Ticket for not having my lights on

[Type_S1]

cops in this city are a joke....definitely protecting and serving with this ticket.

I got a ticket last week at 4:15 pm for not having my lights on...it wasn't even dark yet. I hope to hell that loser constable shows up to court so I can rip him a new ass hole. Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.

[blairtruck]

Originally posted by Type_S1
cops in this city are a joke....definitely protecting and serving with this ticket.

I got a ticket last week at 4:15 pm for not having my lights on...it wasn't even dark yet. I hope to hell that loser constable shows up to court so I can rip him a new ass hole. Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.
ticket for no lights on, or ticket for no DRL?

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by Type_S1
cops in this city are a joke....definitely protecting and serving with this ticket.

I got a ticket last week at 4:15 pm for not having my lights on...it wasn't even dark yet. I hope to hell that loser constable shows up to court so I can rip him a new ass hole. Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.

Yeah, I really think if we happen to see a law being broken right in front of us, we should completely ignore it and in doing so, unlawfully neglect our duty and not do what we are paid for. I think if it's a law that doesn't really "count" and isn't that important, we shouldn't be subject to the rigorous criticism that people fling our way for not properly doing our jobs, cause things like this that effect everyday people aren't the same as "real" laws being broken.

Let me know when you can figure out a way to pay for and hire enough of us to be on every street corner, in every home, and on top of everything that people are doing to each other that counts under the "protecting and serving" umbrella, and I'll personally drive you to city hall to present it to council.

:rofl:

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by blairtruck

ticket for no lights on, or ticket for no DRL?

DRL were of course on, the ticket was for 55 (1)(c) at 4:15 pm on deerfoot, while it was still light out and visibility for miles. I was told they were "cracking down on it" as not having your lights on while it's light out must be extremely dangerous. I asked him to please show up for the court date and proceeded to get logs of deerfoot traffic cameras and city of calgary and government of Canada website records stating the visibility for the time the ticket was given. This guy should be suspended or be forced to pay me $100 out of pocket for the time I'm going to waste walking to the court house and calling him a loser.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Yeah, I really think if we happen to see a law being broken right in front of us, we should completely ignore it and in doing so, unlawfully neglect our duty and not do what we are paid for. I think if it's a law that doesn't really "count" and isn't that important, we shouldn't be subject to the rigorous criticism that people fling our way for not properly doing our jobs, cause things like this that effect everyday people aren't the same as "real" laws being broken.

Let me know when you can figure out a way to pay for and hire enough of us to be on every street corner, in every home, and on top of everything that people are doing to each other that counts under the "protecting and serving" umbrella, and I'll personally drive you to city hall to present it t
:rofl:

So you are saying you would give a ticket for that "unsafe" left turn? How about for not having lights on during day time hours? My problem is police in this city are so focused on ticket revenue they seem to forget the bigger picture. Being a traffic cop has to be one of the most degrading jobs one could have. Detectives, the GU, etc. I have respect for as they are actually trying to make the city a better place. Giving someone a crock of shit ticket because you have a quota to meet is a joke. I don't understand how someone can really feel good about their lives when their sole purpose is handing out traffic tickets.

edit: the negative comments are not directed at you Phil...it's just my opinion that the system has a massive flaw. I feel the same about city construction workers lack of productivity and wasted resources (8 guys on break while 1 works), and even departments at my own company where I could fire half the people and see the same amount of work pumped out.

[Stuart]

Originally posted by Type_S1


DRL were of course on, the ticket was for 55 (1)(c) at 4:15 pm on deerfoot, while it was still light out and visibility for miles. I was told they were "cracking down on it" as not having your lights on while it's light out must be extremely dangerous. I asked him to please show up for the court date and proceeded to get logs of deerfoot traffic cameras and city of calgary and government of Canada website records stating the visibility for the time the ticket was given. This guy should be suspended or be forced to pay me $100 out of pocket for the time I'm going to waste walking to the court house and calling him a loser.

Just so you know, 55 (1) (c) is not for headlights, the wording is as follows:

55 (1) (c) have a vehicle in motion on the highway unless the tail lamps, side marker lamps, identification lamps and clearance lamps with which the vehicle is required to be equipped under the Vehicle Equipment Regulation are alight;

[Type_S1]

Yes and your side markers come on when you turn your headlights on no? The cops exact words when I got pulled over, as caught on dash cam, was that it was getting dark and my night time head lights weren't on therefore my side markers weren't lit so he was forced to give me a ticket. I asked him if he was joking and he said no, it's getting dark out and they were cracking down on it.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by Type_S1
Yes and your side markers come on when you turn your headlights on no? The cops exact words when I got pulled over, as caught on dash cam, was that it was getting dark and my night time head lights weren't on therefore my side markers weren't lit so he was forced to give me a ticket. I asked him if he was joking and he said no, it's getting dark out and they were cracking down on it.

Hear, fucking, hear for the cop!! :clap: I'm so sick and tired of idiots driving around that can't figure out how/when to turn on their lights. Sure it gets dark at 4:45-5:00...but on darker, cloud cover days, at 4:00 it starts to get dim light, and often, when 90% of the cars all have their lights on, someone with NO tail or marker lights on is hard to see.

Hell, coming home from Strathmore last week, it was 3:00 pm and it started snowing heavily. Near white out conditions, everyone on the highway has all their lights on, except for this IDIOT in front of us that you couldn't see at all. I flashed him a few times, he couldn't seem to figure out he had no lights on except his DRL's. Took until we hit Shaunessy, and I pulled up beside him at a red light...A fucking 30-something, EMS ATTENDANT no less!!!!! "Dude..turn your fucking lights on...can't see you at all out there!!!"
"OH!! Didn't realize they weren't on! Thanks" :banghead:

Good on the cop!!

[firebane]

Originally posted by blairtruck

ticket for no lights on, or ticket for no DRL?

Not all vehicles are equipped with DRL you know :P

[blueToy]

Originally posted by C_Dave45


Hear, fucking, hear for the cop!! :clap: I'm so sick and tired of idiots driving around that can't figure out how/when to turn on their lights. Sure it gets dark at 4:45-5:00...but on darker, cloud cover days, at 4:00 it starts to get dim light, and often, when 90% of the cars all have their lights on, someone with NO tail or marker lights on is hard to see.

