Photo Radar coming to Toronto?

GameBoy27

Well-known member
Nov 23, 2004
12,658
2,536
113
Photo radar is advertised as a revenue generating tool by manufacturers. It sends the ticket to the owner, not the driver. There's no points on your licence and it does not affect you insurance premiums. Therefore, it's nothing more than a tax.

If Toronto Mayor John Tory has his way, the message to motorists will be: Smile, you’re on candid camera!

In a bid to reduce policing costs in the city, Tory on Monday said he is “formally” asking Premier Kathleen Wynne to amend provincial laws to allow photo radar in Toronto.

“Give us legislative freedom to do a couple of things that I think are going to be very fundamental to the modernization of policing and to the addressing of the police budgetary concerns,” the mayor said at Queen’s Park following a 40-minute meeting in the premier’s office.

Tory said he is seeking “broader latitude than we have today to use technology, especially when it comes to things like traffic management.”

“We can use technology in place of uniform police officers. This will allow for more efficient deployment of expensive, highly trained police officers,” he said, adding the technology “could include photo radar,” especially in school zones.
“I will only speak about the need to have this in Toronto.”

While Wynne conceded that “the costs of policing, we know, are a challenge for municipalities,” she was non-committal on photo radar returning to Ontario province-wide.

“I’m not going to talk about specific technologies,” the premier said.

“These concerns and these requests have to come from the municipalities. I look forward to getting the formal request from the mayor.”

Photo radar has long been politically contentious at Queen’s Park.

Former NDP premier Bob Rae launched it on Ontario highways in August 1994 and it was scrapped by his Progressive Conservative successor Mike Harris just 11 months later.

Mindful of its unpopularity with many motorists, Harris successfully made it a key issue in the 1995 election.
Tory is a former provincial Progressive Conservative leader.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/02/22/john-tory-asks-wynne-to-bring-back-photo-radar-to-catch-speeders.html
 

Promo

Active member
Jan 10, 2009
2,480
0
36
My opinion:

1) I'm against it for speed enforcement on highways. Personally I have no problem with people driving at reasonable speeds (i.e. 115-125) as long as the conditions allow and they don't weave in traffic, tailgate or create any other dangerous situation for themselves or others.

2) I'm for it on community roads where excess speed creates dangerous situations. i.e. school zones, windy roads with hidden driveways, etc. I live near a GO station and you would be shocked to see how fast and aggressively people drive on the roads near the station in the morning.

3) I'm 110% for it for red light cameras. The number of people who drive through red lights these days has gotten totally out of control. Not only is it dangerous for everyone, it's screwing up traffic flow.

That stated, IMHO government treats Photo radar as nothing more than a revenue grab. It's not about safety at all.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,840
113
It didn't take Tory long, did it? Chopping the TPS' bloated budget by even 1% was too difficult, but going after the taxpayer- not so much.
 

IRIS

Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2010
5,397
332
83
iris4men.escortbook.com
My opinion:


That stated, IMHO government treats Photo radar as nothing more than a revenue grab. It's not about safety at all.
Yes, but countless refugees full health and dental insurance is not cheap. Take the 500$ speeding tickets as a "Thank you for your vote" from our very smart liberal government.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,519
1,142
113
How many times is this going to come up over the years and then be taken away.

I don't support it on highways. Red light cameras at problem intersections with high collision history for sure there is a huge benefit, however not on just any random place used to generate revenue. Only use it for problem and high complaint zones like where kids go to school and the motorists have a habit of creating dangers.

Country roads no way.
 

Promo

Active member
Jan 10, 2009
2,480
0
36
I don't support it on highways. Red light cameras at problem intersections with high collision history for sure there is a huge benefit, however not on just any random place used to generate revenue. Only use it for problem and high complaint zones like where kids go to school and the motorists have a habit of creating dangers.

Country roads no way.
We agree.

