|
|
12-22-2008, 03:42 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 65
|
|
Nicely said Camshaft!!!
I don't think I could add anything more.
Except it should be illegal to advertise locations of Photo Radar.
|
12-22-2008, 03:42 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5
|
|
Great Forum. First Post.
Of course Photo Radar is a cash cow. Great buisness idea. It is a volantary Tax. If you don't want to pay it...Don't Speed.
|
12-22-2008, 03:58 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheatland KB
Great Forum. First Post.
|
Welcome
|
12-22-2008, 04:21 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Parkland County, Alberta
Posts: 336
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by twofifty
Interesting story about the red car.
Anyone know how long is the delay between the radar unit cyphering a vehicle's speed, and the moment that the camera shutter takes the picture?
Lots can happen in a tenth of a second at 60mph: like 8.79 feet !
That's approx. half a vehicle's length, or enough for the red car to exit the picture before the image is captured, or to hide behind yours.
How to use that in court is another matter.
|
I can't remember what it was, but a while back Mythbusters had a show about photo radar. They said how fast the cameras take photos after the radar goes off. It was stupid fast. I was trying to find the information on the interweb earlier, and all I could find was THIS LINK.
|
12-22-2008, 07:01 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canadian Rockies
Posts: 456
|
|
Ya gotta try.
Wheatland says, "Of course Photo Radar is a cash cow. Great buisness idea. It is a volantary Tax. If you don't want to pay it...Don't Speed."
Wheatland, I too finally signed into this forum after reading it for a long time, so newbies unite or something!
But the whole point I've been writing about, and people seem to miss it somehow, is that I wasn't speeding. My vehicle was... Do I not let my wife drive my truck? Or my dad? Or my friend? We're talking 12K over the limit on a road with no cross-intersections in the area, going downhill.
And it's not a "volantary" tax, I didn' speed and I'm getting taxed for it.
Camshaft: I am going to plead not guilty, and that may be a waste of my time and the judge's time as you state. But I'd rather protest this nonsense even in a small way. I will try the charter defense (reasonable doubt) based on the fact that I have done due diligence in lending my vehicle as defined by the traffic act, we'll see how that goes. If I've done due diligence and have a statement that I definitely wasn't driving (my wife and I have argued that one through, she was driving) then I'll be curious to see what the judge says--in my mind that's pretty clear evidence that the crown hasn't proved me guilty at all... The judge here has made some interesting rulings in the past, decent guy. I'll still likely lose but it is a slightly different angle than what I've seen in the other cases I've read. I understand enough about law to understand what you're saying, but even if it goes against me then I've protested it, that's what being a citizen is all about.
And yes to Mr. Puffypants.
|
12-22-2008, 07:11 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 170
|
|
I believe you are not guilty of speeding Beans but the thing is you are not charged with speeding with a photo radar ticket. You are charged with being the registered owner of a vehicle that was speeding. Of that you are going to be found guilty.
|
12-22-2008, 07:22 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 170
|
|
Here is the section of the Traffic Safety Act that allows them to charge you.
Owner liable
160(1) If a vehicle is involved in an offence referred to in section 157 or a bylaw, the owner of that vehicle is guilty of an offence.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the owner of the vehicle satisfies the court that, at the time that the vehicle was involved in an offence referred to in section 157 or a bylaw,
(a) in the case of a vehicle that was in motion,
(i) the owner of the vehicle was not driving the vehicle, and
(ii) no other person was driving the vehicle with the owner’s expressed or implied consent,
and
(b) in the case of a vehicle that was parked,
(i) the owner did not park the vehicle, and
(ii) no other person parked the vehicle with the owner’s expressed or implied consent.
(3) An owner who is guilty of an offence under this section is not liable to imprisonment in respect of that offence or in respect of a default of a fine imposed in respect of that offence
|
12-22-2008, 11:41 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Saskatchewan Ab
Posts: 8,926
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheatland KB
Great Forum. First Post.
Of course Photo Radar is a cash cow. Great buisness idea. It is a volantary Tax. If you don't want to pay it...Don't Speed.
|
Welcome Aboard , and well said.
|
12-23-2008, 08:21 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SW of Dewinton
Posts: 2,129
|
|
Problem is there is no leeway, like someone else said what about that car passing you at high speed, I've been worried before on Glenmore as I drive a decent sized truck and I had a small I think bug haul past me and I saw a flash. I didn't get a ticket as I think the bug was in the picture but what if it was hidden behind my truck?