Hell, coming home from Strathmore last week, it was 3:00 pm and it started snowing heavily. Near white out conditions, everyone on the highway has all their lights on, except for this IDIOT in front of us that you couldn't see at all. I flashed him a few times, he couldn't seem to figure out he had no lights on except his DRL's. Took until we hit Shaunessy, and I pulled up beside him at a red light...A fucking 30-something, EMS ATTENDANT no less!!!!! "Dude..turn your fucking lights on...can't see you at all out there!!!"
"OH!! Didn't realize they weren't on! Thanks" :banghead:

Good on the cop!!




Plus one on this.

[Star1995]

Originally posted by Type_S1
cops in this city are a joke....definitely protecting and serving with this ticket.

I got a ticket last week at 4:15 pm for not having my lights on...it wasn't even dark yet. I hope to hell that loser constable shows up to court so I can rip him a new ass hole. Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.

Let us know the court date, I'll take a day off work to watch you "rip him a new ass hole"

I can't wait to see the "logs of deerfoot traffic cameras and city of calgary and government of Canada website records stating the visibility for the time the ticket was given."

As for the cops, keep writing these types of tickets, keeps our taxes lower and helps pay for the work of all the CPS members that keep our city safe.

For myself, 30+ years of driving with zero at fault accidents and zero tickets. I've managed to drive without getting a ticket for over 30 years so I find it strange that you can't do it. I've had a dash cam for over six years now and since then I find I'm a more careful driver. After all I wouldn't want a video of me being an asshole at a gas station or doing something wrong.

I'm no lawyer but if I showed up in court I'd expect the judge to ask for the entire video from the whole day, I'd also be very careful of what the rest of the video shows. Never being in court; when you ask for disclosure, does the crown also ask for it from you? or can you just show up with a video that may or may not be the entire unedited video?

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by C_Dave45


Hear, fucking, hear for the cop!! :clap: I'm so sick and tired of idiots driving around that can't figure out how/when to turn on their lights. Sure it gets dark at 4:45-5:00...but on darker, cloud cover days, at 4:00 it starts to get dim light, and often, when 90% of the cars all have their lights on, someone with NO tail or marker lights on is hard to see.

Hell, coming home from Strathmore last week, it was 3:00 pm and it started snowing heavily. Near white out conditions, everyone on the highway has all their lights on, except for this IDIOT in front of us that you couldn't see at all. I flashed him a few times, he couldn't seem to figure out he had no lights on except his DRL's. Took until we hit Shaunessy, and I pulled up beside him at a red light...A fucking 30-something, EMS ATTENDANT no less!!!!! "Dude..turn your fucking lights on...can't see you at all out there!!!"
"OH!! Didn't realize they weren't on! Thanks" :banghead:

Good on the cop!!

On this day it was clear, light out, no snow, no wind, no white out conditions. Don't jump to conclusions idiot. As per the actual law...you need to have your markers on if visibility is low....go take a look.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by Star1995


Let us know the court date, I'll take a day off work to watch you "rip him a new ass hole"

I can't wait to see the "logs of deerfoot traffic cameras and city of calgary and government of Canada website records stating the visibility for the time the ticket was given."

As for the cops, keep writing these types of tickets, keeps our taxes lower and helps pay for the work of all the CPS members that keep our city safe.

For myself, 30+ years of driving with zero at fault accidents and zero tickets. I've managed to drive without getting a ticket for over 30 years so I find it strange that you can't do it. I've had a dash cam for over six years now and since then I find I'm a more careful driver. After all I wouldn't want a video of me being an asshole at a gas station or doing something wrong.

I'm no lawyer but if I showed up in court I'd expect the judge to ask for the entire video from the whole day, I'd also be very careful of what the rest of the video shows. Never being in court; when you ask for disclosure, does the crown also ask for it from you? or can you just show up with a video that may or may not be the entire unedited video?

I've had zero accidents and 3 tickets in my 8 years of driving. 1 ticket was for speeding which I had thrown out ( the cop was ticketing a certain road as 50km when it was actually 60), another was for failing to stop at a stop sign which was thrown out (cop was over 300m away coming in the opposite direction which I had dash cam footage of me stopping then getting pulled over) and now this one. I'd be happy to hand over the days footage but what would it even matter? It's a good thing you aren't a lawyer though because by your post you would be a bad one. Congrats on your 30 years of going without tickets.

[71/454]

Originally posted by Type_S1


On this day it was clear, light out, no snow, no wind, no white out conditions. Don't jump to conclusions idiot. As per the actual law...you need to have your markers on if visibility is low....go take a look.

Post the dash cam video

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by Type_S1


On this day it was clear, light out, no snow, no wind, no white out conditions. Don't jump to conclusions idiot. As per the actual law...you need to have your markers on if visibility is low....go take a look.

Yeah..'cuz turning your lights on in winter conditions is such a tedious and strenuous task. :rolleyes:

Obviously the cop felt the conditions deemed it necessary. Oh right...he was just out to get *YOU* specifically, and you're the last word on what is safe driving. Idiot. :facepalm:

[Stuart]

Originally posted by Type_S1


On this day it was clear, light out, no snow, no wind, no white out conditions. Don't jump to conclusions idiot. As per the actual law...you need to have your markers on if visibility is low....go take a look.

The way to clear up any confusion would be to post the dash cam video leading up to the ticket. Then the conditions would become obvious and we could hear the cops exact wording.

[Maxt]

Originally posted by Type_S1


DRL were of course on, the ticket was for 55 (1)(c) at 4:15 pm on deerfoot, while it was still light out and visibility for miles. I was told they were "cracking down on it" as not having your lights on while it's light out must be extremely dangerous. I asked him to please show up for the court date and proceeded to get logs of deerfoot traffic cameras and city of calgary and government of Canada website records stating the visibility for the time the ticket was given. This guy should be suspended or be forced to pay me $100 out of pocket for the time I'm going to waste walking to the court house and calling him a loser.
It's becoming very common to see people driving without the full set of lights on now, simply because with the advent of digital gauge clusters and bright Drl's, the instruments are now lit all the time, where as on older cars, they weren't until you had the parks or the full compliment on.
Does this really deserve the full pull over especially on deerfoot where a traffic stop tends to cause traffic insanity, and the officer is getting out of his car on major freeway, a reasonable mind would of course say no. A simple honk and a light flick would probable be the safer of the two options. But where's the revenue in that I guess, and the law tends to ignore common sense. On top of that its very common for police to drive around with no lights on, no Drl's or anything, that's a safety issue in itself considering people are so conditioned to look for Drls now when making traffic decisions.

