Busted doing +50kms over speed limit. Any advice?

[Rockload6]

That's not the point. They are public roads and other morons are out there. Maybe you can drive like Mario Freakin' Andretti. But, can you react instantaneously when soccer mom or grampa pulls cuts you off because they didn't see you coming at 182 km/h?

Yeah, I'm just thinking of the roads where it's really flat and nothing but a straight hi-way and there aren't any houses or intersections around (think Seaforth area)

Anyway, it's still dangerous and stupid but if you must do it, try barren areas. The fastest I've gone was 155 in my little 4 cylinder just to test it out, but other than that, its usually 120 on the 401 and 100 in 80's.

 

[great_times2]

wow...quite the response.

so I expected the flames....I know its wrong, believe me.

I do have a totally clean record, it was a totally open road, nothing like reckless weaving in and out.

it boild down to that I accelerated, and left my foot on the gas for about 5 seconds to long....end of story.

 

[healer677]

Lawyer - Lawyer - Lawyer

 

[hunter001]

Let the court know that you are sorry, you've learned your lesson and will not do this again.

lol. Yeah right.

it boild down to that I accelerated, and left my foot on the gas for about 5 seconds to long....end of story.

 

[Mao Tse Tongue]

Get a lawyer because no insurance company is going to take you after this.

Personally I think it's easy to do that speed on a highway that already should be at least 100 not 80km/h. 80 is bullshit. People here are so brainwashed, their outrage meters pulsing like jack rabbits. The system got him, he'll suffer the consequences, he's just asking a question.

 

[ChaosTheory]

I have a need for speed too.

I am sorry about your situation.

It is hard driving my Lamborgini Reventon at the speed limit
I would use my other car but it is not easy with my Bugatti Veryon either.
damit i think i just woke up from my dream.

This is fact though:

401 should be the Canadian Autobaan.

 

[chris123]

Basically see a lawyer.
I would like to say that 142kph on a wide open road, in good driving conditions with a decent driver and no distractions isn't dangerously fast IMHO. However your problem is that Ontario says it is.

 

[pencilneckgeek2]

............ these new over 50 speeding laws.

.

Bullshit.

Bill 203 http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/about/bill203.shtml came into effect on September 30, 2007. It's been almost 20 months.

 

[nottyboi]

Firstly, you probably received a notice to appear, so your fine will not be decided then. All that will be decided is a date for your trial. The liklihood is, on the date of your trial you can plea bargin the speed down to about 30-39 over, which is a minor conviction. I got nailed at 157 before these facist laws were put into place, in the past you would face a dangous driving charge. I plead it down to 39 over, which was about a $200 fine. You may want to get a paralegal. What they WOULD know is how willing the crown is to plead these down. Ask for disclosure (lets them know you are ready to fight) and cut a deal with the prosecutor. In the small liklihood you are unable to get a decent deal, when you come up for trial, tell the judge you were fully expecting to reach a plea with the prosecutor, but were not offered a deal, so you would like a continuance to retain legal advice. BTW ignore all the law and order morons on this thread, they probably are more dangerous at 100 kph then you were at 142. THis will take about a year to play out so don't expect a quick resolution.

 

[Rockload6]

BTW ignore all the law and order morons on this thread, they probably are more dangerous at 100 kph then you were at 142.

Thanks, I need a good chuckle haha.

 

[pokergod]

slow the F*ck down, thats just careless driving. I can't belive your asking for advice after doing that. You did the speed so you should just take responsibilty and accept the fines and whatever comes with it. Its your own fault.

 

[Wizard Merlin]

Firstly, you probably received a notice to appear, so your fine will not be decided then. All that will be decided is a date for your trial. The liklihood is, on the date of your trial you can plea bargin the speed down to about 30-39 over, which is a minor conviction. I got nailed at 157 before these facist laws were put into place, in the past you would face a dangous driving charge. I plead it down to 39 over, which was about a $200 fine. You may want to get a paralegal. What they WOULD know is how willing the crown is to plead these down. Ask for disclosure (lets them know you are ready to fight) and cut a deal with the prosecutor. In the small liklihood you are unable to get a decent deal, when you come up for trial, tell the judge you were fully expecting to reach a plea with the prosecutor, but were not offered a deal, so you would like a continuance to retain legal advice. BTW ignore all the law and order morons on this thread, they probably are more dangerous at 100 kph then you were at 142. THis will take about a year to play out so don't expect a quick resolution.

