Should you get a speeding ticket for going 10 km/h over the speed limit?

[ken0042]

How so? Are you denying that a significant number of people die in car crashes?

[Mr.Coffee]

I don't have a problem with them giving tickets for people over the limit, no matter how much over.

I do have a very big problem with the existing posted speed limits, usually far, far below the engineered speed capabilities of the road. In Canada, it almost should be a 2 season limit where you have a summer max speed and a winter lower max speed to allow for the more slippery conditions.

But in general our speed limits are so fataing low on key roads it sure seems like they are purposely set at a pace that encourages speeding and subsequently the cash it would bring in.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by ken0042

How so? Are you denying that a significant number of people die in car crashes?

No, you're putting words in my mouth. We're not talking about dangerous speeding or car crashes, we're talking about going over the speed limit but less than 10% over. If you have an accident at those speeds, there's likely something else causing it, like distraction. Not the speeding. Yet the speeding is what gets all the attention

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by btimbit

No, you're putting words in my mouth. We're not talking about dangerous speeding or car crashes, we're talking about going over the speed limit but less than 10% over. If you have an accident at those speeds, there's likely something else causing it, like distraction. Not the speeding. Yet the speeding is what gets all the attention

Reaction time is also important and that gets cut down significantly as speed goes up. I speed too, but to act like driving above posted speed limits is a non-factor is kinda weird.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by ken0042

How so? Are you denying that a significant number of people die in car crashes?

If you want to play that card, let me know when they actually put an effort into checkstops. Isn't it something like 60-70% of all fatal crashes involve alcohol?

[OutOfTheCube]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

Now I'd like to crab about the photo radar that has been parked on glenmore right under blackfoot trail. Last fall they shut down the construction on the blackfoot overpass last fall, but they left the reduced speed signs up on glen more and now they are using the area to make money. Right now there is no reason to have reduced speed on glenmore.....

Damn, are they sitting there now? I've seen them a couple times on Glenmore the last little while but not right under the bridge.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Reaction time is also important and that gets cut down significantly as speed goes up. I speed too, but to act like driving above posted speed limits is a non-factor is kinda weird.

I'm not denying any of that. My problem, like I've said several times now, is when the speeding infractions get enforced while others don't. Now in this article they're saying that they'd be willing to ticket you even if you're barely going over, which to me says that those other things will get enforced even less now.

Say you're on Deerfoot. You're in the middle lane doing 108. To the left of you is someone sticking to 100 in the left lane. Behind him is someone else tailgating him because he wants to speed. All three cars in this scenario are breaking the law, yet under what this article is suggesting, and from what we've seen from the overblown 'war on speed,' the one doing 108 is the one most likely to get pulled over and ticketed, despite what the other two drivers doing being much more dangerous.

[DFO]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I'm not denying any of that. My problem, like I've said several times now, is when the speeding infractions get enforced while others don't. Now in this article they're saying that they'd be willing to ticket you even if you're barely going over, which to me says that those other things will get enforced even less now.

Say you're on Deerfoot. You're in the middle lane doing 108. To the left of you is someone sticking to 100 in the left lane. Behind him is someone else tailgating him because he wants to speed. All three cars in this scenario are breaking the law, yet under what this article is suggesting, and from what we've seen from the overblown 'war on speed,' the one doing 108 is the one most likely to get pulled over and ticketed, despite what the other two drivers doing being much more dangerous.

Wrong. Although the left lane driver is not being courteous they are not breaking a law travelling the posted speed limit.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

If you want to play that card, let me know when they actually put an effort into checkstops. Isn't it something like 60-70% of all fatal crashes involve alcohol?

Not even close (2012 Alberta stats): http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...ion/AR2012.pdf (page 68).

Alcohol was involved in less than 20% of fatal collisions, and a driver was legally impaired in 13.4% of fatal collisions. Alcohol was involved in 4.1% of non-fatal collisions where there was an injury.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by DFO

Wrong. Although the left lane driver is not being courteous they are not breaking a law travelling the posted speed limit.

That's been discussed to death numerous times both in the driving thread and in the gear grinder thread. Yes they are breaking the law. It has to do with improper lane discipline and not following the safe flow of traffic.

[DFO]

Originally Posted by btimbit

That's been discussed to death numerous times both in the driving thread and in the gear grinder thread. Yes they are breaking the law. It has to do with improper lane discipline and not following the safe flow of traffic.

