odot1

Lol!  Unless he has access to Ontario tickets, the HTA, a court that will accept his ticket.... oh and sworn in as an officer in Ontario, he's kinda out of luck.  But again... original is best.  I always carry my original. 

8 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

He's heading to Florida though.

I'd feel better having my original. Never know what some state Trooper will accept.

I had to show proof of ownership for my bike to Canada Customs when I came back to Canada.

I agree that it's always better to have the original for sure.  Legally speaking though..even in Florida the administrative side of your vehicle is governed by the province in which it's registered.  An example...  you take a trip... while traveling your birthday happens and now your validation sticker is expired..  they could not charge you with anything. It's an Ontario statute and requirement.   We deal with similar issues from Quebec.. 

21 hours ago, odot1 said:

A good quality photo copy SHOULD suffice...  I assume just personal/pleasure ride??

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 12:46 PM, Renegade X said:

Question: Do I need to take the original ownership for a motorcycle when crossing the boarder or does a photocopy suffice?

Thanks

Now that I'm home...  Here is the actual wording of the section.  

Permit to be carried

(5) Subject to subsection (6), every driver of a motor vehicle on a highway shall carry,

(a) the permit for it or a true copy thereof; and

(b) where the motor vehicle is drawing a trailer, the permit for the trailer or a true copy thereof,

and shall surrender the permits or copies for inspection upon the demand of a police officer.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 7 (5).

So the answer is still..  yes, a copy will work. 

On 21/02/2018 at 12:46 PM, Renegade X said:

Question: Do I need to take the original ownership for a motorcycle when crossing the boarder or does a photocopy suffice?

Thanks

A good quality photo copy SHOULD suffice...  I assume just personal/pleasure ride??

8 hours ago, Algonquin Rider said:

Sean I get it.

I hate exhaust cans more than anyone.

The issue is doing what you want on your property. Getting a ticket for anything on your property to me is outrageous.

JMO

  

 

 

I've always been surprised by this... to be honest this is the first time I've heard of it actually happening. 

9 hours ago, Algonquin Rider said:

Hey Sean, check this one out.

A friend if mine got a ticket today for an aftermarket exhaust. No biggy willing to pay as its 2 hours to fight it in court.

The best part is he was on his property going to the Lake to his ice hut. Cop said he was on a Prescribed OFSC Trail.

So you can have no Val Tag, Helmet, no insurance or no Permit on your property but you can't have a modified exhaust? 

Don't get me wrong I'm all for enforcement and a modified exhaust which is part of a turbo kit is not a noise issue. 

Him and his Family have been Trail Landowners for almost 50 years and been involved and helped establish the local Club so no issue there with loss of permission. If they did shut down the Trail on their property it would impact a very important link and Community.

What if they weren't? A Landowner with nothing to do with the Club and gets charged on his property. A good way to get Trails closed.

Discussion?

 

 

 

 

 

While it's always hard for me to comment on another officer's interactions as I was not there and do not have all sides of the story, I can comment on generalities.  As much as we would like thinks to be perfectly black and white in the world...there are too many shades of grey.  Trails on private property being used by the owner is one.  

So here we have the specific section dealing with modifications...  In every section of the Motorized Snow Vehicle Act (MSVA) you will see the rule and then exceptions if any)

Equipment requirements

Muffler in working order

18 (1) No person shall drive a motorized snow vehicle unless it is equipped with a muffler in good working order and in constant operation and no person shall drive a motorized snow vehicle which has a muffler cut-out, straight exhaust, gutted muffler, hollywood muffler, by-pass or similar device upon the motorized snow vehicle.  R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 18 (1).

Removing or modifying any component

(2) No person shall drive or permit to be driven any motorized snow vehicle upon which any component or device, which was required under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada) at the time that the motorized snow vehicle was manufactured or imported into Canada, has been removed, modified or rendered inoperative.  R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 18 (2).

Exception in racing area

(3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to a motorized snow vehicle while it is driven in a racing area sanctioned as such by the council of the municipality within which the racing area is located.  R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 18 (3); 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table.

Next I will post the insurance section....

