Question About Traffic Ticket On Base - "Fail to obey traffic sign - stop sign"

[DCRabbit]

Perhaps they got their licence in Ottawa.  In Ottawa, the "Quebec STOP" is the norm, people driving compact cars think that they are driving 18 wheelers when they turn at intersections and signal lights are optional.  That or many people who are buying BMW's and Mercedes can't afford the extra cash for them (signal lights).

Yes.. in order to activate that turn signal lever, they'd have to let go of their cell phones. Here in Ottawa there is only one rule of traffic.. 'Me first'. Everything else is optional.

 

[Nauticus]

True.  His exact location may be hard to accurately determine, but in a case where he would have to be "right on the STOP sign in order to see it", which would be obvious to all who stopped at that sign, his location further up the street could be roughly demonstrated with photos from various distances.  These could demonstrate that the actual sign and stop being made by a motorist were obstructed from his view.

This is true. Plus, I'd rather provide "too many" photographs as opposed to too few (missing something that could legitimately be helpful to your case), so you could always provide those photographs and let the judge decide.

 

[Romanmaz]

Perhaps they got their licence in Ottawa.  In Ottawa, the "Quebec STOP" is the norm, people driving compact cars think that they are driving 18 wheelers when they turn at intersections and signal lights are optional.  That or many people who are buying BMW's and Mercedes can't afford the extra cash for them (signal lights).

That's pretty funny, but true, I drive a BMW 07  : and you'd actually be surprised how many different options they have just for the turn signals in that car, if your not tech savvy it can get pretty confusing.

 

[ModlrMike]

That's pretty funny, but true, I drive a BMW 07  : and you'd actually be surprised how many different options they have just for the turn signals in that car, if your not tech savvy it can get pretty confusing.

Down is left, up is right or vice-versa if the stick is on the other side... can't be that confusing. Even for a BMW driver.  >

 

[Romanmaz]

Down is left, up is right or vice-versa if the stick is on the other side... can't be that confusing. Even for a BMW driver.  >

:'( That hurts man, don't be jealous 
They actually have different speed settings and different options for changing lanes and turning depending on the amount of pressure you apply.

 

[medicineman]

So does my Accent - light touch = lanes, touch with click = turn.  Don't need speed settings - as long as it continues going click /clock, it means it's working and doesn't need a new bulb or fuse.

MM

 

[Romanmaz]

So does my Accent - light touch = lanes, touch with click = turn.  Don't need speed settings - as long as it continues going click /clock, it means it's working and doesn't need a new bulb or fuse.

MM

Its sounds like u wanna race  :threat 

 

[Good2Golf]

Its sounds like u wanna race  :threat

He may just win...it appears that he knows how to use his turn signals. 

 

[mariomike]

Its sounds like u wanna race  :threat

Best to avoid Toronto for speeding. It, reportedly, has more speed traps than Los Angeles, Montreal and New York -- combined.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Thinking about this thread brought this to mind.

The OP stated that he was cited for an infraction of the Government Property Traffic Regulations.

. . . . . .  The ticket is for, exact quote:

"Fail to obey traffic sign - stop sign"

I was NOT given the offence notice under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, which surprised me as I thought that this applied on an Ontario base.  Rather, I was given a ticket under the "Government Property Traffic Regulations".  The section was nine (9).  . . . . . .

In later discussion about what constituted the proper manner in which to respond to a stop sign, the Ontario Highway Traffic Act (OHTA) was quoted.

Yup, section 136(1)(a) of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, to be precise.

136.  (1)  Every driver or street car operator approaching a stop sign at an intersection,

(a) shall stop his or her vehicle or street car at a marked stop line or, if none, then immediately before entering the nearest crosswalk or, if none, then immediately before entering the intersection; and

(b) shall yield the right of way to traffic in the intersection or approaching the intersection on another highway so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard and, having so yielded the right of way, may proceed.

The OHTA clearly defines what is required of that law, however the OP was not cited for an infraction of that law.  The Government Property Traffic Regulations is worded differently.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._887/FullText.html

TRAFFIC SIGNS AND DEVICES

7. (1) The Minister of Public Works, the Minister of any department having the control or management of any government property, or the Commissioner may mark or erect or cause to be marked or erected on any government property, traffic signs or devices

(a) prescribing rate of speed;

(b) regulating or prohibiting parking and designating parking areas;

(c) prescribing load limits for any vehicle or class of vehicles;

(d) prohibiting or regulating the use of any highway by any vehicle or class of vehicles;

(e) designating any highway as a one-way highway;

(f) for stopping vehicles;

(g) for regulating pedestrian traffic; and

(h) for directing or controlling in any other manner traffic on government property.

