What a ridiculous “street racing” law
http://www.thestar.com/article/261778
Street racers warned: ‘Get bus pass out’
Impound lots being cleared to make room as tough law goes into effect tomorrow, OPP says
September 29, 2007
Curtis Rush
Staff Reporter
The new street-racing law goes into effect tomorrow, and OPP Sgt. Cam Woolley predicts “shock and awe” over the tough new provincial legislation.
If a driver is caught going 50 kilometres over the speed limit, police will impound the vehicle for seven days, issue a minimum $2,000 fine and suspend the driver’s licence for seven days.
Safety officials are upbeat about the new law.
“This is going to be a good day for safety,” said Brian Patterson, president of the Ontario Safety League.
What a difference a day will make. Today, a driver caught going 160 km/h in a 100 km/h zone will receive a summons to appear in court and be on their way. At a minute past midnight, that same offence will get the car impounded immediately “and you better get your bus pass out,” Patterson said.
Woolley said police have been looking for “an immediate consequence” for some time. Police say they are hamstrung by court delays and plea bargains for reduced fines.
“With this law, you will lose your car upfront,” Woolley said. “That will have a tremendous effect.”
OPP Supt. Bill Grodzinski said he expects to see teenage street racers as well as “your 50-year-old businessmen in suits driving really expensive vehicles, sometimes with their families in them” to be affected by the law.
The new law was ushered in after several fatal street-racing crashes this summer.
Then why is it called a street racing law when it is going after people that ae obviously not street racing?
OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino points out that the new law applies to unsafe lane changes, cutting off another vehicle, tailgating and not driving to suit the conditions, such as going over the speed limit in a snowstorm.
Infractions also include “stunt” driving, such as popping wheelies or doing “doughnuts.”
There is no right of appeal in the case of a suspension or impoundment, police say.
Motorists who have no intention of street racing could be snared if they aren’t paying attention to their speed as they come off the highway.
“If a motorist is coming off the 400-series highway at 100 kilometres an hour and hits an 80 zone and then goes through a small town with a 50 zone, they will be 50 over the limit and will get their car impounded,” Woolley said.
Patterson expects at least 300 vehicles to be impounded on Thanksgiving weekend, based on previous statistics for safety enforcement.
Police won’t allow hitch-hiking on major highways, so they will escort a person to a safe place where they can call for a ride.
Impound lots are being cleared to make room for an upswing in business, Woolley said.
About 2,500 motorists were charged last year after being caught going 50 kilometres over the limit and the numbers are close to 5,000 when other infractions covered under this law are factored in, he said.
It’s times like this that make me feel like I’m in the twilight zone
http://www.thestar.com/article/261438
Widow, 77, could lose her home to landlord’s teenage son
September 28, 2007
Joe Fiorito
The ashcan of history is set to receive the crumpled page of September, a month mostly worth forgetting. But here is something memorably cruel.
Anne Bowman’s landlord is dragging her to court. He wants to evict her from the apartment where she has lived for the past 53 years.
Anne, a veteran’s widow, is 77 years old. She is frail after a stroke some years ago, but she still has a sense of occasion. When she knew I was coming to call, she got her hair done and put on her makeup.
That her landlord wants to evict her surpasses understanding.
When I spoke to him two months ago, he said he wanted Anne’s apartment for his son, a good boy, 19 years old, who has his heart set on becoming a police officer.
I don’t know the landlord’s son, but if he urged his father to evict Anne so that he can have her place for his own, then he will make a lousy cop.
And if this ugly business is the father’s doing, what lesson is he teaching that young man?
Anne is getting help from legal aid. She goes to court on Oct. 9.
I am going with her.
Should her lawyer be unable to fight off the eviction, and if Anne should end up on the street, I cannot vouch for my reaction.
On to other matters.
A series of columns about public housing drew this note from a TCHC tenant: “I just want to add my experience re: pest control and management when reporting roaches: When I complained about (how long I would have to) wait for pest control, I was told by management that I would just have to learn to live with them. I told them that this was unacceptable and was told, `Too bad.’
“This is indicative of the prevailing attitude I have experienced in all my dealings with housing management. When renting in the private sector, I never experienced these problems. Action was taken (as soon as) a problem was reported and all units in the building were treated for pests. Consequently, I have never had to live with pests until I moved into (TCHC) housing, where you are treated like a second-class citizen.”