I agree with you there.

I guess a lot of terbites drive Civics. I drive a fast car and it's difficult not to go 50 over. The car is so smooth you don't even feel it. Thank goodness for the H.U.D. In fact I watch it all the time and keep myself at 49 over most times. I'm talking about the highway here, and mostly 407 which flows really nice.

The fact that they charge you with "racing" at 50 over is just ludicrous IMO.

Good luck OP.

 

[dirkd101]

Lawyer-up

 

[lomotil]

ok ok ...I know before I get flamed, I shouldn't have been speeding.

I was up north, wide open road. Got caught doing 142 in an 80km highway.

Ironic part is I was driving for all of 5 minutes, and just accelerated right into a trap!

So I had the pleasure of experiencing these new over 50 speeding laws.
http://www.50over.ca/

7 day suspension of liscence, impounded car.

Court ruling is this week as to what fine I should get. Any advice from anyone who's been here? Should I get representation? Just go in and hope for the best and plead my case?

Any commentary welcome....

As was said before, speed kills, it is better to get those of the road who endanger other people's lives. Perhaps your infraction saved a life, including yours? If you like racing, be a man and get on the track, to places such as Mosport, sign the waiver and drive as fast as you wish.

 

[Brotherman]

www.ottlegal.com can help you. if you dont want to pay paralegal fees you can always go to a law library and read the cases laws yourself.

www.fightyourtickets.ca

 

[alexmst]

I drive a fast car and it's difficult not to go 50 over. The car is so smooth you don't even feel it. I watch it all the time..I'm talking about the highway here, and mostly 407 which flows really nice.

The fact that they charge you with "racing" at 50 over is just ludicrous IMO.

Good luck OP.

Agreed.

It is really hard to keep a powerful european car to the speed limits - I'm not joking...it requires constant looking at the guage, or else using cruise control. I tend to set the cruise control at 120 km/h on long distance trips to avoid problems, as a result I have a clear driving record and haven't had a speeding ticket in years. If the flow increases speed over 120 km/h, then it is OK to match the flow (safer too). With cheap POS cars like I had when I was a teenager, you can feel the speed, but with MB's and Jags you generally cannot...50 km/h feels like the car is rolling in idle with one's foot off the brake.

Where you risk getting nailed is when you are the only car on the road and you are vastly exceeding the limit - you can't argue you are keeping with traffic flow in that circumstance. The safest driver is alert and keeps with the flow - if the flow is doing 70 km/h and the limit if 100 km/h, do 70. If the flow is doing 140 km/h, do that. It works for me.

 

[buttercup]

'Course, there's no such thing as a "safe" speed. All the law can do is introduce measures that they think might have the effect of reducing the deathrate. If they work, keep em. If they don't work, there is no justification whatsoever for keeping them.

The idea behind the harsh fines etc is that it will reduce accidents and save lives. So, its been in force now since 2007 -- have lives been saved? Has the accident rate gone down?

My guess is NO -- the death rate from high speed crashes has NOT gone down -- if it had, we would have heard about it. But it's a matter of fact - the death rate has either gone down, or it hasn't. If it has, I'm all for them making the laws harsher still. If not, it's just pure bullshit politics.

 

[hunter001]

'Course, there's no such thing as a "safe" speed. All the law can do is introduce measures that they think might have the effect of reducing the deathrate. If they work, keep em. If they don't work, there is no justification whatsoever for keeping them.

The idea behind the harsh fines etc is that it will reduce accidents and save lives. So, its been in force now since 2007 -- have lives been saved? Has the accident rate gone down?

My guess is NO -- the death rate from high speed crashes has NOT gone down -- if it had, we would have heard about it. But it's a matter of fact - the death rate has either gone down, or it hasn't. If it has, I'm all for them making the laws harsher still. If not, it's just pure bullshit politics.

Actually I heard a report on the radio today and the accident rates have been going done in Ontario.

 

[Brill]

After this encounter, are you still a speeder?

If so, the new laws aren't tough enough to sink in your head.

 

[hunter001]

The law is unfair because it doesn't take into consideration the conditions of the road (one anti-ticket website makes this argument)

One anti-ticket website make the case for a virtually unenforceable law based on variables instead of one law that applies to everyone all the time. Go figure...

I would like to see make that argument in front of a judge. (Make you print off the article from the website, the judge may not have his iphone web browser available.)