Jump to content

In the neighbourhood


FrostyWinnipeg
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

While we're on the subject, can I ***** about the old ladies in charge of the crossing guards and how they never let the cars through?  I'm not talking about not letting the kids cross the street securely, or that cars have the right of way, I'm talking about these nut jobs that sits in the middle of traffic in a four way and holds up all traffic for every lagging kid that may or may not be crossing the street even though the kids are still 50 feet away from the four way.  Hey, we want a no idle zone because we don't want to pollute the world, but let's keep all the cars sitting at a stand still because these kids who are still 20 second from arriving at the four way look like they may or may not cross the street.

 

Luckily I don't have to deal with this, but I did one time because I had to go to my wife's work to pick her up early for something and had to cross through a school zone just as the kids were let out.  I sat there forever while watching these women hold up traffic.  NO ONE WAS CROSSING THE STREET but she deemed it necessary to hold everyone up because there were a few straggling kids (multiple times) that were coming towards the intersection and she decided to just sit there and wait for them while traffic just built up.  I mean geez, let a few cars get through, every once in a while then open it up again once there's a good amount of kids waiting, don't just sit there holding up traffic waiting for every last child to come out of the school before you move.

There must have been a change in process from when I was a school patrol as a kid.  It never fails to amaze me how little structure the kids today seem to have.

 

When I was a school patrol, it was treated as a privilage.  And we had to stand at attention and look the part.  And the process was cars had the right of way.  If there was traffic, you held back the kids until traffic had passed.  Even if a car stopped for you, we were to wave the traffic through.  Worked pretty good for us. 

 

I agree about looking the part. I was a school patrol at Morley & Osborne when I went to Riverview Elementary School. That was the prestigious spot . Top of the ladder in the School Patrol World at Riverview. No patrolling residential streets like Oakwood & Casey for this dude. M & O was the number one assignment for any patrol at my school. To get that post you really had to prove you were the best. Even though the residential streets were more challenging because there were no traffic lights like at my intersection. With all the pedestrian & vehicular traffic it could get intimidating at times, though. And if any kids messed with a patrol by either bullying or pushing them around when they were at their assigned streets back in the day or just about anywhere when I went to school there was truly hell to pay for the offenders unlike today. We were made to feel that we were special. That we were mature & responsible. I may have been in grade 6 but I felt like I was treated like an adult by my school admin & most of the teachers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely.  Back in my day (lol), school patrol was a respected position.  They even had a monthly Captain and if you got to wear the badge, it really meant something.  They used to take all the Patrol of the Months out for breakfast with the local community police officer and at year-end they'd have a big party for all patrols.  I cant remember what Patrol of the Year got, but it was a pretty good haul.  I was a Patrol of the Month, Captain and runner up to Patrol of the Year.  *pats self on back*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Im on the fence about cell phone use.  While I admit I have texted (at stop lights etc) I can certainly understand that.  But there was already a distracted driver law and reckless driving law.  Apparently, when radios were first put into cars there was the same doom & gloom about how there was going to be chaos as a result of driver's being distracted.

 

Hearing about plain clothed cops standing in downtown over-passes to get better looks at cars below and radioing to cars on the ground is just over-kill.  A friend of mine was pulled over and nearly ticketed for using a cell phone.  He pointed out that his phone was in his pocket and the officer mistook him changing the song on his ipod.  The cop replied that he could ticket him for using the ipod too but didnt.  Then why not ticket us for changing CD's or adjusting the radio?  Ticket people that deserve to be ticketed.  Personally, I can talk on the phone and drive at the same time just like I can hold a conversation with the person beside me, sip my iced cap and drive all at the same time.

 

Bottom line to me is that the old laws (distracted driving etc.) were about safety and the no-cellphone laws are about revenue generation. Cops pretending to be beggars at stop lights really hit this home. And I've never been ticketed for either.

 

 

I know someone who got out of a ticket by doing this. Said the reason she was holding her phone was because she was worried the panhandler aggressively knocking on her window was trying to break in and she was preparing to call 911. Judge threw the ticket out, even with the cop in attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Im on the fence about cell phone use.  While I admit I have texted (at stop lights etc) I can certainly understand that.  But there was already a distracted driver law and reckless driving law.  Apparently, when radios were first put into cars there was the same doom & gloom about how there was going to be chaos as a result of driver's being distracted.