Insurance

12 (1) No person shall drive a motorized snow vehicle unless the vehicle is insured under a motor vehicle liability policy in accordance with the Insurance Act, and the owner of a motorized snow vehicle shall not permit any person to drive the vehicle unless the vehicle is so insured.  2000, c. 30, s. 6 (1).

Production of evidence of insurance

(2) The driver of a motorized snow vehicle who drives or permits the driving of the motorized snow vehicle shall, upon the request of a police officer or conservation officer, produce evidence that the vehicle is insured under a motor vehicle liability policy in accordance with the Insurance Act.  2000, c. 30, s. 6 (1).

Offence for failure to have insurance

(3) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $200 and not more than $1,000.  2000, c. 30, s. 6 (1).

Offence for producing false evidence

(4) Every driver of a motorized snow vehicle who produces false evidence when required to produce evidence under subsection (2) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $200 and not more than $1,000.  R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 12 (4).

Exemption

(5) This section does not apply to a person driving a motorized snow vehicle on land occupied by the owner of the vehicle.  R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 12 (5).

Notice in this section it specifically states that owners of the property are exempt.  In the modification section it doesn't.  So based on the MSVA the officer had the authority to issue the ticket.  I do get your concern however and it is legit.  It's always a tough balance for us out there.  We try to weigh all factors, first and foremost is safety...the in cascades down from there.  Often times it comes down to the totality of the interaction. I.E. is this the only issue for this stop, or are there other infractions? Yes, attitude can factor in. Volume of traffic, weather etc etc.. AND... when it comes to the modified exhaust we always look back to the issue in Quebec when they lost huge sections of trails due to noise.  I've found most paying trail riders despise the cans.  Personally I don't understand why you want the loud buzzing in your ears while riding all day, but to each his own.  I do occasionally laugh when some people cite weight savings and performance gains..  Perhaps on a track..maybe a few pounds.  As for the performance...often you will need to re map the fuel delivery etc...rarely done except by the serious guys.  Even then...  I've yet to see an non-modified sled incapable of reaching 50knm/h  

3 minutes ago, ZRSledhead said:

Thank you for the above. Have a neighbor down the street who is a constant nuisance with his drone in the summer flying in and around backyards including my own. 

Hope it helps.  From what I've been hearing, TC is starting to take these things seriously.  I'd still prefer the good ol' shotgun approach...but meh, what can ya do?!?

Just now, odot1 said:

Sent a few $$

Although I may have screwed you over a bit..  I think I sent it in CAD...

Sent a few $$

2 hours ago, grggade said:

Was she disappointed to see what you actually look like afterwards...

 

(jk)

Oddly...  no!!!!!!!!!  I think she's a keeper!!

I do notice a rather small but hugely telling line within the article...

"Some Defendants, posing at U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities," the indictment claims.

To me that would kinda throw out the whole colluding argument, no?

8 hours ago, Sksman said:

Who do you call to report a drone flying over your backyard and house?

My wife was in backyard one day and a guy was flying a drone around our backyard.  We back onto 16 mile creek and he had a park on opposite side of the creek and instead choose to fly very close to my house.  It scared her.  When wife yelled he ran like a scared cat.  Unfortunately i was not home and when she told me the guy had left his backpack by fence i was pissed she did not pick it up and keep it.    He came back and grabbed it before neighbours did.

Milton Police did not attend but may have increased patrols in neighbourhood as this was third siteing of the guy flying over homes in our subdivision of 17 homes.  One neighbour gave the guy his drone back after it crashed in his yard.   I would have shown the guy where it crashed in my pool. And charged him salvage. 

 

You can call the police for sure...that should at least help in present.. Especially if it's an ongoing issue. He/she could speak to neighbours about privacy issues, trespassing etc..    But also notify transport Canada as it's actually their jurisdiction.  It's an easy online notification:

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/drone-incident-report-form.html

That's just freakin cool!

Just now, revrnd said:

Thanks Sean. A chap I know was telling me about someone (he's assuming his neighbour from hell) flying their drone over his acreage checking out his gravel pit.

Gotta love neighbours!!  I've heard of guys shooting the drones down with shotguns... but if caught you're kinda screwed with firearms charges.  

