What's wrong with this picture?

[flyincanuck]

A 21-year-old neighbour and his infinite wisdom decided to take his car for a joy ride with the windows totally frosted over.

Long story short, he smashed into my girlfriend's parked car, fliped his car onto the roof, and subsequently destroyed both vehicles.



11 Months later (today) we're in traffic Court.

We supplied the Court with 15 photographs just like this one . Charged with Careless Driving, the Defence made a plea bargain with the Crown.

End result:

$85 fine and 3 points off his licence.

Rage is high.

[CID]

Were you going for the death penalty?

[C-KEEP]

I'm assuming that your girlfriend wasn't in the car! I'm glad you're both alright. Hope everything else is going alright.

[flyincanuck]

Were you going for the death penalty?

Nah, not really. But you might when buddy pulls the same stunt and smokes one of your family members, only b/c he thinks he can get away with it.

[flyincanuck]

Or should I say, only because he can get away with it.

[CID]

If he "smoked" one of my family members I think he would have gotten more than $85 and 3 points. Or am I missing something? Were you related to the car in question?

[atwork]

If you sent us a scantly clad picture of your girlfriend maybe that would help.

[Dust Devil]

CID is a true Canadian. Full of tolerance. Unfortunately In this country we have to tolerate people who are insanely dangerous.

[BoostedNihilist]

.

[GilletteNorth]

What the heck did he have to bargain with to plea bargain down to an $85 dollar fine? I got charged more than that for a crummy speed limit violation one time and I didn't hit anything?

[Freddy_Francis]

Ahh traffic court...flying canuck ive been on a rampage about my hatred for the "traffic police" for years....they wait at the bottom of hills waiting for you to go 55 in a 50 and give you a 250$ ticket for "speeding" when really your just letting the car go down hill not destroying your breaks. Then while thier so busy setting up their traffic traps and what not there never around when the real morons (insert your story here) are on the loose. If I had a dollar for all the times ive seen cops run red lights by flicking on their lights and then turning them off when they get across id be rich! RICH! Thankfully no one got hurt but moron neighbours and causing you trouble and not getting any justice is something im all full aware of. I take it he wont be recieving a christmas card from you this year?

[WJflyer]

Go after him in civil court. Sue for damage to property and negligence. If he has a previous record, go for punitive damages. Since he admitted his guilt, getting the judge or the jury to agree with you should be easy.

[CID]

CID is a true Canadian. Full of tolerance.

Thank you. I think so too.

Unfortunately In this country we have to tolerate people who are insanely dangerous.

Insanely dangerous? Some guy gets into a car accident and now he’s insanely dangerous? Again what exactly do you think this guy deserves? Based on what I’ve read, I assume both cars are insured and the driver was licensed. The losses to the parked car has been restored and there was no injury.

The guy got a fine relevant to the infraction, and got points against his license that will more than likely raise his insurance premiums for a few years. The insurance company might have a case to recoup their losses if they can prove some sort of reckless intent but I don’t have enough information to assess that.

Were you expecting jail time? Public flogging? Torture?

What I see here is not a desire for proper justice just lust for vengeance.

[Flying Low]

I have to disagree with CID. Yes, his insurance will go up but not due to the points (unless he has a bunch already). It will be due to the claim against him but who knows...maybe he has one of those policies that "forgives" your first accident.

These fines/points are suppose to be a deterrent. Not much of a deterrent here. Why should I spent a minute in the cold scraping the ice off the car. I might as well try to drive with very restricted visibility...I'll probably be fine. The consequenses of doing this could have been so much worse. Now's the time to sent a message that this is not acceptable...BEFORE someone gets hurt or killed. Maybe jail isn't appropriate but $85 sure is a joke when someone doing 120km/h on the 400 on a clear sunny day gets a higher fine, the same points and is doing something far less dangerous.

[Dust Devil]

CID is a true Canadian. Full of tolerance.

Thank you. I think so too.

Unfortunately In this country we have to tolerate people who are insanely dangerous.

Insanely dangerous? Some guy gets into a car accident and now he’s insanely dangerous? Again what exactly do you think this guy deserves? Based on what I’ve read, I assume both cars are insured and the driver was licensed. The losses to the parked car has been restored and there was no injury.

The guy got a fine relevant to the infraction, and got points against his license that will more than likely raise his insurance premiums for a few years. The insurance company might have a case to recoup their losses if they can prove some sort of reckless intent but I don’t have enough information to assess that.

Were you expecting jail time? Public flogging? Torture?

What I see here is not a desire for proper justice just lust for vengeance.

I think he deserves everything a drunk driver should get. What is the difference of someone who is neglegent in scaping off their windshield and can't see where they are going and some one three sheets to the wind who can't comprehend where they are going.