 

Hearing about plain clothed cops standing in downtown over-passes to get better looks at cars below and radioing to cars on the ground is just over-kill.  A friend of mine was pulled over and nearly ticketed for using a cell phone.  He pointed out that his phone was in his pocket and the officer mistook him changing the song on his ipod.  The cop replied that he could ticket him for using the ipod too but didnt.  Then why not ticket us for changing CD's or adjusting the radio?  Ticket people that deserve to be ticketed.  Personally, I can talk on the phone and drive at the same time just like I can hold a conversation with the person beside me, sip my iced cap and drive all at the same time.

 

Bottom line to me is that the old laws (distracted driving etc.) were about safety and the no-cellphone laws are about revenue generation. Cops pretending to be beggars at stop lights really hit this home. And I've never been ticketed for either.

 

 

I know someone who got out of a ticket by doing this. Said the reason she was holding her phone was because she was worried the panhandler aggressively knocking on her window was trying to break in and she was preparing to call 911. Judge threw the ticket out, even with the cop in attendance.

 

That's priceless.  If everyone in the city all chose to dispute these tickets, things might change but the city knows most people just pay them because they either can't or won't be bothered to invest the time to go dispute them.

 

A perfect example is the city parking lots.  I use the one in Osborne Village a few times per month.  Last summer I tossed the ticket on my dash and it fluttered face down.  When I came back (much earlier than the time remaining), I had a ticket due to the parking chit being face down.  The ticket guy was still working the lot so I approached him and showed him my valid chit and said it just fell onto it's face and I didnt realise.  He was incredibly rude.  "So?  That's your problem" is what he said to me.  I said "true, but Im here and Im showing you it's valid.  It was a mistake and I apologize".  "Not my problem" he said.  And walked off. 

 

I immediately called 311 as directed to on the ticket.  After a lengthy wait, 311 said I'd have to go downtown and request a court date.  Keep in mind the fine was fairly small.  Small enough that the city knows even though I have 100% proof of a valid ticket, that Im not going to take a day off work to go fight it.  I was shocked.  Compare that to Empark (who also suck).  Once got a parking ticket in their lot (cant even remember why to be honest but I had some excuse for it because I called their number).  They had me read out the ticket number to them, typed it up in their computer and since I had no prior excuses, forgave it over the phone.

 

Politicans are so quick to claim "safety" but common sense tells you otherwise.  It's all about the money.  The LAST thing the city wants is everyone abiding by the letter of every law.  Theyd go broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one area where I thought Gord Steeves had the right idea when he was running for mayor.  He was the only candidate who promised to make the focus safety rather than money.  Bowman's take on it was that if you got a ticket, you deserved it.

I voted for Bowman but I cringed when he said that.

 

If everyone is going 10-15 KM/h over the posted speed limit in an area, is it that everyone are law-breakers or is it that the speed limit is artificially low?  We all know regular places with traffic enforcement is dont on a routine basis.  Why? Because they know its common for people to be "speeding".  Why? Because the limit is too low.  If it was about safety they'd park in an area where safety is actually a concern.  There is a three-way stop near me that has a school at the corner.  Every few months, they do enforcement, usually a marked car, to catch people rolling through.  I got caught once.  I can at least appreciate that this is not a cash grab.  Though in my case it was about 4am (why do enforcement at 4am?  Because people are more likely to "cheat" at a stop sign).

 

And how about those goofy roundabouts in some areas?  Not the large ones, the tiny little ones that do nothing but create a very dangerous situation for vehicles approaching from all directions.  What idiot came up with that idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those responding to my comment about not needing cell phone laws, my point is simply that the existing law was adequate to cover cell phone use if the driver is distracted. We didn;t need a law specific to cell phone use, we needed the existing law to be enforced. It bothers me because it leads to lazy enforcement. Tickets for the sake of tickets and not safety related. If I am stopped at a re light and check my phone, I don't see that as a safety issues. If someone is driving and checking their phone, then yes it is and they would have been covered by the existing law.

 

I know cell phones are an issue. But it just bugs me that the cops take the easy way to make money instead of doing their job. There is something broken with our system when it becomes more about cash than preventing accidents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence why our crime rate in this city is so high.  Too many cops are sent out to be cash grabbers, not enough taking care of its citizens.

