PSA: VPD Handing Out VIs Like Candy

[trollface]

Originally Posted by TouringTeg

Hypebunny started a change.org petition:

https://www.change.org/p/vancouver-p...ap_basic_share

Yeah that'll work.

[trollface]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Remember when shaw and telus wanted to have data caps?

The difference is, as a consumer, you can choose to not give money to those companies and find a different provider if you are unhappy with their services.

You can't choose which law enforcement agency you use and what laws you want them to enforce.

[EndLeSS8]

My supervisor's husband drives a new Huracan. He was at a car meet a few weeks ago, and apparently 2 officers were handing out tickets afterwards. He was in the Huracan with their daughter inside.

From what my supervisor says, her husband is not going to dispute the loudness ticket, but he's going to take the police officers to court for the way they spoke to him and how the police officers treated him and everyone else there.

Apparently, the officers were yelling at both him and his daughter, and saying that "their exhaust noise damages baby's eardrums" and they told him to "put it in sport mode" and made him rev to do dB testing, and were very unprofessional in general. He has it recorded on camera.

In addition, the officers pulled over a group of brown/East Indian kids, and the officers were saying to them "Oh, who paid for your car? Your mommy? Your mommy's insurance gonna go up??"

[trollface]

You can sue for being rude?

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by trollface

The difference is, as a consumer, you can choose to not give money to those companies and find a different provider if you are unhappy with their services.

You can't choose which law enforcement agency you use and what laws you want them to enforce.

Really there is someone other that shaw and telus in BC that provides internet? Resellers don't count.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by trollface

You can sue for being rude?

Yes.

[trollface]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Yes.

Fuck, I need to sue everyone in my high school class of 1999, the chick at LA chicken, that one guy at Lordco, and the guy that didn't say please at Church's Chicken yesterday.

New Lambo here I come.


For internet: Teksavvy and LightSpeed

[Euro7r]

On my way home from work, pulled over by the famous assclown. Literally was behind me for half a block and flashed his lights, ruthless. Was dinged for clear side markers, loud exhaust and unnecessary noise (3 points). I haven't really dived into the MVA in detail but I do have some general understanding.

What is even unnecessary noise and what is considered necessary. He tested my dB and asked me to rev my car half of redline, no where in the MVA specifies that is the procedure, along with coupled with the fact the testing done in a non-controlled environment. Literally on one of the busiest roads in Vancouver, said my exhaust exceeds the 83dB limit. Told me to rev half of my vehicle redline and I said my redline is lower, then rev half of that. Also the fact you can't leave the vehicle to see how "far" they putting the dB meter to test. The testing is procedure is flawed as he's literally can make up whatever he wants and you can't dispute the Vi. I ain't no inspector for cars, but what is the proper procedure for dB testing? I've heard of examples of what he's doing is asking cars pulled over to revving to redline, and then half for me (no consistency).

Clear side markers, I can't seem to find on MVA it says it has to be "amber"?

His partner with him was at least nice about it as he offered to waive 2 of the 3 fines off as I had a clean driving record and these are easily fixable things; however, I would have to do so in court. The part that annoys me the most is, his partner multiple times said to me, "look, these are all easily fixable thing", if you know that, why are you giving me a Vi box 2 in the back of my mind. Clean driving record (road star) & being cooperative/nice won't yield a slap on the wrist with this assclown, still have to go through the hassle of Vi.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by trollface

Fuck, I need to sue everyone in my high school class of 1999, the chick at LA chicken, that one guy at Lordco, and the guy that didn't say please at Church's Chicken yesterday.

New Lambo here I come.


For internet: Teksavvy and LightSpeed

both are shaw and telus resellers.

And just because you sue doesn't mean you will win.

[coneZONE]

Re: the dBA testing, the only testing procedure i could find (as of yet) published by a government procedure is the Burnaby noise bylaw; a couple points are stated at the end of the document in Schedule A

https://bylaws.burnaby.ca/en/permalink/bylaw24796

SCHEDULE A
(1) All sound levels shall be determined with a sound level meter on the “A” scale and “slow” meter reading.
(2) Sound level meters shall be used and operated in accordance with manufacturers' instructions. The sound level meter shall be calibrated before and after readings have been taken.
(3) When determining the sound level from a source the ambient or background noise or sound level shall be established at the appropriate position and during the relevant period of time wherever possible before taking sound measurements from the source. No measurement should be attempted if the difference is 3 db or less.
(4) Noise or sound measurement should, in general, be made at a height of approximately one (1) metre and a distance of three (3) metres from any wall, building, or other reflecting structure with the microphone appropriately oriented.
(5) Precautions shall be taken to ensure that the values recorded correspond to the noise or sound being investigated and are not due to wind, or extraneous sources.
(6) When the wind velocity is above eight (8) kilometres per hour, a wind screen must be used. No test should be attempted when the wind velocity is above forty (40) kilometres per hour.