(2) Except as authorized by subsection (1), no person shall mark or erect any traffic sign or device on government property.

(3) No person, other than the Minister of Public Works, the Minister of any department having the control or management of government property or the Commissioner, shall, without the authority of such Minister or the Commissioner, remove or deface any traffic sign or device on such property.

8. Any traffic sign or device on government property bearing the words “Government of Canada” or an abbreviation thereof, or purporting to have been erected by or under the authority of the Minister of Public Works, any other Minister or the Commissioner, shall prima facie be deemed to have been erected pursuant to these Regulations.

9. The driver of a vehicle on a highway shall obey the instructions of any traffic sign or device applicable to that driver, vehicle or highway.

10. Any traffic sign or device on government property marked or erected prior to September 17, 1952 under An Act to Provide for the Regulation of Vehicular Traffic on Dominion Property or the regulations made thereunder or under other lawful authority shall be deemed to have been marked or erected pursuant to these Regulations.

There is no other reference in the regulations about what a stop sign means (unlike the provincial legislation).  Lacking a definition about where to stop for a stop sign, the OP "may" (a big may) be able to make the case that he did stop at the sign (where it could be surmised that the GPTR required him to stop) and thus was not in contravention of the regulations.  For those who would point out that the requirements of the OHTA would apply in the absence of more detail in the GPTR, the following section of the regulations would apply.

COMPLIANCE WITH PROVINCIAL AND MUNICIPAL LAWS
6. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3), no person shall operate a vehicle on a highway otherwise than in accordance with the laws of the province and the municipality in which the highway is situated.

(2) No person shall operate a vehicle on the South Klondike Highway otherwise than in accordance with the laws of the Yukon Territory.

(3) No person shall operate a vehicle on the Confederation Bridge otherwise than in accordance with the laws of the province of Prince Edward Island.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1), in the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations and the provisions of the laws of the province and the municipality in which the highway is situated, the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

(5) For the purposes of subsection (2), in the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations and the provisions of the laws of the Yukon Territory, the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

(6) For the purposes of subsection (3), in the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations and the provisions of the laws of the province of Prince Edward Island, the provisions of the Government Property Traffic Act and these Regulations prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

 

[Romanmaz]

He may just win...it appears that he knows how to use his turn signals. 

Haha yea he can tell me if mine are working right when I fly by him :nod:

 

[Scoobs]

Thinking about this thread brought this to mind.

The OP stated that he was cited for an infraction of the Government Property Traffic Regulations.

In later discussion about what constituted the proper manner in which to respond to a stop sign, the Ontario Highway Traffic Act (OHTA) was quoted.

The OHTA clearly defines what is required of that law, however the OP was not cited for an infraction of that law.  The Government Property Traffic Regulations is worded differently.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._887/FullText.html

There is no other reference in the regulations about what a stop sign means (unlike the provincial legislation).  Lacking a definition about where to stop for a stop sign, the OP "may" (a big may) be able to make the case that he did stop at the sign (where it could be surmised that the GPTR required him to stop) and thus was not in contravention of the regulations.  For those who would point out that the requirements of the OHTA would apply in the absence of more detail in the GPTR, the following section of the regulations would apply.

This is what has been part of the problem.  I cannot find much info about the GPTR.  However, about the definition of a stop, the base that I work at has an internet (not intranet) site that has a link to the MP section.  They define what a stop is and it is pretty damn close to what the OHTA states.  However, a website does not equal a law.  I have found out that para 9 is a "catch all" type of charge since it does not specifically refer to a stop sign, but rather disobeying any traffic sign, etc.  Also, I found out that only tickets under para 20 of the GPTR show up on an Ontario driver's abstract.  Section 20 is speeding.  I wasn't charged under speeding.

The 15 days are up this week and I must make a decision.  Fight the ticket and receive justice plus spend more money than the actual cost of the ticket (the court date will be after I'm posted and it would cost more for me to come back than the cost of the ticket) or just pay the damn ticket and spend less.  This is really sad when my decision will most likely revolve more around money than justice!  This whole situation has seriously eroded my faith in our "justice" system.  Most of my police friends (civy and MP) tell me that it is very hard to fight a ticket.  Why is that?  Aren't we supposed to be innocent and not presumed to be guilty???  Seems to me that traffic court looks at it as you're guilty and then you prove your innocence.

 

[Loachman]

Wait until you have to defend your innocence in a criminal case, win, and still have to sell your house to pay for the legal bill, like some people that I know have had to do.

 

[Infanteer]

...the natural consequence of allowing our justice system to become the domain of specialists who charge hundreds of dollars an hour.  Pretty sad when it is all but inaccessible to the average citizen....