Interestingly, Manitoba has among the lowest 'Criminal Code traffic violation' and 'other code traffic violation' rates in Canada.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Canada#Crime_statistics_by_province_and_territory

 

We sure take the cake on violence, rape, murder, and property damage. I see our low attempted murder rates as a sign that we finish what we start here in MB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How the police do things needs to be over-hauled as well.  I assume the unions wouldnt like it but you have too many cops not actually being cops.  I used to have a job where we interacted with the police on a regular basis and I was always amazed at how much time was wasted.  If there is an incident that requires a witness report, you'd have multiple officers sitting there doing dictation.

 

We had one incident where I was sitting in the police car.  Had probably six cars at our location.  incident was long done, cops mostly standing around talking about what happened.  I heard a call come in for officers to respond to a serious call (cant remember what it was).  No one responded.  A few minutes later, dispatch called to one of the officers out our location specifically and asked his car to respond to the call and he replied that he was already on a call and not available.  Ludicrous.

 

In another incident, I was assaulted with a weapon and needed a) medical attention B) police photos taken.  The officers transported me to hospital, waited for me, transported me to PSB, waited in line for photos and transported me back to my car.  The officers noted their shift had ended a couple of hours earlier and I commented that it must suck for them and they said no, we're on OT just sitting here with you, so its fine by us.

 

I ended up writing up my own witness statements for police whenever they required one from me because even though the cops didnt seem busy enough to have to go back on call, I always was so I'd ask if I could write it myself rather than dictate it.  Always went a lot faster.  They need to use civilians much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
6 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

So I got a School Zone speeding ticket.  I want to murder someone.  4:36 pm.  Not a kid to be seen in the area.  Do I pay it or plead not guilty, hope it takes a year+ for a court date and say my rights were violated due to the wait?  Or do I argue that school zone enforcement is inherently idiotic to begin with.

Up to you, but it's pretty clearly laid out that the school zone is in effect until 5:30 as stupid as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mike said:

Up to you, but it's pretty clearly laid out that the school zone is in effect until 5:30 as stupid as it is.

For sure.  But it IS stupid.  Thats my point.  Obviously I did it.  I guess the honourable thing is to plead guilty.  But I consider the law itself and the way its enforced to be dishonourable so Im not sure I mind pleading not guilty.  It is my right.  And if it takes too long and the judge agrees, that's also within my rights.  Its just a pain in the ass to do.

Anyone else have experience with this (its my first)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

For sure.  But it IS stupid.  Thats my point.  Obviously I did it.  I guess the honourable thing is to plead guilty.  But I consider the law itself and the way its enforced to be dishonourable so Im not sure I mind pleading not guilty.  It is my right.  And if it takes too long and the judge agrees, that's also within my rights.  Its just a pain in the ass to do.

Anyone else have experience with this (its my first)?

You will lose.

There's really not a whole lot of tolerance with speeding infractions. Especially school zones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, considering the sign is posted right there saying it's till 530... You will lose. Waste of time, just pay the ticket. It's basically easier for you to just pay the ticket and admit you made a mistake.  There is a school zone on... is it Panet i think? Not sure but around there, near KP ish... it's annoying as annoying could be, There is a school pushed back off the street, believe it's called Kings School or something like that... That section is annoying but... you know what, I'm used to it so i follow the speed limit, you know what pisses me off tho? When i see someone speeding through it... It pisses me off more than the school zone itself.. That school zone is probably the worst in the city cuz the school isn't really close to the street AT ALL but it pisses me off when i'm doing 30 and i see a car or 2 come speeding by, I actually hope that the people speeding by get caught and when i actually see people getting caught, I just laugh at them. Don't kid yourself, we all know about the 30 speed limit and we all know it's till 530... just deal with the few hundred feet of going 30. 

Edited by Goalie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Well, considering the sign is posted right there saying it's till 530... You will lose. Waste of time, just pay the ticket. It's basically easier for you to just pay the ticket and admit you made a mistake. 

