Jump to content

QC puts the hammer down.


zoso

Recommended Posts

For some of these idgits riding beaters, putting a can on their sled is probably the limit of their mechanical abilities...

 

No different than putting a fart can on a 4 banger or straight pipes on a Harley IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply
18 minutes ago, pt3189 said:

I could barely afford a 100 dollar fine every time I go for a ride.

Very, very few snowmobilers I know could afford to pay a 500 dollar fine every time they ride. I can think of two friends that could cover that , but I suspect they are both too intelligent to be in the situation of having to do so repeatedly.

I may be wrong , but I believe that insurance is a factor in the purchase of a permit in Quebec.

I could afford $500 but my point was more about the likelihood of getting caught each time is low. I ride like 6-10 full days total (3 northern rides) in a year and a few short rides at home if there’s snow so the fine and chances of getting caught won’t even phase me even if the fine was $500.  

 

Im just trying to touch on the fact that fines are a very weak deterrent.  I speed every single day on the 401 where there’s more time on the road and more police and those fines don’t scare me one bit.  I’m sure many would agree

 

For Quebec insurance is part of the cost difference but season length and operating costs is what the biggest difference is. It’s over $120 difference between the two provinces.  Cost of permit doesn’t bother me one bit, wasting potential trail money staffing the trails with police to weed out stupid people bothers me a lot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice that you can afford to speed and pay all associated fines all day long! I personally do not know many people who could or want to.

Make the fines large enough and they will be a deterrent (ie: $1000 for a modified exhaust) How about  we throw in some demerit points as well.!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Police are paid whether they are standing on a trail, or sitting in the station waiting for a call, or in a car rolling around then streets. This kinda blows the cost to enforce out the window. Now if you would like to argue these cops would be better off on the 401 nailing more people for 10 over, then you may have a point. We (the ofsc) got in bed with government so as to enforce the permit using police and allow them to patrol on private property. Not only was the permit a concern, but impaired driving as well.  So, police are on the trails, and are mandated to be there, whether you or I think these resources could be better used. In them being there, they also have an obligation to listen to stakeholders, and enforce the laws. Th stakeholders have identified an issue, that issue being loud exhaust.They noticed that the land owners they ask, and often beg, to allow a trail were saying, no more. The reason given was noise from aftermarket exhausts. In turn pressure was put on police to make sure they give no quarter in regard to this. In the past if everything else was good, police may well and often would turn a blind eye towards the infraction. So, to conclude, the resource is already out there, the resource was not seeing cans as a major issue, and then we pushed them to have zero tolerance due to the implications of having a can and the effects it had on the vast majority of permit buyers. This is what police should do, respond to the concerns of the community, and they did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

Nice that you can afford to speed and pay all associated fines all day long! I personally do not know many people who could or want to.

Make the fines large enough and they will be a deterrent (ie: $1000 for a modified exhaust) How about  we throw in some demerit points as well.!!

Your missing the point, you need money to have someone out there writing fines.  You want your permit dollars being used for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The police are being paid anyway, just make it part of their duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zoso said:

Police are paid whether they are standing on a trail, or sitting in the station waiting for a call, or in a car rolling around then streets. This kinda blows the cost to enforce out the window. Now if you would like to argue these cops would be better off on the 401 nailing more people for 10 over, then you may have a point. We (the ofsc) got in bed with government so as to enforce the permit using police and allow them to patrol on private property. Not only was the permit a concern, but impaired driving as well.  So, police are on the trails, and are mandated to be there, whether you or I think these resources could be better used. In them being there, they also have an obligation to listen to stakeholders, and enforce the laws. Th stakeholders have identified an issue, that issue being loud exhaust.They noticed that the land owners they ask, and often beg, to allow a trail were saying, no more. The reason given was noise from aftermarket exhausts. In turn pressure was put on police to make sure they give no quarter in regard to this. In the past if everything else was good, police may well and often would turn a blind eye towards the infraction. So, to conclude, the resource is already out there, the resource was not seeing cans as a major issue, and then we pushed them to have zero tolerance due to the implications of having a can and the effects it had on the vast majority of permit buyers. This is what police should do, respond to the concerns of the community, and they did. 

The volume of police is a joke. What amount of km do you ride a year and how many police do you see? 

 

Personally I think I’ve seen 2 cops in my last 4 years of riding which is about 10,000km. I rode Sudbury to New Liskeard and back the last few years and seen zero police.  I saw my first police officer in Cochrane just last year and I’ve likely rode there twice a year since the early 2000’s.  

 

I would concede there’s likely more police near Huntsville area but I don’t ride there. Just rough numbers but even if there’s 20 police out per day (there’s not) it’s pretty silly to think they can cover off the trails in the entire province.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

The police are being paid anyway, just make it part of their duty.

And have them stop fighting real crime? 

 

I believe jaywalking is a crime but it’s a waste to say start writing tickets. That cost time and effort.

 

How can anyone honestly say to police the trails and not think there’s an associated cost to do so? That cost will need to come from our trail money if you want that service and that’s not right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm... is Webdogg a bit of subterfuge on the part of Crispy to push his agenda. Joined 4 hours ago and weighs in with essentially the exact same ideology as Crispy. Is he that determined to get everyone to drink his Koolaid. Another one on ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

Nice that you can afford to speed and pay all associated fines all day long! I personally do not know many people who could or want to.

Make the fines large enough and they will be a deterrent (ie: $1000 for a modified exhaust) How about  we throw in some demerit points as well.!!

Not to mention the demerit points. Then the cost of insurance going up or possibly even your insurer cancelling your policy.