And since my place of work is in Bby, i just follow this procedure when needed. It’s near impossible to have an accurate measurement on roadside due to wind or other extraneous noises. It’s already hard enough to do inside a shop environment

[320icar]

Originally Posted by Euro7r

On my way home from work, pulled over by the famous assclown. Literally was behind me for half a block and flashed his lights, ruthless. Was dinged for clear side markers, loud exhaust and unnecessary noise (3 points). I haven't really dived into the MVA in detail but I do have some general understanding.

What is even unnecessary noise and what is considered necessary. He tested my dB and asked me to rev my car half of redline, no where in the MVA specifies that is the procedure, along with coupled with the fact the testing done in a non-controlled environment. Literally on one of the busiest roads in Vancouver, said my exhaust exceeds the 83dB limit. Told me to rev half of my vehicle redline and I said my redline is lower, then rev half of that. Also the fact you can't leave the vehicle to see how "far" they putting the dB meter to test. The testing is procedure is flawed as he's literally can make up whatever he wants and you can't dispute the Vi. I ain't no inspector for cars, but what is the proper procedure for dB testing? I've heard of examples of what he's doing is asking cars pulled over to revving to redline, and then half for me (no consistency).

Clear side markers, I can't seem to find on MVA it says it has to be "amber"?

His partner with him was at least nice about it as he offered to waive 2 of the 3 fines off as I had a clean driving record and these are easily fixable things; however, I would have to do so in court. The part that annoys me the most is, his partner multiple times said to me, "look, these are all easily fixable thing", if you know that, why are you giving me a Vi box 2 in the back of my mind. Clean driving record (road star) & being cooperative/nice won't yield a slap on the wrist with this assclown, still have to go through the hassle of Vi. opportunity.

That’s why that report at the top of this page is such a slap in the face

[trollface]

Originally Posted by Manic!

And just because you sue doesn't mean you will win.

I'm going to sue you.

[inv4zn]

That Porsche, while a very pretty car, the driver drives like an absolute asshat.

He was powersliding through queensborough intersections (albeit at like 1am) coming out of Annacis, and that is NOT a quiet car.

Also, in no definition is that car "lightly modded". The people who've gotten VIs for completely stock cars and trivial modifications should be annoyed that people with cars like that are being vocal (change.org, wtf) which just sways whatever little public sympathy existed.

[bcrdukes]

RIP Porsche

[cywinr]

Originally Posted by EndLeSS8

Apparently, the officers were yelling at both him and his daughter, and saying that "their exhaust noise damages baby's eardrums" and they told him to "put it in sport mode" and made him rev to do dB testing, and were very unprofessional in general. He has it recorded on camera.

In addition, the officers pulled over a group of brown/East Indian kids, and the officers were saying to them "Oh, who paid for your car? Your mommy? Your mommy's insurance gonna go up??"

I agree this is the only way to fight back. We cannot dispute the VI's or the laws because 1) it's not their job to know, that's why they issue a VI and 2) they check and measure everything under a microscope to make sure we wrong

the problem is the way the officers are enforcing the laws. they don't have to VI everyone with clear sidemarkers and a sporty exhaust. technically they can ticket everyone driving over 50kmph but they don't.

that's the whole point of having officers, is to use their judgement and enforce the law for the greater good of society. that is NOT what they are doing. they are abusing the laws to the detriment of society.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by trollface

I'm going to sue you.

Go ahead then I will counter sue you for wasting my time.