Also, I would like to see more enforcement on Deerfoot, a year of driving on it to and from work and I think I've only seen 2 people pulled over.
|
12-23-2008, 09:06 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beansgunsghandi
But the whole point I've been writing about, and people seem to miss it somehow, is that I wasn't speeding. My vehicle was... Do I not let my wife drive my truck? Or my dad? Or my friend? We're talking 12K over the limit on a road with no cross-intersections in the area, going downhill.
.
|
Sorry that I just gave thoughts without qualifying to the OP. There are many situations where you may be at no fault. I get photo tickets sent to me with pictures of the wife all the time. A car passing you etc... I cannot comment on. It has been my experience that the ticket will be thrown out you go to your court date and plead your case to the prosecutor before you are called up...especially if it is anything below 15k over the limit. I was on a first aid course a couple of months ago with an ex-RCMP and a Calgary City Officer who both said they didn't ticket up to 15K over.
Good luck.
|
12-24-2008, 01:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: WMU 214
Posts: 1,822
|
|
Multinova
Quote:
Originally Posted by gitrdun
If they sent a picture of your trucking speeding, why not send them a picture of you in the act of writing a cheque?
|
and they will send you a picture of hand cuffs.
I contested two multi cash grab tickets and beat both of them. The camera operator makes more money in his van then in court. he wont show up to fight one ticket.
Puma
|
12-26-2008, 11:09 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 40
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win
I like how you really brought out the "douche" in that picture. He'll have fun with that one in court. An alarm clock sure would help some of these @ssh@ts quit being in such a fricken' rush.
|
There is nothing in the Highway Traffic Act that says it is an offense to pass on a double or single solid line. The lines are suggestions made up by infrastructure road crews - it could be slightly different from crew to crew. It is however, unlawful to make an unsafe pass - and that's arguable - if visibility is good and one can see farther comparing a pickup to a car say, then a safe pass can be made on a solid line of any kind if there's no oncoming traffic.
Admittedly, those places on our roads are few, but they are there.
|
12-26-2008, 11:40 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,721
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElkCanyon
There is nothing in the Highway Traffic Act that says it is an offense to pass on a double or single solid line. The lines are suggestions made up by infrastructure road crews - it could be slightly different from crew to crew. It is however, unlawful to make an unsafe pass - and that's arguable - if visibility is good and one can see farther comparing a pickup to a car say, then a safe pass can be made on a solid line of any kind if there's no oncoming traffic.
Admittedly, those places on our roads are few, but they are there.
|
You are not looking deep enough into legislation to see some of the laws. The Traffic Safety Act (HTA is no longer in use) contains regulations that are seperate from the TSA. In this case you would need to look in the "Use of Highway and Rules of the Road Regulation".
Rules for traffic lanes
15(1) When operating a vehicle on a highway,
(a) in the case where double solid lines exist between traffic lanes, a person shall not drive the vehicle so that the vehicle or any portion of the vehicle crosses the double solid lines from one traffic lane to another;
(b) in the case of a highway in an urban area where a single solid line only exists between traffic lanes, a person shall not drive the vehicle so that the vehicle or any portion of the vehicle crosses the single solid line from one traffic lane to another except when overtaking and passing another vehicle;
(c) in the case of a highway outside an urban area where a single solid line only exists between traffic lanes, a person shall not drive the vehicle so that the vehicle or any portion of the vehicle crosses the single solid line from one traffic lane to another;
(d) in the case where a single solid line and a broken line exist together between traffic lanes, a person
(i) shall not, except as permitted under subclause (ii), drive the vehicle so that the vehicle or any portion of the vehicle crosses the solid line from the traffic lane next to which the solid line is located, and
(ii) may only drive the vehicle so as to cross to the left over the broken and solid lines from the traffic lane next to which the broken line is located for the purpose of and when overtaking and passing another vehicle in that traffic lane and shall, as soon as that other vehicle is safely passed, recross both lines and return to the traffic lane on the right in which that person’s vehicle was originally travelling;
(e) in the case where
(i) the roadway consists of only 2 traffic lanes that carry traffic in opposite directions, and
(ii) only one or more broken lines exist between the 2 traffic lanes,
a person may only drive the vehicle so as to cross to the left over the broken line from that person’s traffic lane into the traffic lane carrying the oncoming traffic for the purpose of overtaking and passing another vehicle that is travelling in the right traffic lane and shall as soon as that other vehicle is safely passed return to the traffic lane in which that person’s vehicle was originally travelling;
(f) in the case where
(i) the roadway consists of 2 or more traffic lanes that carry traffic in one direction only, and
(ii) only one or more broken lines exist between the traffic lanes,
a person may, with respect to those traffic lanes, drive the vehicle so as to cross the broken lines from one traffic lane into another traffic lane.