[Adrenaline101]

Not to further derail from the original topic but as stated above, why do Police cars have the right to run around with just DRL's on all the time? During the day time I swear 90% of the time I see a vehicle with no lights on in the city or even on the #1 it is a cruiser. I've been so tempted to flash my highs at them multiple times as I would any other common motorist to inform then, but always afraid of getting a ticket for "stunting" or whatever else they can come up with.

[Star1995]

Originally posted by Adrenaline101
Not to further derail from the original topic but as stated above, why do Police cars have the right to run around with just DRL's on all the time? During the day time I swear 90% of the time I see a vehicle with no lights on in the city or even on the #1 it is a cruiser. I've been so tempted to flash my highs at them multiple times as I would any other common motorist to inform then, but always afraid of getting a ticket for "stunting" or whatever else they can come up with.

Kind of hard to sneak up on a crime in progress if you have lights on...

[Stealth22]

Originally posted by Adrenaline101
Not to further derail from the original topic but as stated above, why do Police cars have the right to run around with just DRL's on all the time? During the day time I swear 90% of the time I see a vehicle with no lights on in the city or even on the #1 it is a cruiser. I've been so tempted to flash my highs at them multiple times as I would any other common motorist to inform then, but always afraid of getting a ticket for "stunting" or whatever else they can come up with.
They can shut everything off (i.e. 'stealth mode') completely, including the DRL's if they want to.

Simply for the reason that Star1995 posted. If you're responding to a burglary in progress, do you really want the bad guy to see you coming from a mile away?

Provided that they're performing their duties as a peace officer, they are allowed to break any TSA law that they want to. This includes speeding, going through red lights, etc, whether the lights and sirens are on or not.

Same reason why you'll see cruisers turn on the red and blue's to go through a red light, only to shut them off afterwards.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by Type_S1


So you are saying you would give a ticket for that "unsafe" left turn? How about for not having lights on during day time hours? My problem is police in this city are so focused on ticket revenue they seem to forget the bigger picture. Being a traffic cop has to be one of the most degrading jobs one could have. Detectives, the GU, etc. I have respect for as they are actually trying to make the city a better place. Giving someone a crock of shit ticket because you have a quota to meet is a joke. I don't understand how someone can really feel good about their lives when their sole purpose is handing out traffic tickets.

edit: the negative comments are not directed at you Phil...it's just my opinion that the system has a massive flaw. I feel the same about city construction workers lack of productivity and wasted resources (8 guys on break while 1 works), and even departments at my own company where I could fire half the people and see the same amount of work pumped out.

I've already said I don't know if that officer had another perspective that gave him evidence to believe that turn was unsafe. So, I don't know if I would. If I had the evidence and believe it was warranted, I would write that ticket. I write them on half the collisions I attend, because it's a serious safety hazard.

As far as your problem with us focusing on ticket revenue, there is a wide gap between your perception and reality. We have maybe 30-40 members who do traffic full time, and the rest of the members doing enforcement (800ish) are patrol members. Traffic enforcement constitutes a very small part of our typical work day, as we are dealing with other things that are priorities. Sexual assaults, personal crimes, break and enters, 911 calls, domestics, etc. In between, we see something and we can't just ignore it. That's against the Police Act, and our common law duties.

I know you aren't trying to insult anyone here, but I don't really like the fact that everything I do as a patrol member on a daily basis is diminished by the fact that I may hand out a traffic ticket or two. I solve large frauds, sexual assaults, handle serious domestic calls, and am at the pointy end of the spear when someone is waving a gun around and threatening to shoot people.

Detectives and GIU are important, but they don't answer 911. They come in when everything is all calmed down and over, and further the investigation. Please don't undervalue everything the rest of us do because you don't like the fact that we have to enforce traffic laws, especially when we see one being broken right in front of us.

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by Stealth22

They can shut everything off (i.e. 'stealth mode') completely, including the DRL's if they want to.

Including brake lights?

[ianmcc]

The DRLs get disabled at the Police garage when they install the wig wags (the headlights that flash alternately).

[Stealth22]

Originally posted by FiveFreshFish
Including brake lights?
That, I'm not sure of. It seems like it would be a safety issue. Phil (or any other CPS member on Beyond) could speak better to that.

All I know is, they either have a kill switch for the DRL's, or as ianmcc said, they get disabled when the car is delivered. I thought I've seen them driving around with DRL's, but that could have been the headlights, I guess.

But basically, if they get a crime in progress call at night, they can roll up on it without any headlights or DRL's so as not to announce their presence.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by firebane
Not all vehicles are equipped with DRL you know :P
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesafety/roadsafety-1158.htm


YOU ARE RIGHT. Canada's Motor Vehicle Safety Act (MVSA) and its Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (MVSRs) require that all new vehicles sold in (or imported into) Canada and built after December 1, 1989, be fitted with daytime running lights (DRLs) that go on when you start the vehicle.

Vehicles built after December 1, 1989, that operate without DRLs are either:
•United States licensed whose drivers are visiting Canada
•have a broken or disconnected DRL function; or
•were imported when they were more than 15 years old, (the federal government does not have jurisdiction over these)

Provincial/territorial governments have complete authority over the road system and its use, including the licensing, operation and maintenance of vehicles.

With a few exceptions, the Government of Nova Scotia requires the use of DRLs or low-beam headlamps during the daytime hours. This law applies to all road users, including visitors.

Nova Scotia is the first Canadian province to pass such a law. Transport Canada is encouraging other provinces to follow Nova Scotia’s example.

[Dumbass17]

Originally posted by Type_S1
cops in this city are a joke....definitely protecting and serving with this ticket.

I got a ticket last week at 4:15 pm for not having my lights on...it wasn't even dark yet. I hope to hell that loser constable shows up to court so I can rip him a new ass hole. Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.

Drive with your lights on!!!!!

