(08-10-2016, 04:39 PM)highlander Wrote: [ -> ]Can you clarify how they enforce speed limits without special equipment?
A not-uncommon technique is for a police car to follow the suspected speeder at a moderate distance and for the police officer to observe the actual speed on his or her own speedometer. In some jurisdictions (California!) "speed traps" are illegal and this method becomes the default.
That said, radar is more common these days.
(08-10-2016, 04:39 PM)highlander Wrote: [ -> ]If every police force in Ontario equips police officers with the Ottawa style range measurement device, that seems like a pretty good equivalent to speed traps - special initiatives to catch people breaking the law in places that it is problematic. So enforcement of both laws is probably equivalent for these cases.
(...) There is no way for a police officer driving a car to measure the passing distance of another car to a cyclist. This would be the equivalent of radar/lidar in police vehicles. Perhaps video would verify after the fact, but I would imagine the police officer would still have to make the judgment call at the time. So how close does the police officer have to be for their estimation of the passing distance to be reliable?
Basically, the police officer needs to be
on the bicycle in order to measure the distance; this is not a method for remote measurement. So I don't know that this method would scale up well for large-scale enforcement, more likely it could be used for temporary local campaigns.
(08-10-2016, 05:02 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2016, 04:39 PM)highlander Wrote: [ -> ]If every police force in Ontario equips police officers with the Ottawa style range measurement device, that seems like a pretty good equivalent to speed traps - special initiatives to catch people breaking the law in places that it is problematic. So enforcement of both laws is probably equivalent for these cases.
(...) There is no way for a police officer driving a car to measure the passing distance of another car to a cyclist. This would be the equivalent of radar/lidar in police vehicles. Perhaps video would verify after the fact, but I would imagine the police officer would still have to make the judgment call at the time. So how close does the police officer have to be for their estimation of the passing distance to be reliable?
Basically, the police officer needs to be on the bicycle in order to measure the distance; this is not a method for remote measurement. So I don't know that this method would scale up well for large-scale enforcement, more likely it could be used for temporary local campaigns.
We have officers riding around town every day on bicycles. While it's less likely that driver's would pass a police officer too closely, I'm sure it does happen. These officers could write tickets for this offense.
That being said, I disagree that the officer must be on the bike. If an officer is following a vehicle that overtakes a bicycle, the officer should be in an acceptable position to know if it is too close. Obviously, it would have to be *way* too close, i.e., there is some margin of error, but it isn't unreasonable to expect officers to make this judgement.
Officers make other judgements, how close is too close to qualify as tailgating for example.
[
attachment=1928]
Look what is new at Joseph and Victoria intersection. I hear this was one of the higher accident intersections in the city. Of course, I'm fairly sure a sign will accomplish very little.
(08-10-2016, 05:24 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]That being said, I disagree that the officer must be on the bike. If an officer is following a vehicle that overtakes a bicycle, the officer should be in an acceptable position to know if it is too close. Obviously, it would have to be *way* too close, i.e., there is some margin of error, but it isn't unreasonable to expect officers to make this judgement.
Officers make other judgements, how close is too close to qualify as tailgating for example.
Yes, exactly. I think it’s a direct analogy to the technique tomh009 described above for speeding, in which a police officer is following a car, notices the driver is speeding, and matches his speed at a distance to come up with an estimate of how much he is speeding.
Similarly, I have to imagine that, for the number of instances that motorists likely pass people on bicycles too closely, a police officer in a vehicle must be following behind, and in a position to estimate the distance, and with the time to issue a ticket…at least some of the time.
For what it's worth, if you write down/take a photo/remember the plate and call it in, Police will follow that up with a visit to the person's house to give a verbal warning to the driver.
(08-11-2016, 07:42 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]For what it's worth, if you write down/take a photo/remember the plate and call it in, Police will follow that up with a visit to the person's house to give a verbal warning to the driver.
I was definitely impressed, I called in one incident which I felt was particularly egregious and the police were quite willing to follow up on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4BhZ1md2Z8
Sadly, the plate is only in the video for a few frames and is blurred, so I couldn't actually read the whole plate number. And apparently our police lack the ability to search based on vehicle description and a partial plate.
