push or swipe to answer the phone.  Beyond 2 or 3 key presses seems to get a conviction.  In all honesty as an officer looking for this infraction, its only the obvious ones that get pulled over.  Many justices want to the officer to clearly see the device, and see an engagement of some sort with the driver..  i.e thumb/finger manipulation, lighted screens, mouth moving etc...  As for built in Bluetooth devices...for example my truck has the controls in the steering wheel.  One press can answer/hang up or activate voice dialing etc..  Your hands are no t on the device itself and its really considered no different than hitting your signal, turning on headlights etc...  Hope this answers.. if not, let me know what I missed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blackstar said:

or adjusting your heat/ac, adjusting mirrors, changing radio stations, etc.

I assume it will come down to the officer and the situation as to whether you get charged, warned or nothing.

Sorry Blackstar...didn't see your post..  perhaps answered your question in the one above?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 02sled said:

Curious. How does your being out of province get you out of the red light ticket. From what I have read/heard the red light ticket is attached to the vehicle and not the driver. The premise being that regardless of who was driving, spouse, relative or friend the owner is responsible. 

 

11 hours ago, ZRSledhead said:

Interested in the response / also thought it was attached to the vehicle regardless of who was at the wheel OR was the defense, you and your vehicle were out of province at the time which meant it flagged the wrong vehicle all together?

Here in Scarborough, all too common to get hung out to dry in the intersection when in position to make a left turn. More common vs not,  two or more vehicles to smoke the light after it's turned red. Always on my mind the red light camera is going to glitch n tag me for something that was 100 percent out of my control.

There are no red light cameras in my jurisdiction...or any OPP area as far as I know so not extremely familiar with the legislation.  The photo radar was always based on the vehicle only regardless of the driver however many issues were brought to court surrounding this.  As was my understanding it held up, but with what we refer to as tests... meaning all evidence is listened to and all things must be accurate.. again my understanding.  I don't think the red light cams have the same level attached to them as they are primarily deployed by the specific municipality.  I think in this case the evidence showing that he was not the driver was so overwhelming that it would bring into question the administration of justice that the courts deemed him innocent.  As for being in the intersection..  the way the lights are set up and timed, this should never generate a ticket.  Its the obvious still behind the white line when light turns red but goes through anyway vehicles.   Of which there are many!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, odot1 said:

Thanks for the appreciation!!

As for your question...there is some differing case law out there.  But what SEEMS to be acceptable in a number of courts is, in your example... a push or swipe to answer the phone.  Beyond 2 or 3 key presses seems to get a conviction.  In all honesty as an officer looking for this infraction, its only the obvious ones that get pulled over.  Many justices want to the officer to clearly see the device, and see an engagement of some sort with the driver..  i.e thumb/finger manipulation, lighted screens, mouth moving etc...  As for built in Bluetooth devices...for example my truck has the controls in the steering wheel.  One press can answer/hang up or activate voice dialing etc..  Your hands are no t on the device itself and its really considered no different than hitting your signal, turning on headlights etc...  Hope this answers.. if not, let me know what I missed.

Clears it up nicely, thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Props to a couple of your "cohorts" from the Ptbo detachment. I was stopped today on E107 & all they were interested in was that I had my trail permit. When I reached for my papers he said I was good to go. I would've been off quicker, but had a question for them. They asked me a question about a trail & off I went.

Edited by revrnd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, revrnd said:

Props to a couple of your "cohorts" from the Ptbo detachment. I was stopped today on E107 & all they were interested in was that I had my trail permit. When I reached for my papers he said I was good to go. I would've been off, but had a question for them. They asked me a question about a trail & off I went.

Thanks for the positive input.  Glad to hear stuff like this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Odot 1,

If there was a trespassing snowmobile on your property and you shot a paintball gun towards them what would be the charges?

 

Now, what would the charges be if you were a good enough shot to actually hit the riders or the sled?

 

thanks

 

 

Edited by Sksman
Misspell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sksman said:

Hi Odot 1,

If there was a trespassing snowmobile on your property and you shot a paintball gun towards them what would be the charges?

 

Now, what would the charges be if you were a good enough shot to actually hit the riders or the sled?

 

thanks

 

 

Well.... assault with a weapon minimum...   Should the idiot fall off and hurt himself... assault causing bodily harm.  PLEASE don't do this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Although I get it...and it would be funny to see.... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...