/you got what you deserve, sorry bud

[Lex350]

Originally posted by C_Dave45


Hear, fucking, hear for the cop!! :clap: I'm so sick and tired of idiots driving around that can't figure out how/when to turn on their lights. Sure it gets dark at 4:45-5:00...but on darker, cloud cover days, at 4:00 it starts to get dim light, and often, when 90% of the cars all have their lights on, someone with NO tail or marker lights on is hard to see.

Hell, coming home from Strathmore last week, it was 3:00 pm and it started snowing heavily. Near white out conditions, everyone on the highway has all their lights on, except for this IDIOT in front of us that you couldn't see at all. I flashed him a few times, he couldn't seem to figure out he had no lights on except his DRL's. Took until we hit Shaunessy, and I pulled up beside him at a red light...A fucking 30-something, EMS ATTENDANT no less!!!!! "Dude..turn your fucking lights on...can't see you at all out there!!!"
"OH!! Didn't realize they weren't on! Thanks" :banghead:

Good on the cop!!



THIS!!

[clem24]

Originally posted by blairtruck

ticket for no lights on, or ticket for no DRL?

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but only in Nova Scotia are you actually required to have DRLs on while driving. In AB, you need DRLs in all cars made after 1989 to pass OOP. But after that, you are free to disable them as there is no law that says a car needs to have it's DRL's on during the day.

[killramos]

I was always taught to turn your lights on on the highway regardless of what time it is to improve visibility.

:dunno:

If you were on deerfoot at dusk you should have had your lights on.

[Type_S1]

As an FYI, I didn't create a thread on this...not sure why a mod thought it was okay to take a post in another thread and create a new thread?

I'll post dash cam footage after I get the ticket thrown out in a few weeks. Replies to this have been quite ridiculous. It appears certain people feel you need to have your lights on at all hours of the day which I completely disagree with. When it's starting to get dark, yes, that's the law. Low visibility, yes, that's the law. During the day or while it's light out, no, don't be ridiculous.

[ExtraSlow]

TL : DR
Cop gives me a ticket - He's in the wrong, he's supposed to be ticketing the other drivers. STUPID COPZ!!!

[Aleks]

I'm happy to hear they are cracking down on the lights! However I think they should focus on the people who drive with no lights at night not so much before the sun goes down.

On a side note a few years ago I did get a ticket for a dirty license plate. I had just spent $40 on a car wash a few days earlier and still got pulled over going 20km/h on 9th ave in rush hour for it. Bastard gave me a ticket and then said clean it or I will tow you. $115 down the drain and by the time I got home plate was illegible again (hatchback). Ever since then I wipe the plates every few days. :rofl:

[A790]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
TL : DR
Cop gives me a ticket - He's in the wrong, he's supposed to be ticketing the other drivers. STUPID COPZ!!!
This.

[spikerS]

let me know when the court date is. I'll bring the popcorn and watch you get your ass handed to you.

[jacky4566]

So just to play Devil's advocate the time of sunset according to the GOC for January 6 was 16:46. He was given a ticket at 16:15.

Furthermore the historical weather data stats that the viability was around 3 km for most of that day.

OP is most certainly rude however I would also like to see the dash cam video.

>>>POST THE VIDEO<<<

[speedog]

Originally posted by Type_S1
As an FYI, I didn't create a thread on this...not sure why a mod thought it was okay to take a post in another thread and create a new thread?

I'll post dash cam footage after I get the ticket thrown out in a few weeks. Replies to this have been quite ridiculous. It appears certain people feel you need to have your lights on at all hours of the day which I completely disagree with. When it's starting to get dark, yes, that's the law. Low visibility, yes, that's the law. During the day or while it's light out, no, don't be ridiculous.
You didn't start this thread? What's the other thread you're referring to? Seems odd that a forum moderator would start a new thread using one of your posts from another thread and make this new thread look like you started it - another rogue Toma?

[Dumbass17]

I was following a lady last night, pitch black out.
And she's got her front lights on but of course her car doesn't have taillights running with the Auto setting that so many people take as the holy grail.
Anyways, I highbeamed flashed her about 40 times and then got beside her. I tried to get her attention so she'd look over and I could tell her to turn on her lights. Nope. Nothing. Just tunnel vision staring straight ahead and completely oblivious to life around her.

This happens on the regular.

cool story bro :clap:

[Feruk]

Originally posted by jacky4566
So just to play Devil's advocate the time of sunset according to the GOC for January 6 was 16:46. He was given a ticket at 16:15.

Furthermore the historical weather data stats that the viability was around 3 km for most of that day.

OP is most certainly rude however I would also like to see the dash cam video.

&gt;&gt;&gt;POST THE VIDEO&lt;&lt;&lt;
Exactly my thinking. I'd be taking this ticket straight to trial. Clear visibility and before sunset; I'd love to see what the cop has to say to that.


Originally posted by speedog

You didn't start this thread? What's the other thread you're referring to? Seems odd that a forum moderator would start a new thread using one of your posts from another thread and make this new thread look like you started it - another rogue Toma?
I think that's what actually happened as this was all part of the left hand turn thread.

[clem24]

Originally posted by Dumbass17
I was following a lady last night, pitch black out.
And she's got her front lights on but of course her car doesn't have taillights running with the Auto setting that so many people take as the holy grail.
Anyways, I highbeamed flashed her about 40 times and then got beside her. I tried to get her attention so she'd look over and I could tell her to turn on her lights. Nope. Nothing. Just tunnel vision staring straight ahead and completely oblivious to life around her.

This happens on the regular.

HA I used to do this.. I've given up on it. Found it's completely pointless. Saw another dude do the same thing on Crowchild. Him in a 4Runner and flashing the person in front continually for about 3 KMs, and then just gave up.

Worst one was on the QE2 just after Red Deer. Idiot in a newer Civic with his bimbo beside him.. Anyway he had his lights at the parking lights setting instead of full headlights, so his parking lights were on and his high beams/DRL set to low, which still blinds people and hardly lights up the road ahead. I flashed him a few times, turned off my headlights, etc.. His response? Turned them off and turned them on again to show me he has his lights on. But still in the wrong position. WTF. Said fuck it. Not worth it.