Frankly, I don't understand the Police priorities when it comes to traffic enforcement. Every day we all see dangerous or high annoyance activities occurring on the roads. Weaving, tailgating, cut-offs, using exit lanes/entrance lanes/shoulders to pass, driving through red lights, HOV abuse, left-lane abuse, etc.

Yet it appears to me that 80%+ of the Police's enforcement efforts are focused on speeding tickets. Every day I see several marked and unmarked Police cars strategically parked by the side of the road with a radar/laser out hanging out the window. Rarely do I see a Police car moving in traffic (other than quickly speeding somewhere), or monitoring known bad intersections or in any other way appearing to be policing the more serious infractions. I'm not saying the Police ignore these laws, but there doesn't seems to be a proportionally high effort applied to the high danger laws.

Speeding tickets are the low-hanging fruit for revenue generation. It's a low-effort, quick quota filling ticket so it appeals to the lazy individuals in the Police force. It's guaranteed revenue and politically safe, so the politicians love it. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the weavers and red-light runners know their chance of getting caught is almost zero so they get more and more aggressive.
 

thumper18474

Well-known member
You'll see OPP parked strategically at certain on ramps on the 401 corridor...they'll nail you for seat belts..cellphones use..speeding(ramps do have posted speeds..BTW)...and people still dont get it...
They arent hiding...but they still get their fair share....LOL
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
You'll see OPP parked strategically at certain on ramps on the 401 corridor...they'll nail you for seat belts..cellphones use..speeding(ramps do have posted speeds..BTW)...and people still dont get it...
They arent hiding...but they still get their fair share....LOL
And with a machine doing the job of writing up the ticket — that's all that's been added to the gun the cop points — some of them can move on to the stuff |2 /-\ | /|/ and Promo mentioned.

BTW, if photo-radar was just deployed in "…just any random place" instead of where it would nab numerous offenders and generate significant revenue (some of that revenue Rob Ford put back in car-owners' pockets cancelling the car tax) then City Hall managers are even dumber than I tend to think. Those rich fishin' holes would be "…problem and high complaint zones like where kids go to school and the motorists have a habit of creating dangers"(my emphasis)
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
At first it sounds objectionable, but I know where the red light cameras are (not that I go through red lights). Maybe we will know where the photo radar installations will be too, and be extra cautious, just like I know where the cops hang out along the 407.

The only problem though is that there might be little leeway in driving over the speed limit.

Cops won't ticket you if you're 10 KM over the limit (even 15 KM sometimes).

Will the photo radar cameras issue tickets for minor speed contraventions?
 

kono

Member
May 19, 2009
523
0
16
This is just going to open the flood gates. "Look at hoe much money it saved us. Let's implement it GTA wide." What they really need is policing at schools. If you've ever driving in a school zone in the morning you know what I'm talking about. It's complete chaos and I'm shocked there aren't more accidents. It's not a speeding issue it's reckless and distracted driving. Oh, and kids running onto oncoming traffic. But people love to point the finger at speed.
This is a very slippery slope...
 

rhuarc29

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2009
9,643
1,269
113
In a bid to reduce policing costs in the city, Tory on Monday said he is “formally” asking Premier Kathleen Wynne to amend provincial laws to allow photo radar in Toronto.
In a bid to reduce policing costs? That is the biggest load of bullshit that's probably ever came out of his mouth. Anyone who thinks policing costs are going to decline significantly as a result of this is blind, deaf and dumb!

Frankly, I don't understand the Police priorities when it comes to traffic enforcement. Every day we all see dangerous or high annoyance activities occurring on the roads. Weaving, tailgating, cut-offs, using exit lanes/entrance lanes/shoulders to pass....
I see people using the exit/entrance lanes and shoulders to pass every single day, many times a day. What I don't understand is why cops aren't posted at these known locations during peak hours. Nothing is more annoying than sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic for an hour or two every day and watching the assholes cruise merrily by. Not to mention that it creates a dangerous situation at times. I blew out a tire once and was pulling off to the shoulder and almost got run over by a guy. He had the obnoxiousness to honk his horn at me. I imagine he thought I saw him coming and was trying to block him, something I've seen quite a few people do, especially truckers. Police she be nailing these guys EVERY SINGLE DAY. Why is that not happening?