12 hours ago, Slow Joe said:

Very much appreciated Odot1 thanks for taking the time to answer this question I have been considering this for some time as wanting to haul the fishin craft along with the utv pretty sure the ole General could pull them but although I have great respect for our law enforcement I like to keep visits not unlike the inlaws down to a minimum  preferably non existent so runnin under the radar is the order of the day.Stealth Joe 

Thanks for the kind words Joe.....and lmfao at the inlaw comparison!! 

7 minutes ago, revrnd said:

What are the legalities of someone flying a drone over private property?

Certainly not my area of expertise...but we did talk about this last summer at work.  Hers the regs...

• below 90 m above the ground
• at least 30 m away from vehicles, vessels and the public (if your drone weighs over 250 g and up to 1 kg)
• at least 75 m away from vehicles, vessels and the public (if your drone weighs over 1 kg and up to 35 kg)
• at least 5.5 km away from aerodromes (any airport, seaplane base or area where aircraft take off and land)
• at least 1.8 km away from heliports or aerodromes used by helicopters only
• outside of controlled or restricted airspace
• at least 9 km away from a natural hazard or disaster area
• away from areas where its use could interfere with police or first responders
• during the day and not in clouds
• within your sight at all times
• within 500 m of yourself
• only if clearly marked with your name, address and telephone number

You are exempt from these rules if you are at a field or event approved by the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada. 

Basically...unless you live in a rural setting you're kinda stuck ans have to venture out somewhere.  This is all "policed" by Transport Canada and they would be responsible for administer fines.  The lesser stuff can be fined up to $3000.  The major stuff...such as endangering an aircraft can get you up $25000 in fines.   AND..  beware of trespassing laws, the  new voyeurism laws etc....

3 hours ago, steve from amherst said:

Former cop sues NYPD, claims job made him obese

Maybe it was the doughnuts.

A morbidly obese city cop got a hefty pension when he retired on disability at age 43, but he’s still hungry for more dough — so he’s suing the NYPD, claiming the job left him corpulent.

“The job is like a tyrant,’’ said ex-NYPD Officer Jose Vega, who is 5-foot-10 and tips the scales at 360 pounds.

“I went from 250 to 395 pounds in one year — I guarantee you, as small as you are, you eat more than me,” he told a Post reporter Tuesday, insisting it was the slew of health problems caused by the stress of his former police job that led to his mass weight gain, not his eating habits.

Vega, 46, a former Marine, said that when he first joined the department in 1997, he weighed in at a svelte 180 pounds.

“My goal was to become a first-grade detective and homicide detective,’’ he said.

But “they brainwashed you. ‘Go out and make arrests.’ The job would emphasize arrests without concern for any officer’s heath,’’ said the former cop, who worked in the Bronx’s 42nd Precinct.

 

Bold:  WTF?!?!?  How is that brainwashing??  That is literally a huge component of our job.  Fkn idiots like this destroy it for others...

5 hours ago, Puzzleboy said:

Sean, can you post up the regs for double towing, if you have them?  Would be a good read. 

So I've looked and all I can find is a reference to an MTO publication Part 6 addressing this issue.  It reads:

"Towing More Than One Vehicle

Cars, passenger vans and SUVs are not permitted to tow more than one trailer or one vehicle. Motor homes, trucks, pickup trucks and truck campers are legally permitted to tow two trailers or a trailer and a motor vehicle behind a trailer. However, a three vehicle combination that is swaying excessively, is unstable or has reduced handling capabilities is subject to action by the police as an unsafe combination of vehicles under the Highway Traffic Act.

The maximum length of any combination of vehicles is 23 m (75' 6")."

Having said that...  I can't find the actual publication any more. This was back in 2010.  I will try to get more solid and factual info for you guys...

Sean

Shitty..  glad to hear you are ok!!

2 minutes ago, Puzzleboy said:

Now you gotta get off your butt, find it, and repost it!   

Hard to believe it was that long ago..... sucks that we couldn't keep all that old info. 

Yeah...  I'm not even getting paid for this shit!!!!!!   Well..  other than the internal warm fuzzy feeling of helping you guys (not Zoso though..  or F7Ben)!!!