[CID]

I think he deserves everything a drunk driver should get. What is the difference of someone who is neglegent in scaping off their windshield and can't see where they are going and some one three sheets to the wind who can't comprehend where they are going.

Uh...but he wasn't drunk. If you feel there needs to be some "windshield scraping" legislation to address this apparent unaddressed danger then by all means contact your governement representatives. While you're at it ask about banning cell phone use and make-up application while you're in the driver's seat. In my opinion those are pretty dangerous activities that I'd like to see addressed too.

[Hedley]

CID: after observing you for several years, it becomes apparent that you have a near-pathological need to coerce people to blindly accept whatever the government arbitrarily says or does. This is not a criticism, merely fascination on my part, not entirely unlike observing a petri dish or what grows between my toes.

I understand you work for the government in Ottawa. We should get together sometime for a beer!

[CID]

Do you think the punishment in this case is "arbitrary" Hedley? And no, I don't work for the government in Ottawa.

[Hedley]

In comparison to the punishments for other, lesser offences, yes, this punishment is clearly arbitrarily low.

My apologies as to your locale - my mistake. If you do ever pass through Ottawa, please do stop by my neck of the woods for a Pitts flight and a beer!

[CID]

OK now we’re getting somewhere. You probably (excuse the assumption) understand that the driver in question received “punishment” in accordance with the law, but you feel that law is inadequate in this regard. Is that correct?

That isn’t exactly “arbitrary” now is it. It’s actually probably compliant with the law. Handing out punishment above and beyond what the laws provision for would be “arbitrary” in my opinion.

The fact that speeders are subject to worse fines I think is indicative of public pressure. Speeding is a pretty high profile offense that is a factor in many serious accidents. I don’t think window scraping (or lack thereof) has reached similar levels of public attention so it’s probably lumped in with other minor driving offenses.

So like I said, if you figure the law should be revised to prevent these dangerous “non-scrapers” from re-offending, you should launch a campaign. Hell, I’d sign the petition!

Next time I'm in Bytown I'll down a sarsaparilla in your honor. That’s as much as I can promise.

Cheers

[Hedley]

very minor nit: I understand that if one falls asleep behind the steering wheel of a car in motion, one can be charged with reckless/dangerous driving.

Ordinarily, the act of falling asleep should not be seen as a serious crime

However, when one combines it with the operation of a motor vehicle, according to the gov't, it becomes careless/reckless driving. Your provincial laws may obviously vary.

My point is that when one does not scrape their windows clean, this too is not a serious crime However, when one combines that with the operation of a motor vehicle, it similarly becomes careless/reckless driving.

Careless/reckless driving, resulting in an overturned car, should not be punished by an $85 fine.

[C-GGGQ]

The window scraping factors little into this, the point is he was out driving, he did NOT lose control of the vehicle due to ice or avoiding something he just blindly drove into a car, it was cause by he couldn't see properly because he didn't bother to scrap off the car. Long and short he still totaled two cars because of careless reckless driving. It wasn't a mistake it was a blatant disregard for safety, and he should have gotten much more than a mere $85 fine. If the windshield had been clear and he crashed he would have gotten in much more trouble, but it seems the verdict was "oh he couldn't see that well because of the ice it was an accident" No it wasn't and accident if visibility was bad from blowing snow or something then yes it was an accident, but his visibility was bad because he was too lazy to scrape off the windshield

[HuD 91gt]

@#$!, in BC a seatbelt ticket is 169 dollars (no points though) You got totally canucked on that one... sorry man

$268 here in MB

[BoostedNihilist]

.

[jetmech]

The fact that he drove with "Frosted windows" is careless driving. A fine a hell of alot greater than $85.00. Driving with 'Frosted windows" would also constitue an unsafe vehicle. Yet another wollop of a fine. Would I be seeking the death penalty? Of course not. But heres a scenario that takes place in everyday life. Buddies Girlfriends car is wrote off by an idiot. Say her car is some eight years old give or take, and is in very good shape. Insurance cuts her a cheque for somewhere in the area of $5000.00. Was she looking for a new car at the time? Probably not. Does she need one now? Yes. How much is an average car these days? $25000 to $30000. So because of some dumbass, she's out of pocket an enourmous amount of coin. Now she could go and by a used car, but why? The dumbass should be responsible for the full replacement cost of the car. By that I mean: If its a 1999 civic, then he should replace it with a 2007 Civic, as 99's are presently out of production. Our insurance laws are a total joke, and so is the Court system. Dumbass makes out like a bandit, and buddies girlfriend is left on the hook?

CID, no offence, I don't know you but seriously....