ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[Bob_McBob]

Careless driving is considered an incredibly difficult offence to prosecute, which is why driver who strike and kill pedestrians rarely end up with more than a small fail to yield fine.

[tomh009]

Careless driving is considered an incredibly difficult offence to prosecute, which is why driver who strike and kill pedestrians rarely end up with more than a small fail to yield fine.

And the same thing may happen here, too.

[panamaniac]

Careless driving is considered an incredibly difficult offence to prosecute, which is why driver who strike and kill pedestrians rarely end up with more than a small fail to yield fine.

Why?

[jeffster]

Careless driving is considered an incredibly difficult offence to prosecute, which is why driver who strike and kill pedestrians rarely end up with more than a small fail to yield fine.

Why?

Likely because people lawyer up and makes it harder to convict, so they plead guilty to a lesser charge.

Though keep in mind, there is Careless Driving and Careless Driving Causing Bodily Harm or Death and it's only been in law since September 2018. While not a 'criminal conviction', technically you could do jail time (I have no idea how that works) if properly convicted.

[tomh009]

It's also harder to convict because "careless" is a somewhat subjective term, whereas an illegal left turn, for example, is pretty much black-and-white whether the accused did it or not.

[Spokes]

Careless driving is considered an incredibly difficult offence to prosecute, which is why driver who strike and kill pedestrians rarely end up with more than a small fail to yield fine.

And the same thing may happen here, too.

Do we not have vehicular manslaughter?

[jeffster]

And the same thing may happen here, too.

Do we not have vehicular manslaughter?

I believe this falls under "dangerous driving causing death" or "careless driving causing death" depending if there is a criminal element to it (one might be driving too fast and killing someone, the other might be fail to yield killing someone).

Unless you ran over someone on purpose, than it would be then 1st or 2nd degree murder.

[danbrotherston]

Careless driving is a much more serious charge than drivers typically face for this sort of thing. And just a reminder the driver who killed Robert Linsley had that charge dropped because it was a bit dark on King St.

You're right, that is a good point, drivers have just been charged with "making an improper turn" or something like that, a far less serious charge....I didn't even notice that.

Ugh, pretty typical....yeah, please keep reminding us that "I didn't care to look out for cyclists cause...eh...slightly dark" is a sufficient justification for murder as long as you're driving a car.

[ijmorlan]

Careless driving is a much more serious charge than drivers typically face for this sort of thing. And just a reminder the driver who killed Robert Linsley had that charge dropped because it was a bit dark on King St.

You're right, that is a good point, drivers have just been charged with "making an improper turn" or something like that, a far less serious charge....I didn't even notice that.

Ugh, pretty typical....yeah, please keep reminding us that "I didn't care to look out for cyclists cause...eh...slightly dark" is a sufficient justification for murder as long as you're driving a car.

On top of all the other considerations, do we really need to prosecute somebody who just put themselves in hospital with their carelessness, without endangering anybody else?

If we replace the bicycle with a car and the LRV with a bicycle, then you have an innocent but dead (possibly) cyclist and an unharmed automobile driver who is in need of prosecution. In this case, though, the cyclist didn’t endanger anybody else and is spending a few days in hospital, probably followed by an extensive period of healing.

If all collisions only harmed the at-fault party, I don’t think we would even need driving laws. It’s only because one person driving badly can hurt someone else that the law needs to come into it. There isn’t a law against cutting your thumb off with a paring knife while preparing dinner.

[Momo26]

Gotdamn another problem with LRT and during my morning commute. Sign said 55 min to next one - lady on intercom going on about shuttle buses in a completely seperate part of the track so I take mitigation measures and grab the one going opposite way so I can catch a bus to DTK. Then I see the one I would need zoom by.

Bus drivers have no clue - treated like completely seperate entity. I dunno what the hell is going on

[danbrotherston]

[Momo26]

Yah, it's one thing to not divulge the reasons if there a POLICE investigation going on..okay fine. But be more clear with what's happening in terms of trains and detours...my issue is, so you have the shuttle buses running specifically between those two stops...it does not explicitly state which direction...one could infer Fairview bound as GRH comes before Kitchener Market, but that's an ass-umption.

Second, how does this effect the REST of the line, in terms of exact, to-the-minute delays? Display said 55mins at Block Line Station, so I think 'oh crap, no trains are coming this way for about an hour - and even that might be an estimate only. There are no obvious buses heading where I need to go at Block line, but there is at least one at Fairway Station, so I go THAT way instead, as a train is approaching heading there (somehow). Then I see one has left Fairway heading to downtown (maybe it'll end and kick everyone off at Market Station - this would have worked for me, but barely), but I did not know this and again, the signage said 55mins!

Bus drivers are kept out of the loop completely - despite all being part of the K-W Public transit NETWORK.

It's frustrating, infuriating. We depend on the transit that our tax dollars subsidize (LRT being built on property tax dollars). So get. it. right.

[JJTL]

On top of all the other considerations, do we really need to prosecute somebody who just put themselves in hospital with their carelessness, without endangering anybody else?

If we replace the bicycle with a car and the LRV with a bicycle, then you have an innocent but dead (possibly) cyclist and an unharmed automobile driver who is in need of prosecution. In this case, though, the cyclist didn’t endanger anybody else and is spending a few days in hospital, probably followed by an extensive period of healing.

If all collisions only harmed the at-fault party, I don’t think we would even need driving laws. It’s only because one person driving badly can hurt someone else that the law needs to come into it. There isn’t a law against cutting your thumb off with a paring knife while preparing dinner.

I wonder if they are considering there is endangerment to the passengers on the train. Train makes sudden unexpected stop to try avoiding cyclist and passengers of all ages get thrown around the train, could certainly result in injuries I would think (although not to the extent the cyclist endured). Just a thought.

[ijmorlan]

On top of all the other considerations, do we really need to prosecute somebody who just put themselves in hospital with their carelessness, without endangering anybody else?

If we replace the bicycle with a car and the LRV with a bicycle, then you have an innocent but dead (possibly) cyclist and an unharmed automobile driver who is in need of prosecution. In this case, though, the cyclist didn’t endanger anybody else and is spending a few days in hospital, probably followed by an extensive period of healing.

If all collisions only harmed the at-fault party, I don’t think we would even need driving laws. It’s only because one person driving badly can hurt someone else that the law needs to come into it. There isn’t a law against cutting your thumb off with a paring knife while preparing dinner.

I wonder if they are considering there is endangerment to the passengers on the train. Train makes sudden unexpected stop to try avoiding cyclist and passengers of all ages get thrown around the train, could certainly result in injuries I would think (although not to the extent the cyclist endured). Just a thought.

That is a fair point. Overall I hope the most vulnerable people on an LRV are seated, but an emergency stop still does have the potential of causing injury. Incidentally, does anyone know how fast an emergency stop is? I mean, is it like a bus stopping suddenly or more sudden than that?

[taylortbb]

Incidentally, does anyone know how fast an emergency stop is? I mean, is it like a bus stopping suddenly or more sudden than that?

The LRVs have magnetic track brakes, where the vehicle magnetically attaches itself to rail to bring itself to a pretty rapid stop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_brak...ack_brakes

I don't know the exact stopping speed, but my understanding is that it's somewhat faster than a bus. The drivers get on the intercom and make sure the passengers are okay after every use, so there's definitely an expectation of injuries.