Reminder: New excessive speeding law starts Sept 20

[GabAlmighty]

I almost got a VI in the old volvo on cut springs. Checked to see if I was rubbing at full lock, didn't even care that I had to turn te car off in order to hear him... He wanted to make sure "it as safe" as he put it, my car was probably safer than half the cars on the road. I pulle to about 4K on the way out and made a nice backfire.

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

at least u walked away without the fucking stupid VI, which is completely bullshit.

I fucking hate a retarded cop who has no clue wtf they are looking for or talking about. SImply ignorant.

cant get the make/model right nor tell whether its VI material or not.

the fuck


RIghtttt im gonna make your life myserable, so here is a ticket and a VI to the mechanic shop. Let them decide if the car is legal or not, because im so dumb i really cant tell. i enjoy eating the donuts but repairing vehicles really isnt my experty. What do i know??@#!@#!@#

[ericthehalfbee]

Hahahaha.

I post a statistcal fact that speeding is the #1 cause of fatalities, and people run their mouths talking about the causes of accidents.

People who hate the idea of speeding tickets and speed llimits always bring this up in their arguments about the causes of accidents, where driver inattention is usually first and speeding is way down the list. They then try to equate this to mean that "speeding is safe since it's not the main cause of accidents".

When ICBC says "Speed Kills" they don't mean that speed causes accidents. They mean that accidents at a higher speed (regardless of how they are caused) cause fatalities. In fact, the chance of a fatality (or extent of injury and subsequent $$$ payed out for rehab and so on) goes up exponentially with the speed of the accident. Hitting something at 120 km/h does not equate to only 20% more damage than hitting something at 100 km/h.

[GabAlmighty]

Ever stuck your hand out of the window at 240km/h?

[ericthehalfbee]

Originally Posted by Mugen EvOlutioN

at least u walked away without the fucking stupid VI, which is completely bullshit.

I fucking hate a retarded cop who has no clue wtf they are looking for or talking about. SImply ignorant.

cant get the make/model right nor tell whether its VI material or not.

the fuck


RIghtttt im gonna make your life myserable, so here is a ticket and a VI to the mechanic shop. Let them decide if the car is legal or not, because im so dumb i really cant tell. i enjoy eating the donuts but repairing vehicles really isnt my experty. What do i know??@#!@#!@#

I do provincial inspections, and our shop is where ICBC often sends vehicles for a "proper" inspection (for example, when a shop illegally passes a car and ICBC wants a re-inspect).

I have inspected countless cars for VI's. There have been a few where nothing is wrong with the vehicle and the officer got it wrong.

That said, the vast majority had one or more problems and deservedly got a VI.

So you'll have to excuse me when someone on RS gets a VI and complains about the "stupid bullshit pig that VI'd me for no reason" that I show no sympathy, because odds are extremely good that your car is a POS and deserved the VI.

[GabAlmighty]

One or more problems being? What exactly can fail the car?

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by T.T

I don't see how hard it would be to just keep your speed at 100 which is already pretty damn fast since you'll be approaching lougheed hwy soon and most likely have to stop for the light. On this stretch most people drive 80-90 still.

The problem with the SFU hill is, there's a tight, blind curve at the bottom, followed immediately by a left turn and a traffic light.

I seem to recall an incident a few years ago where someone was flying down the hill and slammed into the back end of a slower car, killing its occupants. See, just because YOU (a metaphysical "YOU", not T.T specifically) can handle going down the hill and whipping around that curve at 100, doesn't mean the car - or cars - ahead of you can or want to do it... and if you come around that curve, at that speed, and there's a wad of traffic stopped at the light, the back end of which is right at the exit of the curve, well...

I think this law is fair for those who drive responsibly. It's "unfair" to irresponsible drivers..but then again we don't want irresponsible drivers on the road.

The few irresponsible drivers aren't being "fair" to the many, many responsible drivers on the road, anyway... so the law is perfectly "fair" for them as well.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by GabAlmighty

One or more problems being? What exactly can fail the car?

Judging from recurrent posts in the Police Forum, I'd say the list for Revsceners includes, but is not limited to, front tint, improper lighting, missing reflectors, lowered too far, exhaust too loud, tires rubbing, improper seats, improper restraints, improper bumpers...

I've also seen or heard of VIs for non-working lights, non-working horns, broken springs, cracked/broken frames, rusted-out body panels, MISSING bumpers, MISSING body panels, non-working brakes, improperly adjusted brakes, non-working emergency brakes, cracked windshields, bald tires, badly-worn tires (caused by bad alignment)...

Keep in mind, of course, that you can be VI'd for one obvious thing (like, HIDs in a '79 Volvo) , and when you take it for inspection, the shop can fail it for any combination of other above items, and more... like if they find your Volvo has gaping holes rusted through the floorboards. An inspection doesn't just check the one thing you were written up for... it checks that EVERYTHING is in proper, legal running condition.

[GabAlmighty]

But the rusty ones are always the cheapest!!!

[the shocker]

lol i got a V.I on my car for my rear camber, the cop thought something was bent after i told him countless times that nothing was and that i had experience with car and gone to school for automotive. Car had no rust as well. Cops are just dumb and don't know any better than wrecking someones day

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

^

wat did i tell you

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by the shocker

lol i got a V.I on my car for my rear camber, the cop thought something was bent after i told him countless times that nothing was and that i had experience with car and gone to school for automotive. Car had no rust as well. Cops are just dumb and don't know any better than wrecking someones day

If you're running so much camber that a cop thinks something is bent, you might want to head back to automotive school.