Show me the law. Those stay right signs refer to travelling below the posted limit.

[btimbit]

Not to be confused with the slow moving vehicles law, that's a different one.


Ticket: Traffic lane violation
TSA section 3
Demerits 2

3(1) If a person driving a vehicle is driving the vehicle on a
highway at a speed that is less than the normal speed of the traffic
on the highway at that time and place and under the conditions then
existing, that person shall drive the vehicle
(a) in the right traffic lane then available for traffic, or
(b) as close as practicable to the right curb or edge of the
roadway,
except when either
(c) overtaking and passing another vehicle travelling in the
same direction, or
(d) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private
road or driveway.

[DFO]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Not to be confused with the slow moving vehicles law, that's a different one.


Ticket: Traffic lane violation
TSA section 3
Demerits 2

But it's still bound by the posted speed limit.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Now in this article they're saying that they'd be willing to ticket you even if you're barely going over, which to me says that those other things will get enforced even less now.

The problem with this story is that it's entirely a non-story.

A reporter got his panties in a twist because he received a perfectly valid ticket for going 120% of the posted speed limit.

Somehow, he thinks he was treated unfairly because of something someone told him almost 20 years ago. Then, he goes whining to the guy in charge who basically tells him to GTFO and says that he believes there "should" be zero tolerance for speeding (which is exactly what you would expect someone in his position to say).


When the Edmonton Police Service starts handing out tickets for going 51 in a 50, then this might be a real story. Until then, it's no different than any other person who's angry he got a fully deserved speeding ticket, except this guy happens to work for a newspaper.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by DFO

But it's still bound by the posted speed limit.

True, so the correct thing for that person to do would be move over, then only the other 2 cars are in the wrong. But back to my example above, everyone is in the wrong, yet arguably the one doing the least dangerous driving would be the one most likely to get a ticket.

@getback: Yeah but for the sake of discussion I'm treating it as if it were a thing they'd really start doing. I'm just assuming (possibly incorrectly) that that's what the thread was created to discuss.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by btimbit

No, you're putting words in my mouth. We're not talking about dangerous speeding or car crashes, we're talking about going over the speed limit but less than 10% over. If you have an accident at those speeds, there's likely something else causing it, like distraction. Not the speeding. Yet the speeding is what gets all the attention

Fair enough. My previous point adresses that though- if you don't see the traffic enforcement at the speed you are going; in my mind that means you were somewhat distracted, etc. So in effect you have a speeding ticket that was an indirect result of the distracted driving.

And speeding is likely the easiest traffic offense to prove in court. No stopping at a stop sign- your word against the cop's. Distracted driving; you could argue that even with cell records it was your passenger texting.

[FlamesFanStrandedInEDM]

When I was in Edmonton I believe it was they wouldn't ticket you if you were less than 10% over not 10km. So if you were going 110 in a 100, you're fine, but in a 50 zone you probably could only go 55.

Either way, I think all speed limits should be thrown out the window when you are leaving Edmonton. You should be able to leave Edmonton as fast as you please.

[PeteMoss]

Interesting, on the major highways here in Ontario we have signs that insinuate the fines start at 120kph so everyone drives at 119 (speed limit is 100). No photo radar here either, it was here for a bit but eliminating a long while ago.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by getbak

Not even close (2012 Alberta stats): http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...ion/AR2012.pdf (page 68).

Alcohol was involved in less than 20% of fatal collisions, and a driver was legally impaired in 13.4% of fatal collisions. Alcohol was involved in 4.1% of non-fatal collisions where there was an injury.

My bad then, thought it was way higher.

[Red Slinger]

I used to think that the whole world used the 10% rule. But since moving overseas I've realized that Canadians, in general, drive fast. Here, most people stick to the posted limit and frankly, after a bit of getting used to, it's refreshing. I don't have to wonder how much I should be speeding to satisfy some imaginary limit, which, by the way, varies from driver to driver. I've also found that it results in fewer left lane warriors and tailgaters and an increased feeling of safety consciousness. For some reason I think it also encourages people to be less competitive and more cooperative on the roads. That said, the speed limits in Canada need to be increased in certain areas outside of residential and school zones.

I don't think a zero tolerance speeding policy would necessarily do it, but I do believe the Canadian driving culture needs to change.