[dirtsniffer]

yea, when I started driving, only a decade ago, people knew what the fuck was meant when you flashed the brights at someone. I haven't successfuly 'flashed' someone's lights on in probably 5 years. And like dumbass said, you pull up beside these people and give a little honk they won't even look over. like im going to fucking shoot them if they glance to their right. jesus

[Aleks]

To be fair these symbols are confusing to most people.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachments/modifications-accessories/1222835d1395554153t-diy-vw-polo-swapping-cabin-light-headlight-switch-installing-footwell-lights-img_6457.jpg

Guessing this is why some people drive with their parking light on only.

[lilmira]

I had people aggressively sped up and changed lane after I flashed them for no lights on like I was a paparazzi. I pretty much gave up on humanity now. :dunno:

[Phihalo]

To be fair, I want to see the dashcam video before saying anything because the sunset time is around 4:30ish this past week and the conditions are not THAT bad.

[blairtruck]

Originally posted by clem24


Someone can correct me if I am wrong but only in Nova Scotia are you actually required to have DRLs on while driving. In AB, you need DRLs in all cars made after 1989 to pass OOP. But after that, you are free to disable them as there is no law that says a car needs to have it's DRL's on during the day.
i got a ticket for no drl downtown Edmonton last summer. truck is a 2002. and originally came with but i had disabled.

[speedog]

Originally posted by Aleks
To be fair these symbols are confusing to most people.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachments/modifications-accessories/1222835d1395554153t-diy-vw-polo-swapping-cabin-light-headlight-switch-installing-footwell-lights-img_6457.jpg

Guessing this is why some people drive with their parking light on only.
One has to wonder why automatic headlights and running lights just aren't included on every vehicle - hell, if Chevrolet can have this every simple feature on every one of their vehicles for the past 13 years at least, then why can't other manufacturers. Surely it can't be that much of an expense for auto manufacturers.

[firebane]

Originally posted by Aleks
To be fair these symbols are confusing to most people.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachments/modifications-accessories/1222835d1395554153t-diy-vw-polo-swapping-cabin-light-headlight-switch-installing-footwell-lights-img_6457.jpg

Guessing this is why some people drive with their parking light on only.

RTFM..

Its located in that thing called a glovebox.

Oh shit that is giving people too much credit.

[Seth1968]

Speak Klingon FFS.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by Dumbass17

And she's got her front lights on but of course her car doesn't have taillights running with the Auto setting that so many people take as the holy grail.


Is it common for an Auto light setting not to illuminate the tails? That seems kinda stupid.

[btimbit]

Good to hear they're cracking down on this!

[Dumbass17]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Is it common for an Auto light setting not to illuminate the tails? That seems kinda stupid.

Very common and yes, pretty bad design.
And alot of people don't realize it, they think that since their headlights are on and their dash is lit up, that they their tail lights are on. Nope. Not always the case

[max_boost]

Type_S1 has a way of endearing himself to the Beyond crowd.

Well sorry bro you got a ticket and I feels what you are saying but it is what it is.

Is it a demerit ticket? or just fine?

[killramos]

Originally posted by Dumbass17


Very common and yes, pretty bad design.
And alot of people don't realize it, they think that since their headlights are on and their dash is lit up, that they their tail lights are on. Nope. Not always the case

Mine are so sensitive its never an issue. My dash changes color at "night" so i can tell. Seriously driving through a shadow is plenty to enable night time haha.

[firebane]

Originally posted by killramos


Mine are so sensitive its never an issue. My dash changes color at &quot;night&quot; so i can tell. Seriously driving through a shadow is plenty to enable night time haha.

Our Chevy Orlandos are the same way. Its so bloody annoying on some days.

[Traffic_Cop]

Originally posted by max_boost
Type_S1 has a way of endearing himself to the Beyond crowd.

Well sorry bro you got a ticket and I feels what you are saying but it is what it is.

Is it a demerit ticket? or just fine?

$115. . No demerits. Its classified as an equipment violation.

[killramos]

Originally posted by firebane


Our Chevy Orlandos are the same way. Its so bloody annoying on some days.

Mine jsut changes from white to amber so it isn't enough to bother me but i could see how it could annoy some people. Loved the quick reaction driving through the tunnels to revelstoke this summer haha.

[diamondedge]

Originally posted by jacky4566
So just to play Devil's advocate the time of sunset according to the GOC for January 6 was 16:46. He was given a ticket at 16:15.

Furthermore the historical weather data stats that the viability was around 3 km for most of that day.

OP is most certainly rude however I would also like to see the dash cam video.

&gt;&gt;&gt;POST THE VIDEO&lt;&lt;&lt;


I'll bite.

Even though sunset is at 16:46pm we have to contend that Deerfoot is in a bit of a valley. I would wager it was much dimmer with the rays casting a shadow, especially since the sun sets low low southwest - downtown shadow.

I don't drive Deerfoot at this time but this is my guess. Post the video S1.

[Traffic_Cop]

Originally posted by clem24


Someone can correct me if I am wrong but only in Nova Scotia are you actually required to have DRLs on while driving. In AB, you need DRLs in all cars made after 1989 to pass OOP. But after that, you are free to disable them as there is no law that says a car needs to have it's DRL's on during the day.

Yes there is. Sec 55.1. Alberta use of highway rules of the road regulation clearly states " a person must not have the motor vehicle in motion unless the daytime running lamps are alight"

[max_boost]

$115. Just pay it kid and pack your lunch for the day. haha

[Kijho]

Can someone post and quote the actual section which states DRL's / running lights are required? Spoke with a CPS member not long ago who mentioned that cops can't actually force you to turn your lights on, as it wasn't an actual traffic violation/ law. (We had seen people driving with no lights, and it was brought up if that was ticket-able.)

[Traffic_Cop]

Originally posted by Kijho
Can someone post and quote the actual section which states DRL's / running lights are required? Spoke with a CPS member not long ago who mentioned that cops can't actually force you to turn your lights on, as it wasn't an actual traffic violation/ law. (We had seen people driving with no lights, and it was brought up if that was ticket-able.)

Got some bad advice. I cant copy & paste. Google " alberta use of highway rules of road reg". Scroll down to section 55

[CompletelyNumb]

People should have full headlights on 24/7. Problem solved.