Six points

You will receive a warning letter recommending that you improve your driving skills.

Nine points

You may have to go to an interview to discuss your record and give reasons why your licence should not be suspended. You may also have to complete a driver re-examination. If you fail this test, your licence can be cancelled. If you fail to attend an interview, or fail to give good reasons for keeping your licence, your licence may be suspended.

15 points

Your licence will be suspended for 30 days from the date you hand over your licence to the Ministry of Transportation. You can lose your licence for up to two years if you fail to surrender it. After the suspension, the number of points on your driver's record will be reduced to seven. Any extra points could again bring you to the interview level. If you reach 15 points again, your licence will be suspended for six months.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Webdogg said:

Your missing the point, you need money to have someone out there writing fines.  You want your permit dollars being used for that?

You seem to be uninformed. The permit $'s don't go to the OPP for enforcing the laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 02Sled said:

You seem to be uninformed. The permit $'s don't go to the OPP for enforcing the laws.

The point someone needs to pay for the policing don’t they? It’s clearly not free. 

 

All im saying is if you want an increased service that cost needs to come from somewhere right? I doubt all taxpayers would be fine with committing OPP service to our organization. It would need to be funded by the OFSC in some manner just like they bill extra police cost to special events and such.  That’s all I’m getting at, we would be stuck with a bill for sure 

 

Here’s an example I believe it’s fact that the OFSC “usually” gets government money but that would be the first thing that’s gone if they need to invest heavily into policing. That effects everyone and that’s not fair. 

 

As for blocking me feel free.  I’ve been here a long time though I rarely posted and had a email problem they couldn’t repair so new name. Im also very close in “real life” to many of posters here; they know me and know what I’ve done for snowmobiling.   I’m not trying to flame you or anyone and my ideas don’t align with that other anti establishment poster. My ideas are simple - if you wait for policing to work you’ll be greatly disappointed and your trails will be gone.  Block away

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

You seem to be uninformed. The permit $'s don't go to the OPP for enforcing the laws.

Exactly!

 

 

Wow is it a blue moon out there, I seem to find myself agreeing with 02 and Zozo!!!:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

Exactly!

 

 

Wow is it a blue moon out there, I seem to find myself agreeing with 02 and Zozo!!!:unsure:

Simple question then; Is the level of police service we have now adaquate to address this problem? If so close the thread, if not tell me how we can get extra service for free

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just need to re-arrange their priorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zoso said:

Police are paid whether they are standing on a trail, or sitting in the station waiting for a call, or in a car rolling around then streets. This kinda blows the cost to enforce out the window. Now if you would like to argue these cops would be better off on the 401 nailing more people for 10 over, then you may have a point. We (the ofsc) got in bed with government so as to enforce the permit using police and allow them to patrol on private property. Not only was the permit a concern, but impaired driving as well.  So, police are on the trails, and are mandated to be there, whether you or I think these resources could be better used. In them being there, they also have an obligation to listen to stakeholders, and enforce the laws. Th stakeholders have identified an issue, that issue being loud exhaust.They noticed that the land owners they ask, and often beg, to allow a trail were saying, no more. The reason given was noise from aftermarket exhausts. In turn pressure was put on police to make sure they give no quarter in regard to this. In the past if everything else was good, police may well and often would turn a blind eye towards the infraction. So, to conclude, the resource is already out there, the resource was not seeing cans as a major issue, and then we pushed them to have zero tolerance due to the implications of having a can and the effects it had on the vast majority of permit buyers. This is what police should do, respond to the concerns of the community, and they did. 

I don’t disagree with what you say I just don’t think that’s enough to put a dent in the issue. There’s a lot of km and very few resources to cover it.  If we wait and hope the current volume of police can tackle the issue that’s a pretty big gamble with sensitive landowners.  I see a lot more cans than I do police. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

Hmm... is Webdogg a bit of subterfuge on the part of Crispy to push his agenda. Joined 4 hours ago and weighs in with essentially the exact same ideology as Crispy. Is he that determined to get everyone to drink his Koolaid. Another one on ignore.

I was thinking that too....writes the same ...sad if he or she would go to that length .to make a very very obtuse point. Igorant about the trail landowners real concerns and PR effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do take re-arrange their priorities, and change it to there are enough police on the trail now???

 

Sorry, but I'm out, your just being argumentative

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Webdogg said:

Simple question then; Is the level of police service we have now adaquate to address this problem? If so close the thread, if not tell me how we can get extra service for free

Hello Webdog. So sorry but I have to go now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

How do take re-arrange their priorities, and change it to there are enough police on the trail now???

 

Sorry, but I'm out, your just being argumentative

Not sure why you think that but if you took it that way I apologize.  Just trying to see if you believe they are capable of getting this problem under control by popping open some panels.  Not trying to spin it I just believe they can’t do it with resourcing they have now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still say form a dedicated mobile squad of retired or off duty peace officers - these can be of any type as they all have jurisdictional powers over the entire country. Get them out in different areas and their only job would be trail pass, license, insurance, illegal modifications, gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Panther340 said:

I was thinking that too....writes the same ...sad if he or she would go to that length .to make a very very obtuse point. Igorant about the trail landowners real concerns and PR effect. 

It's a real simple concept. Whatever upsets or concerns the generous landowners that LET us use their property is something that should be of concern to every snowmobiler.

 

53 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

How do take re-arrange their priorities, and change it to there are enough police on the trail now???

 

Sorry, but I'm out, your just being argumentative

Yup... troll for sure..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...