Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Operation seize

Ontario's draconian new speeding laws are now in effect and London police were out in full force to secure cars and money from the dissident population. Motorists caught exceeding the speed limit by 50 kilometers or more will now be classified as speed racers. Violator's cars will be impounded, their licenses suspended and they could be fined up to $10,000. What better way to fund the crumbling system than by imposing tougher laws on the wreckers of society?

At least eight drivers in the London region were nabbed -- licences yanked for a week, cars impounded and drivers ticketed a minimum $2,000 fine for exceeding the speed limit by 50 kilometres an hour or more.

But there's more -- they'll have to pay $400 in tow and storage fees to get cars back.

[..] Across Ontario, OPP impounded 30 vehicles and issued seven-day licence suspensions in the first 24 hours under the new regulations.


Ian Scott said...

Interesting. The Liberal government of Ontario have decided to invoke some very conservative, right wing policies all in the name of law and order. How very right wing and conservative of them!

Law and order.

Next thing you know, they'll be banning some speech and expressions of some that we just don't agree with here! Ah yes... the Ontario Film Board censorship all over again - the wonderful institution of the moral majority under the conservative Bill Davis - but expand it all further to take in more than just films.

All governments seem to be f*cked.

yes, let's all vote for the Freedom Party! They will even respect our property - hmmm.. oops.. they will want some of it though for what they see as "moral" reasons for invading other nations.

I wonder what is worse- a government stealing cars - or a government stealing money to invade other places?

Perhaps it's just.. a matter of degree?

Mike said...

Invading other countries is the job of the federal government, Ian.

Canada's bloody history of rapine and plunder, from Vimy Ridge to Dieppe to Kandahar, has nothing to do with any provincial party.

Ian Scott said...

Mike, the Provinces are not completely autonomous in Canada. Whilst I recognize that no Provincial government has responsibility for the armed forces, most certainly they can voice support or disagreement with national policy.

I certainly don't want a Provincial government who's leader believes it moral to invade other nations even when the other nation has not used force against the invader.

Anonymous said...

Ian, you're a pussy.

Lisa said...


Provincial governments may have some influence when it comes to foreign policy, but the Freedom Party is focused on provincial matters and the ultimate decision to engage in military action lies with the Federal Government.

This post is about the totalitarian police state otherwise known as Ontario. I don't expect much better from the Conservatives, but I wouldn't vote for a Conservative nor a Liberal. Generally I don't vote, as I recognize the system for the farce that it is, but I would vote for a Freedom Party candidate if there was one was running in my riding because the focus of the Freedom Party of Ontario is on personal responsibility and hence less governmental interference. Like it or not, we stuck with government and the Freedom Party is made up of very principled and sensible individuals.

Flying Squirrel said...

Lisa, I don't understand why enforcing the speed limit is "draconian"?

I love the freedom of the open road as much as everyone and I speed on provincial highways but town and city limits you must obey!!! The freeps article you link to mentions someone going 168 km/hr on Wharncliffe South -- that's where I live and that would scare the hell out of me if I was driving with that person on the road. Anyone who took their grade 11 physics can visualize the kind of impact that kind of speed has on a collision.

I think this issue is about safety and as a driver, you should be able to generally predict the actions of other drivers and not be scared silly by some lunatic loser who has seen The Fast and the Furious a little too much.

I don't know the statistics but I am pretty sure that excessive speeding in town has increased substantially over the recent years, hence the increased fines.

There needs to be a big distinction made between speeding within city limits and outside of them. One is a lot more dangerous.

When I'm driving in town (even late at night, as I frequently do) I don't think it's draconian to expect everyone else to be going in the general range of 50k. These laws are in place to help protect the sane people who are following the rules of the road.

Ayn Steyn said...

There's nothing draconian about these laws. If you're going over 50 kms the speed limit, you should be punished. If some jackass was flying down my city street going 100 km/hr, I'd give him a draconian kick in the nuts for being so stupid.

Jay Jardine said...

And if you're going 50 km/h over the absurdly and infantilizingly low speed limit of 100 km/h on a clear, dry, flat section of divided highway with a vehicle in excellent mechanical condition.....you still get your car seized.

Surely a zero-tolerance, context independent law is not needed for you to correctly distinguish between someone who is clear and present threat to people's safety (e.g. 100 km/h on a residential street) and someone who is not. That's what brains are for.

Ayn Steyn said...

150 km/hr is a dangerous speed even with a 100 km/hr limit. There is NO need to drive that fast.

Brains are for thinking. Common sense tells me that driving 150 km/hr on a highway isn't thinking straight.

Ian Scott said...

Lisa, I sympathize with your support and/or consideration for Freedom Party members and that you'd vote for them. I used to think the same way until I realized that it's all just about "degree" of freedom.

As far as "sensible and principled" is concerned, I'd agree perhaps that appearance wise, the Freedom Party folk that I've come across seem to have a few more principles that I find logical - but arguing for the "morality" of invading another nation that has not attacked your own is utterly unprincipled and unsensible.

It is my position that if you choose to participate in the "democratic" system, then you are acknowledging that some larger minority can have the power to tyranize others.