|
12-27-2008, 10:15 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 45,469
|
|
Anyone that believes that photo radar is infallible,needs to learn about cosine error.Unless the photo radar vehicle is parked perfectly,the results will not be accurate.
http://www.cyberbeach.net/~mtrenout/errors.html
As far as warning signs are concerned,there is a set of guidelines set forth by the government that the people using the photo radar are required to follow.
http://www.justice.gov.ab.ca/publica...t.aspx?id=2512
One guideline that they are required to follow,but they usually ignore is:
Quote:
Signage should inform drivers about photo radar locations:
|
The quote is taken directly from the link above.After reading all of the the guidelines,it is very obvious ,that many photo radar tickets are in fact not issued in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the government.As such,those tickets are not legally issued tickets.
Last edited by elkhunter11; 12-27-2008 at 10:41 AM.
|
12-27-2008, 10:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,671
|
|
the radio stations in the Fort always let listeners know where the photo radar is set up.
I think that if it helps people slow down, have at it.
I work on the Syncrude site amd drive to work every day.
Untill the traffic got so congested that traffic naturally slowed down, even the presence of a squad car would slow drivers down.
of course, there was still the odd 160KM ticket being handed out!
people up here seem to drive at insane speeds, especialy on HWY63 and 881.
The highways get blamed as being dangerous, but if people were not driving at
warp 2 there would not be nearly the amount of accidents and deaths on our highways up here.
I haven't had a speeding ticket for over 20 years, but then I don't drive way over the limit on the highway ( 105KPH normally) and I drive the posted limits in town.
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!
|
02-10-2009, 11:19 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1
|
|
Since photo radar does not affect your insurance rates etc... what incentive is there to pay, what can they do if you never paid it? (Appreciate the input, excuse my ignorance in the matter)
|
02-10-2009, 11:38 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
|
|
Since the ticket is issued to the registered owner, it would seem reasonable to me that they would deny the right to renew the registration till such leins are paid in full.
|
02-11-2009, 01:49 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Saskatchewan Ab
Posts: 8,926
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niglin
Since photo radar does not affect your insurance rates etc... what incentive is there to pay, what can they do if you never paid it? (Appreciate the input, excuse my ignorance in the matter)
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vindalbakken
Since the ticket is issued to the registered owner, it would seem reasonable to me that they would deny the right to renew the registration till such leins are paid in full.
|
Not only not being able to register your vehicle you also after a certain amount of time I believe get a lovely letter plus fees added on by Alberta justice and if you continue to refuse to pay I think eventually will post a warrant , not sure if that's with photo radar , but I know with traffic tickets and parking tickets after a certain time they put a warrant for your arrest .
|
02-11-2009, 02:04 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Red Deer Alberta
Posts: 783
|
|
The way out
From what I understand the best way is to pay it buy check and make it for $1 more than the ticket.They will send you a check back for one dollar and if you do not cash that check for a dollar they can not finish the paper work on there end so it does not get processed and there for never ends up on your record and the insurance companys never now about it.Or the registrie.So you can go about your way with out hasle.
__________________
This is gonna get messy..........................
|
02-11-2009, 07:27 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,721
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGBADJOHN
but I know with traffic tickets and parking tickets after a certain time they put a warrant for your arrest .
|
Thats only partly true. There are two types of 'tickets' you can get as an individual. Anyone who has ever gotten a 'yellow' ticket for speeding will never have a warrant issued for arrest. These are tickets that are often speeding and moving violations. If you are issued a 'pink' ticket and do not pay then a warrant for your arrest can be issued. These are offenses such as littering, peeing in public, etc, You will not have a warrant issued for photo-radar or for parking as the offenses are 'Registered Owner' tickets and are applied on the vehicle registration. If unpaid, the vehicle is not able to be registered at the end of the year. And yea...probably some extended late fees.....
|
02-11-2009, 07:35 AM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rackmastr
These are tickets that are often speeding and moving violations. If you are issued a 'pink' ticket and do not pay then a warrant for your arrest can be issued.
|
A warrant will be issued for not appearing in court, not for unpaid fine as the pink tickets don't show a fine amount.