[Aleks]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Is it common for an Auto light setting not to illuminate the tails? That seems kinda stupid.

I've never seen this on any of my cars. I do wonder why some Fords I see and some Nissans run with what appears to be full front lights (not DRL) and nothing out back. Seems so odd.

[Asian_defender]

Originally posted by Traffic_Cop


$115. . No demerits. Its classified as an equipment violation.

at $115 with no demerits why would anyone waste their time?
you didn't have your headlights on and a police officer called you out on it and gave you a ticket. I bet you were off on your way in less than 5 mins after he told you what you did and gave you your ticket
Should be lesson learned and move on.

[revelations]

- its an equipment violation

- lights on in the day has been proven for decades to reduce collisions, most Northern European countries have strict laws about 24/7 lights on.

- cops can choose what laws to enforce and my guess with his attitude, S1 probably had some other reason to them to do so (history of tickets?)

[killramos]

Originally posted by revelations


- lights on in the day has been proven for decades to reduce collisions, most Northern European countries have strict laws about 24/7 lights on.



To be fair in some of those countries the sun doesn't rise for a significant portion of the year :rofl:

[A2VR6]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Is it common for an Auto light setting not to illuminate the tails? That seems kinda stupid.

I havent heard of that before. In fact I know for my car (BMW) the rear tails are illuminated regardless if the the headlights are in auto or not, on or off.

[clem24]

Originally posted by Traffic_Cop


Yes there is. Sec 55.1. Alberta use of highway rules of the road regulation clearly states &quot; a person must not have the motor vehicle in motion unless the daytime running lamps are alight&quot;

Thanks for that.


55.1 If a motor vehicle is equipped with daytime running lamps
installed by the manufacturer of the motor vehicle, a person must
not have the motor vehicle in motion on a highway unless the
daytime running lamps are alight.

Just to clarify, the traffic act states that DRLs must be on ONLY if DRLs were installed by the manufacturer in the first place. So by my interpretation of the law, if you imported a car from the US without factory DRLs and they were installed after market to pass OOP, then you are free to disable them after OOP and it would not break the law.

[Traffic_Cop]

Originally posted by clem24


Thanks for that.



Just to clarify, the traffic act states that DRLs must be on ONLY if DRLs were installed by the manufacturer in the first place. So by my interpretation of the law, if you imported a car from the US without factory DRLs and they were installed after market to pass OOP, then you are free to disable them after OOP and it would not break the law.

Not sure if i impressed myself or just realised how sad i am. I recited that section and wording from memory. Only missed a few of the exact wording. LOL

[eblend]

Sorry to hear OP, but glad they are cracking down. It's retarded how many people drive with their lights off. Hell I don't remember a car I or my dad ever owned that didn't have auto lights, yet I notice a bunch of Civics and Toyota don't have this standard.

I just curse my way all the way down the road until the idiots are gone. I noticed like otheres that people don't even look at you when you honk at them when you pull right up next to them...

[frizzlefry]

Originally posted by CompletelyNumb
People should have full headlights on 24/7. Problem solved.

But the added fuel cost! :nut: lights do cause the engine to use more fuel. A minuscule amount but fuel none the less. This is why manufacturers are always striving to make more efficient DRLs. That combined with less drag, automatic light sensing headlights, more efficient AC etc etc can reflect in lower MPG on the spec sheet. It all adds up.

But I do think DRLs should be mandatory and tickets like this should be issued. I can't stand it when I am on a two lane highway during the day, want to pass and see a grey vehicle off in the distance in the other lane passing someone else only to realize once I am passing that its some 1985 crapwagon heading towards me without running lights. With DRLs you can quickly determine if the car in the distance is passing or heading towards you. Same goes when the sun is in your face. You can see an oncoming car's DRLs but not the car itself.

DRLs should be mandatory at all times and if you don't have them turn your lights on. When everyone else expects your car to have DRLs but you don't it can create dangerous situations.

[Moonracer]

Originally posted by eblend

I noticed like otheres that people don't even look at you when you honk at them when you pull right up next to them...

It's likely because they think you are pissed at them for something and they don't want a confrontation so they just ignore you.

[E46..sTyLez]

Originally posted by Moonracer


It's likely because they think you are pissed at them for something and they don't want a confrontation so they just ignore you.

This. They see you...they are just shitting their pants lol.
I had a cop pull up next to me one time, and I knew he was there, he pulled right along side me and kept the same speed. I just looked straight forward lol.

Once he threw on his cherry's I looked over and he indicated to put the window down then said "Talk about distracted driving, I have been right next to you for about a kilometer and you haven't even looked over".
I said I was paying attn to the road. Then he said, "well, slow it down". I said yes sir, and obliged.
Worst part, we were cruising at about 60km/h on 52nd for this whole encounter...

[jacky4566]

Originally posted by CompletelyNumb
People should have full headlights on 24/7. Problem solved.
Agree. If motorbikes are required why is this optional for cars?

Also just for fun frizzlefry I did some searching and found this
Alternator Efficiency Reduces Fuels Cos (http://delcoremy.com/documents/high-efficiency-white-paper.aspx)

Using some magic rounding.

Medium car using 14 amps = $88.90/ ~100,000km

So is the cost of an xbox game worth more than your safety? But I see your point.

[JustinMCS]

Originally posted by Dumbass17
I was following a lady last night, pitch black out.
And she's got her front lights on but of course her car doesn't have taillights running with the Auto setting that so many people take as the holy grail.
Anyways, I highbeamed flashed her about 40 times and then got beside her. I tried to get her attention so she'd look over and I could tell her to turn on her lights. Nope. Nothing. Just tunnel vision staring straight ahead and completely oblivious to life around her.

This happens on the regular.

cool story bro :clap:


Originally posted by Dumbass17


Very common and yes, pretty bad design.
And alot of people don't realize it, they think that since their headlights are on and their dash is lit up, that they their tail lights are on. Nope. Not always the case

What cars do you drive? I highly HIGHLY doubt what you are saying. I have not been in ONE car that has AUTO headlights that work how you describe.

Auto headlights, as described by nearly every manufacturer, will switch on all of your lights, front and rear, when lighting conditions merit. How do you know if her lights are on auto?! If her front lights are on and her dash lights are on and no rear lights on, she's 100 percent in DRL mode (lights in the OFF position) or has an electrical fault.