You'll see OPP parked strategically at certain on ramps on the 401 corridor...they'll nail you for seat belts..cellphones use..speeding(ramps do have posted speeds..BTW)...
Many ramps have advisory speed limits (those yellow signs). It's not illegal to drive faster.
 

thumper18474

Well-known member
At first it sounds objectionable, but I know where the red light cameras are (not that I go through red lights). Maybe we will know where the photo radar installations will be too, and be extra cautious, just like I know where the cops hang out along the 407.

The only problem though is that there might be little leeway in driving over the speed limit.

Cops won't ticket you if you're 10 KM over the limit (even 15 KM sometimes).

Will the photo radar cameras issue tickets for minor speed contraventions?
Yeah OPP can be lenient...take away that and as was mentioned...the flood gates will open..... on the 401 between Meadowvale and 409..from 11AM to about 2:30pm photo radar will be akin to shooting fish in a barrel....and lets not forget 11:pM to about 3:30AM...during the summer with all the 1200CC crotch rockets doin about 170-180KPH..on an empty highway.
Where is the money gonna go...OPP?..City of torontos coffers?...AG office?
you'll have dept..fighting amongst themselves tryin to get their piece of the pie...
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
27,034
7,588
113
Room 112
I have to see how this plays out but if Tory goes ahead with this initiative he will never get my vote again. This has nothing to do with public safety. This has everything to do with tax and grab.
 

thumper18474

Well-known member
Many ramps have advisory speed limits (those yellow signs). It's not illegal to drive faster.
While the limits on yellow signs aren’t enforceable, you could potentially face charges if you go over the recommended limit – especially if you get into a crash.
In Ontario, the enforceable speed limit on a ramp is the posted speed limit on the road you’re driving onto, the Ministry of Transportation says.

If the recommended ramp speed says 40..and you're doing 60 or 70?..you're taking your chances...some OPP will be lenient some wont...but get into an accident...and you're fucked....
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,032
3,879
113
It's bullshit, it's just a tax grab.

You just know they are going to set the fucking thing to 51 km/hr.

I remember back in the bad old days of photo radar, everyone was putting covers on their plates to obscure them from photo radar cameras.
 

Keebler Elf

The Original Elf
Aug 31, 2001
14,607
229
63
The Keebler Factory
Don't break the law, don't pay the "tax."

I could just as easily call it a user fee for those who choose the speed.
 

rhuarc29

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2009
9,643
1,269
113
If the recommended ramp speed says 40..and you're doing 60 or 70?..you're taking your chances...some OPP will be lenient some wont...but get into an accident...and you're fucked....
As you should be. You should only drive as fast as is safe. If you crash all by yourself on a ramp, it's because you're going too fast for whatever the conditions are, and you deserve to get fucked!

I've seen some stupidly low advisory signs where I can easily double the posted recommendation without putting myself at risk.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
It's bullshit, it's just a tax grab.

You just know they are going to set the fucking thing to 51 km/hr.

I remember back in the bad old days of photo radar, everyone was putting covers on their plates to obscure them from photo radar cameras.
Of course it is. What government isn't providing only minimal services and on substandard levels at that? They're all worse than broke. The pols are too addicted to getting votes to do the honest thing and make us pay for what we have and want. But taxing the stupids and scofflaws is something they think they can sell.

TANSTAAFL. If you don't like this tax, name the one you prefer. Or show us a Ford Nation passport.

On the license-plate cover thing: Parking cops now ticket for expired plate-stickers. i bet it won't be long before they get the authority to ticket for obscured and unreadable plates, which are already against the law? It'll benefit the 407ETR and the province's new HOT toll scheme.
 
Toronto Escorts