Hmmm...  Just checked the thread quickly.  Seems that was on the old FS site...

3 minutes ago, Slow Joe said:

Yea my original understanding of this when i asked a guy at a service centre was it was legal behind a fifth or a gooseneck but yes i did mean bumper pull "only a saying"  behind a pickup two in the rear '"that will make the girls wince".Make no mistake straight Joe

12 minutes ago, Puzzleboy said:

It's legal (might even be referenced earlier in this thread IIRC), but for some reason the legislation states that the tow vehicle must be a "pickup truck".  Lol.  Nobody seems to know why that is.....  I'm sure Odot can post up the piece of legislation that defines the requirements. 

I'm thinking of doing it with two sled trailers.  My dad does it with the fifth wheel and a boat trailer. 

 

20 minutes ago, Slow Joe said:

I see in the regs Odot 1 "Drive a vehicle pulling a double trailer" I have seen this more frequently in the last couple years on the highways pickup truck with a camper trailer with a boat trailer tagging along, so is that a illegal practice or they just breezed thru under the radar as it were.Joe 

Yes...it's legal and seems to be happening more and more frequently.  As the Puzzler said the regs reference pickup trucks only..   Never did clarification on this. The requirements aren't any different really than a single trailer.  It was discussed a little while ago in this thread.  You have to watch your overall weight and length.  I'll have to dig for the regs..

27 minutes ago, Slow Joe said:

So to acquire that license is it the same as class A as far as medical exam,re writing tests, do you have to take a road test to get this I had never heard of this class of license interested to know if the winters dont improve here I might have to buy a huge RV and trailer and head to Inuvik or Alaska for 6 months of the year,wearing different apparel  than snow birds, fur hat, bid snow pants ,sorrels,and a sun lamp.Frozen Joe

From what I can tell, the differences are almost non-existent in the process.  The obvious difference being the vehicle used for the road test.  Still need medical, eyes, written test etc..  I've been an AMZ licence for a long time.  I didn't find the road test all that challenging, nor are the written tests.   Pulled this from MTO site;

Restricted Class A licence

What you can drive

The restricted Class A (condition R) licence is meant for drivers operating smaller truck-trailer combinations, such as a recreational, horse or utility trailer.

You can also drive:

• a car or light truck covered by a Class G licence
• heavy trucks covered by the Class D truck licence

What you can't drive

With a restricted Class A licence, you can't:

• pull a trailer equipped with air brakes
• drive a full-size tractor-trailer
• drive a vehicle pulling a double trailer
• train another driver on a vehicle that requires full Class A privileges to drive

Requirements

To apply for a restricted Class A licence (condition R), you need to:

• be at least 18 years old
• hold a valid Ontario licence other than G1, G2, M, M1 or M2
• pass an eye test
• submit a medical report
• pass a knowledge test about operating large trucks and tractor-trailers
• pass a road test

35 minutes ago, Sksman said:

Hi Odot 1,

Can you clarify do the larger fifth wheel trailers require a modified A license?

My parents both had to get modified A for their Pick up and 35 foot fifth wheel.  This was done by RV dealer.

 

Odot 1 can you also verify weight limit but for comercial i think it is 10,000lbs trailer and you require your A license.

 

 

Yes to the modified A licences for the larger 5th wheels and the big RVs.   

Regular A licence:

• Any combination of truck/tractor and trailer with a Manufacturer’s Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (MGVWR) of at least 4600 kg; and
• A full air brake system on both the truck/tractor and trailer.

Restricted Class A licence:

• Any combination of truck/tractor and trailer with a Manufacturer’s Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (MGVWR) of at least 4600 kg; and
• Trailer is not equipped with air brakes.

So essentially its a bit of weight but also a separate full braking system.   

37 minutes ago, Puzzleboy said:

"Sorry officer, trailer is locked, and the keys are up at the destination".  

Actually, Odot, would the officer not have to ask the owner's permission, legally, to open the trailer?  Unless something was visibly wrong from the exterior? 

 

Yes, unless there are some sort of extenuating or exigent circumstances you would need owners permission to search the trailer...