[JustinMCS]

Also, I am surprised by a lot of the comments in this thread. If it is 4:15pm out, you don't need more than your DRLs on. Read the WHOLE TSA 55 (1) (c)

Use of lamps, etc.
55(1) At any time on a highway during the period of night time or
when, due to insufficient light or unfavourable atmospheric
conditions, objects are not clearly discernible on the highway at a
distance of at least 150 metres ahead, a person shall not do any of
the following:

(c)have a vehicle in motion on the highway unless the tail
lamps, side marker lamps, identification lamps and
clearance lamps with which the vehicle is required to be
equipped under the Vehicle Equipment Regulation are
alight;

It's one thing to just read (c) by itself, that would lead you to believe that you must have all your lights on ALL THE TIME. But if you read it in conjunction with 55 (1) as you should, it says quite clearly at any time on a highway during the period of NIGHT or insufficient light.

When is 4:15pm in January "night" or "insufficient light"?

That's the argument here. This is a BS ticket.

[Stuart]

Originally posted by JustinMCS
Also, I am surprised by a lot of the comments in this thread. If it is 4:15pm out, you don't need more than your DRLs on. Read the WHOLE TSA 55 (1) (c)

Use of lamps, etc.
55(1) At any time on a highway during the period of night time or
when, due to insufficient light or unfavourable atmospheric
conditions, objects are not clearly discernible on the highway at a
distance of at least 150 metres ahead, a person shall not do any of
the following:

...

That's the argument here. This is a BS ticket.

Until he shows the video we can only take his word that
a) It was not later than he said
b) There were no "unfavourable atmospheric conditions"
c) Objects were clearly discernible 150 m ahead
d) The cop said what is claimed

That is why we want to see the video.

[frizzlefry]

Originally posted by JustinMCS
Also, I am surprised by a lot of the comments in this thread. If it is 4:15pm out, you don't need more than your DRLs on. Read the WHOLE TSA 55 (1) (c)

Use of lamps, etc.
55(1) At any time on a highway during the period of night time or
when, due to insufficient light or unfavourable atmospheric
conditions, objects are not clearly discernible on the highway at a
distance of at least 150 metres ahead, a person shall not do any of
the following:

(c)have a vehicle in motion on the highway unless the tail
lamps, side marker lamps, identification lamps and
clearance lamps with which the vehicle is required to be
equipped under the Vehicle Equipment Regulation are
alight;

It's one thing to just read (c) by itself, that would lead you to believe that you must have all your lights on ALL THE TIME. But if you read it in conjunction with 55 (1) as you should, it says quite clearly at any time on a highway during the period of NIGHT or insufficient light.

When is 4:15pm in January &quot;night&quot; or &quot;insufficient light&quot;?

That's the argument here. This is a BS ticket.

I would say that it's very subjective on what qualifies as inefficient light or "clearly discernible". I suppose the officer would have to prove objects were not clearly discernible at 150 meters as that figure is clearly stated in the TSA. I could see the officer's opinion that it was too dark being good enough if the TSA simply said "insufficient light" but it specifies 150 meters....so, as impractical as it sounds, i think the officer should prove it.

I don't know if a certain ambiant lumens number is mandated by the TSA or anything but my Audi auto sensing headlights would be on at 4:30 this time of year. But they probably low-ball the ambient lighting threshold by a bunch in order to meet every country's standards when it comes to requiring that headlights be on. They even turn on when I enter my very well lit parkade during the day.

[E46..sTyLez]

Look outside right now...pretty bright out still. BS ticket IMO.
I'm surprised how many people on here will back a cop 100% no matter what, like no bad tickets are ever issued or something.
You don't have to like the OP, but I think he is justified in calling this ticket silly based on what information we are given. IMO of course..

[Stuart]

Originally posted by E46..sTyLez
Look outside right now...pretty bright out still. BS ticket IMO.
I'm surprised how many people on here will back a cop 100% no matter what, like no bad tickets are ever issued or something.
You don't have to like the OP, but I think he is justified in calling this ticket silly based on what information we are given. IMO of course..

But why hold on to the video when it is available? the only reason I can think of is that it would contradict something he stated. Can you think of another reason?

[JustinMCS]

Originally posted by E46..sTyLez
Look outside right now...pretty bright out still. BS ticket IMO.
I'm surprised how many people on here will back a cop 100% no matter what, like no bad tickets are ever issued or something.
You don't have to like the OP, but I think he is justified in calling this ticket silly based on what information we are given. IMO of course..

agreed. If there is a dashcam video showing the conditions, that would help the rest of us base our opinion. Even as far back as Jan 1 had a sunset of 440pm and each day is about 2 minutes later.

If it was a blizzard condition, of course there needs to be lights on.

[E46..sTyLez]

Originally posted by Stuart


But why hold on to the video when it is available? the only reason I can think of is that it would contradict something he stated. Can you think of another reason?

Maybe he was singing along to Celine Dion in the background?? :dunno: haha

I agree the video would settle all though.

[jacky4566]

Originally posted by Type_S1
Yes and your side markers come on when you turn your, headlights on no? The cops exact words when I got pulled over, as caught on dash cam, was that it was getting dark and my night time head lights weren't on therefore my side markers weren't lit so he was forced to give me a ticket. I asked him if he was joking and he said no, it's getting dark out and they were cracking down on it.

Show us the money Type_S1

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Type_S1
Too bad I can't sue the cop for lost time at work for having to appear in court.

I've asked that at various times and in various manners.

The response is always, "If you don't like it, move to another country".

In other words, "I'm being bent over, but it's ok, as the other guy will bend me even further"

Did I mention I like flowers?

[FraserB]

No one is forcing you to take time off work to appear in court.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by clem24


HA I used to do this.. I've given up on it. Found it's completely pointless. Saw another dude do the same thing on Crowchild. Him in a 4Runner and flashing the person in front continually for about 3 KMs, and then just gave up.