Also, they will only give a "warning", as a plate doesn't indicate who was driving the vehicle.
(08-11-2016, 08:26 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ] (08-11-2016, 07:42 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]For what it's worth, if you write down/take a photo/remember the plate and call it in, Police will follow that up with a visit to the person's house to give a verbal warning to the driver.
I was definitely impressed, I called in one incident which I felt was particularly egregious and the police were quite willing to follow up on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4BhZ1md2Z8
Sadly, the plate is only in the video for a few frames and is blurred, so I couldn't actually read the whole plate number. And apparently our police lack the ability to search based on vehicle description and a partial plate.
Also, they will only give a "warning", as a plate doesn't indicate who was driving the vehicle.
Oncoming vehicles within 3' is scary. I had a similar experience this summer caught on video with my rear facing camera. Couldn't make out the plate so I didn't call it in.
(08-11-2016, 09:58 AM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]Oncoming vehicles within 3' is scary. I had a similar experience this summer caught on video with my rear facing camera. Couldn't make out the plate so I didn't call it in.
Indeed, I was pretty shaken up, I screamed and yelled for a bit, then turned around, walked my bike back to the quieter concession I'd arrived on, and went home.
Later I emailed the governments of various levels for Perth, and the Town of Shakespeare explaining what had happened, and that this was a marked bike route, and yet, despite having been very recently reconstructed, had no bike infrastructure whatsoever, which seems unacceptable for a bike route. And that I was a bike tourist, who was traveling to Shakespeare to spend my money, and because of the dangerous traffic conditions, I won't be doing so again. I heard nothing from any one of the dozen politicians I emailed. Not a peap. I was very disappointed.
(08-09-2016, 02:29 PM)highlander Wrote: [ -> ]Ontario's one-metre passing rule for cyclists not being enforced, numbers show
Only 19 charges for <1 m passing in Ontario in ~11 months. I've been waiting to see these numbers and I'm not surprised at all. You can't blame this on police, the law is just almost impossible to enforce. And anecdotally, I would guess I experience a <1 m pass once a week, so I don't believe that its because drivers are in almost 100% compliance.
No data to support this but I suggest that almost all of the 19 charges were most likely laid as a result of bicycle-vehicle collision. #BVC I agree it is almost impossible to enforce in traffic.
(08-10-2016, 05:24 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2016, 05:02 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]Basically, the police officer needs to be on the bicycle in order to measure the distance; this is not a method for remote measurement. So I don't know that this method would scale up well for large-scale enforcement, more likely it could be used for temporary local campaigns.
We have officers riding around town every day on bicycles. While it's less likely that driver's would pass a police officer too closely, I'm sure it does happen. These officers could write tickets for this offense.
That being said, I disagree that the officer must be on the bike. If an officer is following a vehicle that overtakes a bicycle, the officer should be in an acceptable position to know if it is too close. Obviously, it would have to be *way* too close, i.e., there is some margin of error, but it isn't unreasonable to expect officers to make this judgement.
Officers make other judgements, how close is too close to qualify as tailgating for example.
Absolutely, it is possible for an officer to judge "too close" without actually being on the bike. But for actual measurement, the officer needs to be on the bicycle in order for the equipment to measure the distance to the car.
Actual measurement isn't required for a ticket. Like for tailgating the police officer won't be measuring but can still ticket a driver.
Correct. But the discussion was about the measuring equipment used by Ottawa police, and whether it could be used everywhere.
The discussion was actually about whether the law is "nearly impossible to enforce." It's not: police officers on bicycles can use the equipment used in Ottawa. Police officers not on bicycles can use their sight and good judgment, even if they can't come up with an entirely accurate passing distance.
I've appreciated the discussion here, perhaps it was pessimistic to say this is unenforceable. But if it really is no different than other laws, why were there only 19 charges laid in a year? My own experience and what I'm hearing from others suggests it's a rather common occurrence.