"Yellow tickets versus pink tickets
A police officer can provide you with a “yellow” or “pink” ticket. A pink ticket is called a Summons and it has a mandatory court date. There is no fine specified on a pink ticket. This means that you are required to appear before a Judge/Commissioner and he or she will decide the penalty. If you do not appear in Court on a pink ticket, in most cases a warrant will be issued for your arrest.
If you are found guilty of the charge on your Summons the Judge/Commissioner has the option of suspending your licence and imposing jail time."
|
02-11-2009, 08:22 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 483
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams
...but I've had 6 month's grace and the buggar that wrote me the tickets, will have to spend two days in court. As it is, I feell I have a good chance of beating both.
Grizz
|
to bad they get paid for it and we dont even if we win. that should be the next step suing the crown for lost time!
|
02-11-2009, 08:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 483
|
|
Kind of off topic, but didnt Edmonton pass a idling ban? why is it that the photo radar van is sitting on the side of the road running? or are they above the law?
|
02-11-2009, 08:29 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Just North of the 55th Parallel
Posts: 1,497
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beansgunsghandi
Camshaft writes, "The bottom line is simple, and has been stated time and time again....dont speed, and u will not get a ticket."
I and others do have a massive issue with getting a ticket when we weren't the ones speeding. I wasn't speeding, and I got a ticket. The above statement is wrong. Or, from the crown's perspective, my vehicle got a ticket. In Europe if you get a ticket driving a vehicle they send you a picture of the person behind the wheel. I've paid those tickets without even thinking about it. This is different.
|
You assume responsibility when you allow someone else to drive your vehicle. Even though not guilty you are responsible for the person that you allow to drive your vehicle. Same concept applies if your car was in an accident and you weren't the driver. Insurance company would go after your insurance company, not the driver.
|
02-12-2009, 03:37 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cowtown, agian
Posts: 2,814
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElkCanyon
There is nothing in the Highway Traffic Act that says it is an offense to pass on a double or single solid line. The lines are suggestions made up by infrastructure road crews - it could be slightly different from crew to crew. It is however, unlawful to make an unsafe pass - and that's arguable - if visibility is good and one can see farther comparing a pickup to a car say, then a safe pass can be made on a solid line of any kind if there's no oncoming traffic.
Admittedly, those places on our roads are few, but they are there.
|
Wow you don't have any idea about the statutes do you? It is an offense to cross any solid line on the highway period. Those lines are Statutory not Regulatory and the road crews are told where to put them. That goes for the old HTA and especially in the new TSA. And there is no srguing on a unsafe pass. What constitutes an unsafe pass is clearly out lined in the TSA. Do you really thing that a third party road maintenance company is in charge of Statuatory lines on a highway
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11
Anyone that believes that photo radar is infallible,needs to learn about cosine error.Unless the photo radar vehicle is parked perfectly,the results will not be accurate.
http://www.cyberbeach.net/~mtrenout/errors.html
As far as warning signs are concerned,there is a set of guidelines set forth by the government that the people using the photo radar are required to follow.
http://www.justice.gov.ab.ca/publica...t.aspx?id=2512
One guideline that they are required to follow,but they usually ignore is:
The quote is taken directly from the link above.After reading all of the the guidelines,it is very obvious ,that many photo radar tickets are in fact not issued in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the government.As such,those tickets are not legally issued tickets.
|
And the number one rule about cosine angle is that when radar is stationary, or moving in a straight line, the cosine error always decreases the speed measurement. That means it is in your favor.
Man the old wive's tale are great.
|
02-12-2009, 03:45 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 45,469
|
|
Quote:
And the number one rule about cosine angle is that when radar is stationary, or moving in a straight line, the cosine error always decreases the speed measurement. That means it is in your favor.