Worst one was on the QE2 just after Red Deer. Idiot in a newer Civic with his bimbo beside him.. Anyway he had his lights at the parking lights setting instead of full headlights, so his parking lights were on and his high beams/DRL set to low, which still blinds people and hardly lights up the road ahead. I flashed him a few times, turned off my headlights, etc.. His response? Turned them off and turned them on again to show me he has his lights on. But still in the wrong position. WTF. Said fuck it. Not worth it.

Driving for the past 35 years...the rule of thumb was always this:

Flashing your lights on and off in daytime at oncoming traffic = cops/radar ahead

Flashing your lights off and on at night = "turn your lights on idiot"
flashing your high beams = "Your highs are on!!" (or if you're behind them= "speed up or move the fuck over" :D )

Now what makes this hard today is, some vehicles you cannot turn your headlights off at any time. My van I can't. So I can't turn my lights off and on, to tell someone their lights are off. Flashing my high's at them, just pisses people off, or scares them.

My Navigator, I can literally turn the headlights OFF and on at any time while driving. So if I see someone without tail/marker lights, I'll blink mine off/on/off/on when I'm behind them, and they usually get the message.

[Nitro5]

I'm also noticing more and more fucktards driving around with their hi-beams on.

[firebane]

Originally posted by Nitro5
I'm also noticing more and more fucktards driving around with their hi-beams on.

1) Dead bulb
2) Dirty headlights
3) Just being idiotic

[Willie Bobo]

.

[ianmcc]

Anyone know if you can legally re-assign the DRL to another light? I know some cars have the fogs as their DRL? As long as they work does it matter which light it is (and as long as they go out when you turn on the lights)?

[88CRX]

Noticed it was pretty bright at 4:15pm today :nut:

[Kijho]

So, the moral of this thread is...

Forget to turn your headlights on (at 4pm.. I had sunglasses on driving home): $115.00 ticket

Perform a 50-point turn in an attempt to back out of a parking stall, smash into another vehicle, then flee the scene of the crime: $115.00 ("unsafe backing" ticket.)

Our system... :dunno:

[sr20s14zenki]

Originally posted by Kijho
So, the moral of this thread is...

Forget to turn your headlights on (at 4pm.. I had sunglasses on driving home): $115.00 ticket

Perform a 50-point turn in an attempt to back out of a parking stall, smash into another vehicle, then flee the scene of the crime: $115.00 (&quot;unsafe backing&quot; ticket.)

Our system... :dunno: Or, i dunno, somebody isn't telling the WHOLE truth?

Dashcam footage or it didn't happen. Dunno why you don't just post it. It strikes me that when somebody wishes for people to believe them...they submit all the evidence necessary to sway the opinion to their side? Maybe you just don't care what we think...and thats fine too...but if thats the case, why bother with this thread?

[msommers]

Originally posted by Kijho
So, the moral of this thread is...

Forget to turn your headlights on (at 4pm.. I had sunglasses on driving home): $115.00 ticket

Perform a 50-point turn in an attempt to back out of a parking stall, smash into another vehicle, then flee the scene of the crime: $115.00 (&quot;unsafe backing&quot; ticket.)

Our system... :dunno:

That's all that BMW suv owner got? How the hell was that not considered a hit n' run??!!!

[frizzlefry]

Obvious, at this point, we are being trolled. Post the footage. It's not like it will harm you in court or anything. It's a freaking equipment ticket, no demerits. You think a prosecutor is going to bother scouring google for incriminating evidence against that equipment violation ticket he has to contest? The only info they get is whats disclosed to them by the police. The prosecutor executes zero effort outside of court to find you guilty. Especially for 115 bucks and no demerits :nut:

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by sr20s14zenki
Or, i dunno, somebody isn't telling the WHOLE truth?

Dashcam footage or it didn't happen. Dunno why you don't just post it. It strikes me that when somebody wishes for people to believe them...they submit all the evidence necessary to sway the opinion to their side? Maybe you just don't care what we think...and thats fine too...but if thats the case, why bother with this thread?

I didn't make this thread. A mod thought it was a good idea to take a post in a different thread and make it look like I created one. This wasnt a big issue but a response in another thread showing that I believe cops priorities aren't in line with reality (the unsafe turn). I could care less if people believe me or not. Dash cam footage identifies who I am and my gf through conversation so am reluctant to post. If I spend the time yo upload it and edit out sound I will be called a liar anyways.

I know probably 15-20 beyond half of who I showed the video and got good laughs out of it for 1) having a ridiculous convo with the gf and 2) the ridiculous convo with the cop.

Anyways, whichever mod opened this thread pretending to be me, please close?

[Traffic_Cop]

S1...you do realise that the Police Cars are equipped with Cameras right? So it will clearly show if your car was visible or not. If I was you, I would contact the Crown and request the video justso you dont look too silly. when you hand the cops ass to him. Just saying.......

[D'z Nutz]

Originally posted by Type_S1
As an FYI, I didn't create a thread on this...not sure why a mod thought it was okay to take a post in another thread and create a new thread?


Originally posted by Type_S1


I didn't make this thread. A mod thought it was a good idea to take a post in a different thread and make it look like I created one. This wasnt a big issue but a response in another thread showing that I believe cops priorities aren't in line with reality (the unsafe turn). I could care less if people believe me or not. Dash cam footage identifies who I am and my gf through conversation so am reluctant to post. If I spend the time yo upload it and edit out sound I will be called a liar anyways.

I know probably 15-20 beyond half of who I showed the video and got good laughs out of it for 1) having a ridiculous convo with the gf and 2) the ridiculous convo with the cop.

Anyways, whichever mod opened this thread pretending to be me, please close?

Nobody is "pretending" to be you. :rolleyes:

This discussion was split from the other one because the original thread was going completely off topic and there are valid points to this discussion with or without your input so there's no reason to close this thread.

[YCB]

Originally posted by firebane


1) Dead bulb
2) Dirty headlights
3) Just being idiotic

#2.. As we get warming weather, and roads get wet and dirty so do headlights.. instead of drivers cleaning them.. they turn on their highbeams.. :banghead: :banghead:

Anyone notice Saturns always seem to have their "highbeams" on from their buckteeth front lights? :dunno:

[A790]

So, about that dashcam video...

[Moonracer]

So after I left work yesterday at 4:30, 15 min after said ticket, I noticed that about 90% of the cars I saw did not have any other lights on other than their DRLs. Just saying....;)