08-10-2016, 04:39 PM
(08-10-2016, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote: When you say it’s difficult, what makes you say that? Speed limits are practically impossible to enforce objectively without special equipment, so police forces equip themselves with that equipment.
If every police force in Ontario equips police officers with the Ottawa style range measurement device, that seems like a pretty good equivalent to speed traps - special initiatives to catch people breaking the law in places that it is problematic. So enforcement of both laws is probably equivalent for these cases.
(08-10-2016, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote: But they can and do enforce speed limits even without the use of that equipment when it’s abundantly clear that the rule is being broken. Police could do that with this rule, too: it can be pretty obvious when a motorist is passing someone on a bicycle too closely, and at least some of those times there must be a police officer around. The fact that they only laid 19 charges in nearly a year means that practically none of them were trying.
Can you clarify how they enforce speed limits without special equipment? As far as I know, all the penalties for speeding require a measurement of the speed the vehicle is travelling. There is no way for a police officer driving a car to measure the passing distance of another car to a cyclist. This would be the equivalent of radar/lidar in police vehicles. Perhaps video would verify after the fact, but I would imagine the police officer would still have to make the judgment call at the time. So how close does the police officer have to be for their estimation of the passing distance to be reliable?
The chances of a police officer being around for the less than one second duration of the offence are also significantly lower than for someone who is speeding.