Two tickets have been thrown out due to wait times in court, creating a precedent.  If I had the time to do battle, I would certainly say I cannot verify the validity of the ticket without the corresponding evidence that the radar gun was inspected (which has impacted tickets in the past).  Additionally, the school zone in questions is actually improperly marked and was identified as such in one of those wise up Winnipeg videos.  However, the street I got the ticket on was not the street with the improper signage.  I havent had a chance to go back and do some investigating but Ill check it out this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bigg jay said:

Always fight it.  Best case is that it gets thrown out, worst case is you cut a deal the day of court (they usually offer to let you plead guilty with an explanation for like half the cost).  There's no interest applied and no discount if you pay quickly like they offer with parking tickets.

Thats sort of what Im thinking.  Ive never "weaseled" out of tickets before.  But the school zone program is so egregiously idiotic and so clearly about revenue, not safety that Im finding it a tough pill to swallow.  Years ago I got a ticket for doing a rolling stop at the nearest intersection to this zone and I paid it...I was guilty (even thought it was 4am).  But this is just idiocy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah well if the sign until 530 isn't posted, you have a chance. If it is, you are honestly just wasting your time trying to fight it. Seriously, It sometimes ends up costing you more money than you would have to pay just to fight it.

 

How much is the ticket? if you don't mind me asking. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Goalie said:

Yeah well if the sign until 530 isn't posted, you have a chance. If it is, you are honestly just wasting your time trying to fight it. Seriously, It sometimes ends up costing you more money than you would have to pay just to fight it.

 

How much is the ticket? if you don't mind me asking. 

 

$259.50

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Goalie said:

Yeah well if the sign until 530 isn't posted, you have a chance. If it is, you are honestly just wasting your time trying to fight it. Seriously, It sometimes ends up costing you more money than you would have to pay just to fight it.

 

How much is the ticket? if you don't mind me asking. 

 

That's the thing... in this case it can't cost you more than what you are already on the hook for.  If you fight it, the cost can only go down, not up.

For me, it's the principle of the photo radar that I don't like.  Call it what it is, a cash grab but don't try to spin it as a safety thing.  I got one photo radar ticket and I fought it.  Not because I thought I was innocent or was looking for a way out but because I wanted my minute in court to tell them waht I thought of their "safety program".  I could have taken the guilty with an explanation deal and saved myself a couple bucks if it was about the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres how to figure it out if it's worth fighting..

 

1. Go find out if that 530 sign is up.. if it's not, you got a chance, if it is... you are pretty much wasting your time

 

2. Figure out how much money you'd actually lose if you took a day off work, trust me, it would  be a fully day off for sure.. 8 hours guaranteed. 

Is it more or less than your ticket is? If it's more, then it's not really worth it.. less? It might be but at the same time, because of the whole 530 timezone thing... You still would be just wasting your time in my opinion. 

 

Unless you have some pretty solid proof that sign wasn't posted, then... you seriously are wasting your time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bigg jay said:

That's the thing... in this case it can't cost you more than what you are already on the hook for.  If you fight it, the cost can only go down, not up.

For me, it's the principle of the photo radar that I don't like.  Call it what it is, a cash grab but don't try to spin it as a safety thing.  I got one photo radar ticket and I fought it.  Not because I thought I was innocent or was looking for a way out but because I wanted my minute in court to tell them waht I thought of their "safety program".  I could have taken the guilty with an explanation deal and saved myself a couple bucks if it was about the money.

What was the outcome/experience with court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Heres how to figure it out if it's worth fighting..

 

1. Go find out if that 530 sign is up.. if it's not, you got a chance, if it is... you are pretty much wasting your time

 

2. Figure out how much money you'd actually lose if you took a day off work, trust me, it would  be a fully day off for sure.. 8 hours guaranteed. 

Is it more or less than your ticket is? If it's more, then it's not really worth it.. less? It might be but at the same time, because of the whole 530 timezone thing... You still would be just wasting your time in my opinion. 

 

Unless you have some pretty solid proof that sign wasn't posted, then... you seriously are wasting your time. 

I could probably attend without taking a day off work (my work is rather flexible with appointments etc).  Like Bigg Jay said, its more the principle.  The fact tickets are being thrown out due to the wait in getting into court, makes me think I should ask for a court date and see what happens.  If it's over a year, Ill use the previous dismissed tickets as precedent in asking for mine to be dismissed.  If that doesnt work, I can at least express my opinion.  Worse case scenario, I pay what I have to pay right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...