I know it’s often argued this way but then why do they give speeding tickets if the person can also fight that and get it dropped ?
Tickets for moving violations, outside of dragnet speed traps / speed cameras often serve the the public good in a way that bugging consenting adults fucking doesn't. Being that there is a good chance that aggressive enforcement of C-36 would lead to it getting thrown out it tends to work better as a threat than a law that gets enforced (outside of the case of unambiguously bad actors).
Fighting at ticket, unless there is an unambiguous error in process, or the application of the law, is usually not an 'easy win', and to get a ticket thrown out you'll usually want representation (not necessarily a lawyer).
More typically you, or your representative, will go to the prosecutor looking for a deal citing things like poverty, your good driving record, or other factors and then ideally present the prosecutor with a specific ask (like a reduction in the fine, and no points).
In Ontario the prosecutor can't use what's said in that meeting against you in court. You have the option of taking the deal offered (if any), paying the original fine (AFAIR, it's been awhile), or going to court.
If you take the deal you plead guilty and pay the fine, or arrange payment. If you go to court you (or your representative) MAY get offered one last deal which may be better or worse than the previous deal. You MAY also get lucky and have the officer fail to show up, and have the ticket thrown out.
Note, accusing the police of unseemly things to a prosecutor or judge, unless you have hard proof and are in court, is unlikely to go well. Also, if you take the meeting with the prosecutor they're not there to armchair litigate your ticket, they're there to discuss the charges as filed (with the assumption they are legitimate unless there is a clear process error).
As was said, most people who get the very occasional ticket, will simply pay the fine.
Edit: Not a lawyer, and this is AFAIR.