[dtaygolf]

Thank-You. This is exactly the point. It seems certain member's of the VPD are going after a lot of very trivial traffic enforcement issues.
Sports exhausts and clear side makers, let's face it, these are simple common mods that many enthusiasts do. And often it's just cosmetic, in no way does this single you out as a "street racer", unless you really are! These are not safety issues in any reasonable sense, yet many of these VIs are issued for extremely trivial and silly "offenses".
Jay walking is actually a good case in point. How many pedestrians are killed or injured each year in Vancouver alone for (commonly) disobeying this law? Because it is an inherently dangerous activity , with the stats to back it up, so why the apparent lack of enforcement? Well, it's a pain in the ass to catch and ticket someone on foot, if your in a vehicle. Many of the types that routinely do it, let's face it, on the DTES are drug addled addicts, good luck with that, as well PIVOT will jump down VPD supervisors necks for targeting that group of people. But based on stats, I'm going to go out on a limb and say, more people are killed and injured each year from this "seemingly harmless activity". I'm pretty sure a Lamborghini's exhaust hasn't killed anybody lately...unless you count heart attacks .
So then police routinely practice discretion, you can see this as most police will not pull over vehicles that are 10km/hr or less over the limit, since it's not really a safety issue, especially if it's flow of traffic, It's the outliers they typically go after. Obviously this is the easy low hanging fruit that they seem to be targeting. Because it's not a moving violation, it's not easy to challenge legally. The real question is to what end, and why do they care so much?
By the way, what ever happened to that promised "campaign" for enforcement of pedestrians disobeying traffic signals? ( walk and stop), I somehow remember this was a promise. I can't imagine the outrage if police targeted pedestrians ( even for their own stupidity), evening news and pedestrians rights activists would be protesting and blocking bridges in weeks. Car owners are already much maligned by elitist progressives, so easy pickings for whoever has an ax to grind.

[trollface]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Go ahead then I will counter sue you for wasting my time.

How rude.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by trollface

How rude.

Are you 10?

[cywinr]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Are you 10?

you two should get a room

[DaJo]

I agree, let's leave all the nonsense and butthurt spam/comments out of this thread. If it's not relevant to the case, please refrain from commenting... If you're not the solution, you're part of the problem.

[underscore]

Does anyone have a copy of the complaint that the report is about? Without having it for reference it's hard to really judge but reading the report the complaint provided a lot of third hand info and not a lot of actual facts.

As for the petition, whoever wrote that is so clueless it's hard to know where to begin. It's good for a laugh at least.

[BIC_BAWS]

Originally Posted by underscore

Does anyone have a copy of the complaint that the report is about? Without having it for reference it's hard to really judge but reading the report the complaint provided a lot of third hand info and not a lot of actual facts.

As for the petition, whoever wrote that is so clueless it's hard to know where to begin. It's good for a laugh at least.

I'm pretty sure that's the report that was posted a while back. Traum submitted the complaint. It was posted here.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Traum]

Originally Posted by underscore

Does anyone have a copy of the complaint that the report is about? Without having it for reference it's hard to really judge but reading the report the complaint provided a lot of third hand info and not a lot of actual facts.

This is the original complaint that was sent to OPCC in mid January 2019 regarding how VPD have been enforcing N&O. It was filed as a Service & Policy complaint:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rP...7bEV8nxELyva2j

The complaint was deemed to be "admissible", at which point an internal VPD investigation took place as per the standard complaint protocol. The following report is what came out of it:

https://vancouver.ca/police/policebo...t-2019-004.pdf

A rebuttal (to the VPD report) was written and sent to the OPCC in mid July 2019 following the VPD investigation report:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YO...h9l6K1edOBcdZD

Upon review of the rebuttal, the OPCC made the following recommendations to the Vancouver Police Board:

- To assess whether enforcement action taken by the Vancouver Police Department is arbitrary or is consistent with the relevant lawful authorities and department policies. It is recommended that a sample of Notice and Orders issued by the VPD be audited to determine the number of vehicles that were found to be in compliance with the law. This sample could include issues related to wheel alignment/camber and exhaust systems.

- The audit should assess VPD compliance with departmental policy related to the driver’s choice of which Designated Inspection Facility (DIF) the driver chooses to use (VPD Regulations and Procedures Manual, s. 1.10.13(viii) – Traffic Violations – Unsafe Vehicles)

- Determine whether any changes are required to VPD policy following this audit.

However, it is unclear whether those recommendations have been adopted, and what results came out of them had they been adopted.

[snowball]

Originally Posted by Traum

However, it is unclear whether those recommendations have been adopted, and what results came out of them had they been adopted.

Apparently not, judging from what's been happening in this thread still.