(11-04-2020, 01:13 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:

(11-02-2020, 06:12 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: You're basically arguing that the law is just "whatever man". The reason the law says 15 cm, is because 15 cm is too much. The law is there so that we all have, as much as is possible, an unambiguous statement about what is right and wrong. When it says 15 cm...it's because we all agree that it should be 15 cm, not 15.1 and not 14.9. Since that kind of thing can be measured unambigously, why should we not ticket 16 cm (lets be fair and use a reasonable measurement error)? I am sick and tired of people believing themselves above the law. The only thing worse than people believing themselves above the law is LEOs telling them that they are right.

As for why I believe this is okay, you're right, I don't measure the distance to the curb, but I know that farther than 15 cm (about half a foot) is not okay, which means when I park, I ensure that I'm closer than that...it isn't hard...I don't need a measuring tape, if I'm at all close to half a foot, I'm not close enough.

This is why I like automated enforcement. If there is a speed camera, if you are traveling over the set point for speeding (which *SHOULD* be the limit, but in practice will not be, but should at least be public), you get a ticket, no discussion, no "well, he's a white guy", "she's a cute girl", "he looks like me", "well he has kids at my school", they just get a ticket. And people who get angry about this do so because they are used to using their privilege to get away with breaking the law.

Like I said, I call your 50% of the sidewalk, as bullshit...sidewalks are of different width, and my stroller takes up more than 50% of the sidewalk, 50% is well beyond obstructing the sidewalk, most sidewalks are only 1.5 meters wide, that leaves .8 meters with no ticket issued? I can't get a stroller past that. When I call in a vehicle because I was forced to go off the edge of the sidewalk when walking, I expect a ticket to be issued, and I would be quite angry to find out that wasn't happening. We already bend over backwards to excuse driver behaviour at every turn...I expect bylaw to do their job and enforce the bylaws. My friend got ticketed for being a few inches over, but you're telling me a driver forcing me into mud won't be unless they are blocking more than half the sidewalk fuck that.

Now you may be right and they don't issue tickets. But you say this policy exists for a reason? This isn't a good reason, it's a very bad reason, they exist because we refuse to enforce our laws against people who break them, who fit a certain description (is driving a car), and that is very wrong. It's also a terrible implementation. The law is written down so that we can all see it, but if the law isn't being enforced, but some other secret policy is, that's not how a fair society works.

Look I'm basically just ranting at this point, but I'm sick and tired of this bullshit. I'm sick and tired of blocked sidewalks and I'm so fucking sick and tired of council telling me enforcement is the solution, then refusing to even enforce the bylaws...GAH!!!

As for whether bylaw would write a ticket, I don't know, I agree the sign is wrong, and whoever put it up is at fault for any failure to write a ticket.

While I'm in a ranting mood, I would like to point out the insanity that it took us YEARS, like 4-5 YEARS to get the city to properly sign the MUT along Weber St. as a MUT. I'm aware that people were harrassed BY POLICE who mistakenly believed it was a sidewalk, as a result of the incorrect signage. Yet I'm aware of two cases in a season we have signage put up by the city or region that is fundamentally flawed, first, the dismount signs at the IHT crossing, and now this sign. How come this is so hard.

Two words: Officer Discretion.  Its written in legal precedent, and you can like it or not.  I don't care. 

When a parking meter expired, I didn't write a ticket, even though it would of been legal to do so.  [When a meter expired, there would be a 10 min Violation countdown (flashing red, or in the old days a pop up VIOLATION sign).  Once the meter was expired more than 10 min the meter would be solid red (or pop up expired sign) and that's when a ticket would get written.  The 10 min isn't written into the by-law, but I can assure you every MLEO followed that.  We don't like having JP's ream our ass for being dickish in issuing tickets.

These policies also protect your councillors who receive the complaints when we issue tickets.  THEY are the driving force behind things like the 50% rule, as they are trying to placate the driving public.  CoK recently pushed for cat tags, similar to dog tags.  I have to pay a fee for my dog, even though he is in the house, my fenced backyard or if elsewhere, on a leash.  My neighbours cat roams the neighbourhood.  When the city had discussions, every "Crazy Cat Lady" showed up against, and that was shut down immediately.  The cat tags would of 100% funded the humane society, but instead we will continue with additional grants... all because those councillors are afraid of not getting voted in next election.

Your comment about automated enforcement is valid.  I agree with you.  But if you think for a second the Region will let you know where they have placed the limit, you are fooling yourself.  I wouldn't be surprised if it fluxuated over time (both up and down)to ensure you never know... and if they set it at 41 km/h, those close to the limit would be tossed by a JP.  [Who most have no legal background and are appointed by the ruling political party, which is why we have a hairdresser on the bench, but that's a different argument]

Quote:The law is written down so that we can all see it, but if the law isn't being enforced, but some other secret policy is, that's not how a fair society works.

CCC s. 265 (1) A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

(Pre COVID )You are working your way through a crowded room to get to the bathroom.  On your way, you brush against more than a dozen people before thankfully making it in time.  When you alight, police are there to charge you with 14 counts of assault.  The law was there for you to see, and there is no secret policy.  That is how a fair society works.

/end sarcasm

Coke

(11-07-2020, 06:15 PM)catarctica Wrote: I was attending the bike lane zoom meeting and was told that there’s already a stretch in downtown constructing bike lane. Not sure if I heard that correctly?

(11-07-2020, 06:22 PM)catarctica Wrote: I’m talking about the downtown grid zoom meeting yes. I don’t remember the street name but I saw construction on Ontario (I think) between duke and king so I was a bit convinced it’s for bike lane.

Quote:My role is to change the philosophy of how we design streets,

(11-09-2020, 12:10 PM)tomh009 Wrote: A new manager of transportation planning for the region, Kornel Mucsi:
https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2020/11/07/changing-the-region-street-by-street.html

Quote:My role is to change the philosophy of how we design streets,

Mucsi spent the last 10 years working on making Ottawa more friendly to active transportation and he's looking to do the same in Waterloo Region.

(11-09-2020, 12:54 PM)Bytor Wrote: https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2020/11/09/cyclists-are-vulnerable-road-users-but-now-that-concept-became-hard-reality.html

How the heck is a motorist right-hooking a cyclist an ambiguous situation to the police?

(11-09-2020, 12:10 PM)tomh009 Wrote: A new manager of transportation planning for the region, Kornel Mucsi:
https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2020/11/07/changing-the-region-street-by-street.html

Quote:My role is to change the philosophy of how we design streets,

Mucsi spent the last 10 years working on making Ottawa more friendly to active transportation and he's looking to do the same in Waterloo Region.