The whole massive camber fad is dumb, and illegal/unsafe. I hope it fades out fast.

[the shocker]

Originally Posted by taylor192

If you're running so much camber that a cop thinks something is bent, you might want to head back to automotive school.

The whole massive camber fad is dumb, and illegal/unsafe. I hope it fades out fast.

it wasn't that much camber, it was about -3

[q0192837465]

Failure to stop is the cause of ALL accidents.

[Soundy]

...and excessive stopping is the result!

[BallPeenHammer2]

I don't like the new laws at all. They restrict, but offer no options.
At this point, ANY cop can nail me for excessive speeding even if I'm not. And make me go through all the headache and trouble and money just to prove it.

In the mean time, the shithead dumbasses I see on the road with the 80k cars don't really need to care. ESPECIALLY the ones w/ int'l licenses. They just get back on the road. I personally know a few ppl who just do that, 'cuz mom/dad have 2-4 cars at the house that they can just take. They don't care if they injure someone or hit something. money will solve it. They don't usually get pulled over anyway 'cuz the car's never under their name, and they're usually big ticket cars.

Some of the fastest cars on the road are the expensive ones. Yet I never see them get pulled over.

[BallPeenHammer2]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Judging from recurrent posts in the Police Forum, I'd say the list for Revsceners includes, but is not limited to, front tint, improper lighting, missing reflectors, lowered too far, exhaust too loud, tires rubbing, improper seats, improper restraints, improper bumpers...

I've also seen or heard of VIs for non-working lights, non-working horns, broken springs, cracked/broken frames, rusted-out body panels, MISSING bumpers, MISSING body panels, non-working brakes, improperly adjusted brakes, non-working emergency brakes, cracked windshields, bald tires, badly-worn tires (caused by bad alignment)...

Keep in mind, of course, that you can be VI'd for one obvious thing (like, HIDs in a '79 Volvo) , and when you take it for inspection, the shop can fail it for any combination of other above items, and more... like if they find your Volvo has gaping holes rusted through the floorboards. An inspection doesn't just check the one thing you were written up for... it checks that EVERYTHING is in proper, legal running condition.

Don't forget the exclusion of cat, or improper cat. Tow hooks front and rear, illegal lighting in vehicle cabin. colour of lights. Colour of indicator llights. Size of steering wheel. Aftermarket non-airbag steering wheel. foreign objects protrusions (exhaust tip, tow hooks, even the little side bumper wings). Spoiler too big, too long, etc. There's a huge shitlist.

[GabAlmighty]

What if the car was never made with a cat? Didn't know about the tow hooks or steering wheels. What's the smallest steering wheel?

[zulutango]

If it didn't come from the factory with a cat then you don't need one, the aftermarket steering wheel has to be the same size as the factory one. Tow hooks would come under the section dealing with items sticking out that can injure peds. Want the complete details, take a look at the inspection manual.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by BallPeenHammer2

I don't like the new laws at all. They restrict, but offer no options.
At this point, ANY cop can nail me for excessive speeding even if I'm not. And make me go through all the headache and trouble and money just to prove it.

Any cops could, yet no cop will. Even a power tripping cop doesn't want to do all the associated paperwork.

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

we will see about that

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by taylor192

Any cops could, yet no cop will. Even a power tripping cop doesn't want to do all the associated paperwork.

Are you kidding me?
They streamlined the paperwork so an officer can be done with his paperwork quickly and be out enforcing again. There isn't much paperwork involved in any traffic situations, outside of an accident. In that case, most of the work involves details of said accident.

C/N's: It's not that hard for a cop to bust you. It's their job.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

Are you kidding me?
They streamlined the paperwork so an officer can be done with his paperwork quickly and be out enforcing again. There isn't much paperwork involved in any traffic situations, outside of an accident. In that case, most of the work involves details of said accident.

C/N's: It's not that hard for a cop to bust you. It's their job.

From what I've been told the procedure to impound and/or suspend is far more involved than a normal traffic violation. I'll ask my RCMP buddy tonight again to confirm and see if I can get exact details of how much more work it is.

[taylor192]

Anyone considering running from the cops, I finally found the MTA section that will screw you if they get your plate (or if you have an easily identifiable car that can be tracked down):

MTA 84 outlines the duty of the owner and MTA 83 outlines the owner will be held liable for specific offense if the driver is not identified and the corresponding fines and imprisonment.

Duty to give information

84 (1) If a peace officer has reason to believe that a motor vehicle has been involved in an accident or in a contravention of this Act, the Commercial Transport Act or the Transportation Act, the regulations under any of these Acts, the bylaws of a municipality or the laws of a treaty first nation, and so informs the owner or a person in the motor vehicle, it is the duty of the owner or person, as the case may be, if required by the peace officer, to give all information it is in his or her power to give relating to the identification of the driver of the motor vehicle at the relevant time or during the relevant period.

(2) If the owner or other person fails to comply with subsection (1), or gives information that he or she knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he or she commits an offence against this Act.

[GabAlmighty]

I left the keys in the ignition...