Here’s the thing: her building is owned by us, paid for with our taxes, and managed for the public good on our behalf.
So now I wonder who is the better landlord: the one who wants to kick a 77-year old woman onto the street, or the one who says public housing tenants had better learn to live with roaches? Toss-up, I’d say.
Oh, one last thing.
I let fly earlier about the air show at the CNE. I said it ought to be cancelled. It is a waste of fuel, it is far too noisy, the planes make too many low passes over residential neighbourhoods, and there is no point served by an orgy of military glorification.
I got flak from fogeys, old and young, some of whom could even spell their crude and racist remarks. The prevailing argument is that I and my neighbours should move if we don’t like it.
Sorry, boys. We will not be driven off by the likes of you.
And to those students of history who think we’d all be speaking German if it weren’t for the pilots of yore: one sign of the victory over totalitarianism is the flourishing of a variety of opinion, including ones you don’t care for. Or why did we fight?
Finally, I salute the aviation aficionado who sent this briefly eloquent note: “GFYS.” I take him to mean, “Good For You, Sir.”Joe Fiorito usually appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Email: jfiorito@thestar.ca
Truly one of the greatest articles I’ve ever read
Well done Christopher Hume, well done.
http://www.thestar.com/article/260491
43 years of history vs. 20 parking spots
September 26, 2007
Christopher Hume
URBAN AFFAIRS COLUMNIST
The gap between what the city does and what it says is growing wider.
That became clear recently when we heard that Toronto wants to buy the legendary Matador Club and tear it down to make way for a parking lot. A parking lot! A parking lot!
No, we’re not making this up.
This is in the city that likes to pass itself off as the greenest on the continent. As if.
To add insult to injury – or should that be lunacy to idiocy – we also heard that if the owners of the 43-year-old club aren’t prepared to sell their land to the city for $800,000, it will consider expropriation.
Truly, Toronto has lost its way. Truly, whatever our aspirations may be as a civic entity, they are fast being undone by a bureaucracy so out of touch with reality it’s frightening. And where are the councillors in all this? Does their silence signal agreement? Creeping suburbanization is one thing, but this is neanderthal.
And as if all this isn’t madness enough – expropriating an important site at the corner of College St. and Dovercourt Rd. – the city’s intention is to create a 20-unit parking lot to service the West End YMCA across the road.
The YMCA, no less, a place where people go to exercise, swim, play and generally engage in healthy activities.
“We’ve identified that area as high demand (for parking),” Toronto Parking Authority president Gwyn Thomas told the Star last week.
Maybe someone ought to tell guileless Gwyn that the 1950s are over. Oh, and while they’re at it perhaps they could let Mr. TPA in on something else he may not have heard about – a little thing called global warming. Yep, that’s right, Gwyn, and it’s a big problem everywhere else, if not here. Around the world, cities are actually taking steps to get people out of their cars and onto public transit, bikes, their feet, whatever.
But thanks to people like you, Gwyn, that won’t happen here in Toronto. This is a city that invites you to hop into the family vehicle and drive on downtown for a workout. God forbid anyone should have to take the streetcar, which goes to the front door of the YMCA, or the bus, or that they should be forced to cycle, or, worst of all, walk.
No sir, for us it’s the car or nothing.
Some cities, far, far away from Toronto, impose a fee on those who drive in the city. You and your colleagues may not have heard of them, Gwyn, but they include London, Stockholm and Singapore. In other cities, parking is viewed as a means to control car use. These cities set parking rates high enough to make people think twice about driving downtown.
Not here in Merry Olde Toronto, where we’re only too happy to expropriate and knock down a historic building to oblige the needs of those who must drive, even if it’s only 20 of them. Heritage shmeritage.
As for the development potential of the site, well, there’s lots more where that came from.
Send the wrong message? Who cares about that? Sure this would be considered outrageous in many cities, but this is Toronto. In some cities, parking lots are viewed as a lower order of land use than a building. Indeed, some jurisdictions see parking lots as a way of creating a land inventory for future development. Here, where the city is willing to demolish buildings to make way for parking, we do it the other way around.
So welcome to Toronto, a little behind the times, but a great place to park.
UPDATE:
There is a site dedicated to this cause called, appropriately enough, www.savethematador.com