If one chooses to participate, one cannot complain about the results either for participation is an act of acquiescence to the system. There is no law that you must participate, there are no thugs with guns (yet) that force you to participate in this fraudulent excercise that gives some power over others.

I realize this line isn't the point of your original post - but my point originally being that government tends to grow and excercise authority by force over individuals.

Even the Freedom Party will do this through some forms of taxation in order to give themselves a salary to sit in a legislature and argue and debate with others.

Ian Scott said...


"Ian, you're a pussy."

Well, I do enjoy pussy.

I think anonymous posters that leave silly ad hominem comments are the sort of pussies I don't enjoy however.

Ian Scott said...

ayn stein,

"There's nothing draconian about these laws. If you're going over 50 kms the speed limit, you should be punished. If some jackass was flying down my city street going 100 km/hr, I'd give him a draconian kick in the nuts for being so stupid."

Well, we can observe that the principles of justice commonly refered to as "Western Justice system" aren't that important to you.

All you need is an accusation, and that's as good as being guilty?

No trial? No cross-examination of evidence?

No.. police officers never lie about things.

I find it interesting you support "punishment" without trial.

Of course, you don't have to worry. You never do anything "wrong," and we all just KNOW you'll never come across a bad cop that lies and that will punish you. Having your day in court to have your guilt proven before you're punished is just so not needed in this day and age, right?

Lisa said...

Flying Squirrel said...

Lisa, I don't understand why enforcing the speed limit is

This new law is a giant cash grab. In addition, it classifies the driver's as street racers, which is absurd. While I agree that dangerous drivers should be punished, no matter whether they are driving in the city or on the highway, seizing vehicles and fining people a minimum of $2000 IS draconian when it is applied regardless of the circumstance. Like Jay points out, this law applies to ALL drivers going 50km over the speed limit, not just speeders in the city. As usual, the crappy reporting of the London Free Press is misleading.

You admit you speed on provincial highways, so if you are caught exceeding that limit by 50km, your car could be seized and you could be fined up to $10,000.

mariposa said...

Nothing "draconian" about it. Nobody needs to drive that fast either within city limits or on the highway.

Ayn Steyn said...

ian scott said:

"Well, we can observe that the principles of justice commonly refered to as "Western Justice system" aren't that important to you."

They sure are. I believe that kicking someone in the nuts who is endangering my children by flying down the road at 100 km/hr is a good form of JUST self-defence.

Kind of like whacking a baseball bat across someone's head if they break in my house.

But I'm sure that being a "libertarian" you'd want me to call the the police if someone was climbing in my window...or call "your" police to negotiate with theirs.??

Flying Squirrel said...

I'm sorry but I can't let this one go!

If this really is a "giant cash grab," that would mean that there are a significant amount of people going 50k/m over the speed limit -- significant enough to raise giant cash.

Even if we're talking about highways, that would mean enough people going over 130, 140, and 150k on the various types of highways to raise some giant cash.

You're already breaking the law by speeding. Cry me a river if you get your car towed for breaking the law when you're already well aware of what it is. That's why those signs are all over the place telling you how fast you're supposed to go. Why aren't you applying the same rationale to say, fining graffiti artists?

I don't think this issue merits the terms "draconian" or "totalitarian police state".

Lisa said...

Flying Squirrel;

I think we might have to agree to disagree, but I'm going to respond to your last comment anyways.

It's a giant cash grab no matter how many drivers are fined. Think about this: speeders are to be fined a minimum of $2000, and can be fined as much as $10,000. While I imagine a fine of $10,000 would be reserved for the most reckless of speeders, an automatic fine, a vehicle impound fee and a license suspension, no matter the circumstance, is just plain crazy.

A cash grab it is and I expect we will see even more speed traps in the near future. Maybe even photo radar.

Have you ever driven 150km on the 401 in the middle of the night, sober, in a vehicle in good condition, when there are few cars on the road and no pedestrians to be seen? Do you really consider this to be a crime to punished with massive fines and a car seizure? The driver in this instance cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered a street racer, for where is/are the other car(s) he is racing?

While it is true that speeders are well aware they are breaking the law when they exceed the speed limit, it doesn't follow that they should be slapped with such a huge penalty, provided they are not obviously endangering the lives of other people. Reckless drivers should be punished according to the gravity of their offense, but a safe driver exceeding questionable highway speed limits is a different matter all together.

I confess that I don't understand your reference to graffiti here. As graffiti "artists" are defacing other people's property, they should indeed be fined or at least held responsible for the damages they cause. The difference between graffiti artists and fast drivers is that speeders do not necessarily post a threat to others, but graffiti artists, once they've added their tag to a building or mailbox, have clearly damaged property.

Ultimately, it comes down to the driver. If someone is whipping through a school zone at 120, that's just crazy and sure, they are putting people at risk and should be fined accordingly. The 2 am alert 401 speeder, on the other hand, hardly deserves to have their car seized. One size does not fit all.

My apologizes for the length of this comment!

Ian Scott said...

It's not so much the "cash grab" that concerns me. It's the idea that some no longer give a shit about "Innocent until proven guilty."