Man the old wive's tale are great.
|
When you are talking about the standard radar used by the police,you are correct.However photo radar is set up differently,and the topic of this thread is photo radar.Obviously you didn't read the link that I posted before replying.
http://www.cyberbeach.net/~mtrenout/errors.html
This is from that link.You might read the example before making another incorrect reply.
Quote:
For a stationary photo radar van one of the most important of these errors is the cosine error. The Gastonomer units used in Ontario, had its beam offset at a 22 degree angle. The unit would correct the returned signal to take into account the frequency shift caused by the 22 deg angle. If the vehicle is not parked exactly parallel to the target vehicles it will affect the accuracy of the unit since the unit blindly assumes that the angle is always 22 degrees. Lets look at how a simple 10 degree shift in alignment can affect the reading, either way.
We will assume that the vehicle in question is traveling at 100km/h, the cosine of 22 ° is .9272 and the photo radar unit will add 7.28 km/h to get the correct reading for speed.
1) 100 X .9272 = 92.72km/h + 7.28km/h = Readout is 100km/h
If the van is parked with the front of the vehicle parked 10 ° away from the direction of the road, the angle would increase to 32 °. The cosine of 32 ° is .8480
2) 100 X .8480 = 84.80km/h + 7.28km/h = Readout is 92.72km/h
You get a break and your speed is lowered by 7.92km/h
Now the opposite will happen if the front of the vehicle is pointing towards the road at a 10 ° angle. The cosine of 12 ° is .9781.
3) 100 X .9781 = 97.81km/h + 7.28km/h = Readout is 105.09km/h
Your vehicle has 5.09km/h added to the actual speed and if they are operating at zero tolerance, you get a ticket.
|
|
02-12-2009, 03:59 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
|
|
Maybe already posted, but I can't be bothered to go back and see. I heard a piece on the radio, the other day. It seems some guy fought a photo radar ticket. Turns out the calibration certificate, for the equipment, was 120 days, out of date. They figured 139,000 tickets were illegally issued and most people just paid them.
I've got a court date next friday. Winter entertainment. I was charged with speeding and failing to stop for a peace officer, last July. Court date was set for Feb. 20. So a couple of days ago, I got a letter from the Crown, advising that a "key witness " was unavailable for the trial and they would be seeking an adjournmet. I'll be asking for a Dismisal.
Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
|
02-12-2009, 04:21 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 483
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win
Wow you don't have any idea about the statutes do you? It is an offense to cross any solid line on the highway period. Those lines are Statutory not Regulatory and the road crews are told
|
Nither do you i guess then. Single lanes are fair game
Quote:
Quote:
Rules for traffic lanes
15(1) When operating a vehicle on a highway,
(b) in the case of a highway in an urban area where a single solid line only exists between traffic lanes, a person shall not drive the vehicle so that the vehicle or any portion of the vehicle crosses the single solid line from one traffic lane to another except when overtaking and passing another vehicle;
|
right from: http://www.qp.gov.ab.ca/documents/Re...sbn=0779738624
Last edited by thundergrey; 02-12-2009 at 04:29 PM.
|
02-12-2009, 05:03 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Just North of the 55th Parallel
Posts: 1,497
|
|
Well, some of these posts certainly gives me a clearer understanding of why we have so many great drivers on the roads here in AB. We have those that are ignorant of laws (passing on solid lines) and those that have no regard for laws (speeding and failing to stop for peace officers). Nice to know that wasting the court's and law enforcement's time and tax payers money is considered "winter entertainment".
Quote:
(b)if, in an urban area, a single solid line only exists between
traffic lanes, a driver shall not cross the single solid line
from one lane to another except when overtaking and
passing another vehicle;
(c)if, outside an urban area, a single solid line only exists
between traffic lanes, a driver shall not cross the single
solid line from one lane to another;
|
Definition of Urban: Of, relating to or located in a city
http://www.canlii.org/ab/laws/sta/h-8/20030217/whole.html
|
02-12-2009, 06:13 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 483
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sporty
Well, some of these posts certainly gives me a clearer understanding of why we have so many great drivers on the roads here in AB. We have those that are ignorant of laws (passing on solid lines) and those that have no regard for laws (speeding and failing to stop for peace officers). Nice to know that wasting the court's and law enforcement's time and tax payers money is considered "winter entertainment".
|
dont be too mad. 75% of peace officers dont know either
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:21 AM.
|