Nice:
Cars adapted for street racing can be seized and destroyed, even if charges haven't been laid and a race has not taken place, Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant said Wednesday.Bryant warned potential racers that all it takes is a tip from police to seize and destroy their cars. Car junkies who pour thousands of dollars into their vehicles to make them as fast as possible are wasting their money, Bryant said.
"If we can establish someone has parts and they're juicing up their car — obviously for the purpose of street racing — then we can seize those vehicles," Bryant said.
"We will seize it and you will never see it again. We will crush your car, we will crush the parts." -- cbc.ca
I miss the old days where we actually waited for someone to commit a crime before we punished them. I suppose this is to be expected in a country where we enjoy less protection of our private property than a citizen of communist China does.
On the bright side... at least this is consistent with theory of "government knows best". Also consistent with the crowd that wants to ban or take away anything that MIGHT hurt someone in the wrong hands. Amusing to read some of the comments on the G&M website - some of the strongest advocates for gun control are against this.
> take away anything that MIGHT hurt someone in the wrong hands.
In this case, is it something that MIGHT hurt someone, or something that is MEANT to hurt someone?
There is always a silver lining in every cloud. The good news in this story is that there is apparently someone left in Onterrible with enough after-tax disposable income to actually be able to spend money to pimp their ride.
Cannuckistan indeed.
It depends on the definition of "modified for street racing". If there is an objectively true definition of this, then the government is doing us all a favour by taking such cars off the streets.
It's no different than seizing illegal substances.
We're not allowed to drive a car that has failed emission standards, so how would this differ from that?
Cars that are checked and deemed unsafe are taken off the road; how does it differ from that?
Street-racing is especially heinous because it is a wifull, intentional activity, and innocent people are usually its victims.
Provided there is an objective definition, and they are not just penalizing people who have cars with powerful engines, I'm in favour of it.
I'm afraid for my children's brains, that they may someday be poisoned/hurt by the opinions spewed from the CBC. It's obvious what should be done..
Not only is it wifull, it's willful, not to mention wilful too.
I despair for my country at times, but have little sympathy for Torontonians. Just like the palestinians (I don't capitalize it because they're neither a 'state' nor a 'race'). Anyway, as I was saying, just like them the populace has gotten what it wished for.
Man, I'm gonna buy some stock in a company than manufactures vehicle trailers, because I know of thousands of people who drive their cars Monday to Friday, and then race them on weekends.
Or the many thousands of 'rides' out there that we see at every 'show n' shine'. There's some serious horse-power in those things.
Or are we gonna have somemore bureaucrats deciding by some arcane points system as to what the 'intent' of the vehicle is before deciding to send it to the crusher.
I swear, we're becoming more like Russia than the U.S., each and every day.
Well, you know, if ONE innocent pedestrian or ordinary driver can be saved ...
Looks like CANADUUHH has been taken over by the realy dim witted jerks and the wackos whinning about this global warming poppycock bull kaka
some more time and only donkeys in ontario allowed
The Minority Report. Pre-Crime... Orwell didn't think far enough ahead...
pun'dit: watch the language, please.
Oh sure, I'd like to ban all our problems, but that's never worked before, so why start now?
I think it's important to pay attention to the central point in Sean's post. This isn't about whether or not one misbehaves via a high-power vehicle on the public streets; that is and should be an offence.
This is about being the owner of a high-powered vechicle, on a public street, even if one is not misbehaving. Even if one is innocent of any reasonable offence, even if charges haven't been laid and a race has not taken place. Even if one is driving down a public street, calmly, slowly, and without error, on the way to the race track.
Down that road lies deamons. The concept of innocent until proven guilty has evolved for a reason. If we deny the concept of responsibility, a priori, then we suffer the loss of responsiblity, ipso facto. As Boris Yeltsin said: "Everything which was not permitted was forbidden. Whatever was permitted was mandatory. Citizens were shackled in their actions by the universal passion for banning things."
Meanwhile, we have silly problems like some idiots with loud motorcyles making it impossible to carry on a conversation on Whyte Avenue on a Saturday afternoon. Will city council enforce the existing noise bylaws to charge the miscreants? Of course not. But they will consider banning motorcycles, even quiet ones. Why? Because they are stark raving bonkers.
Pay attention: punish bad behaviour, not unindicted property ownership, else ye risk the wrath of the gods.
So does this include the souped "chasecars" the OPP uses? You know the ones on the 401,well,when they aren't protecting the natives at Caledonia from the lawful landowners?
Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on banning smoking in public places?
Assuming you are speaking to me, MN, perhaps I can respond with this previous essay I wrote on the matter, since it's getting late and I want to keep things short.
If we want to make tobacco illegal it is simply a matter of scheduling it in the relevant federal drug act, just like we do for cocaine and marijuana, and could for alcohol or caffine. As long as tobacco remains legal in Canada, Edmonton City Council is justified only in regulating, for the common good, the municipal commons circumstances in which public use of tobacco may occur. Council is not justified in abusing the Municpal Government Act of Alberta to unconstitionally deny citizens their freedom of association for the purpose of enjoying legal tobacco.
Before Edmonton's new anti-smoking bylaw, 17% of the restaurants in Edmonton allowed smoking, and 20% of Edmontonians smoked. Smoking was prohibited in the context of all essential services. Nobody was forced to be a customer or staff of any premises where smoking was allowed. In what way was that distribution of services, to people as they choose, unfair?
Shouldn't our government be doing its level best to come up with mechanisms by which people with differing personal views are accommodated? Isn't that what a pluralistic society means? Why can't tobacco aficionados just go over into their little corner of society and be left alone?
If I want to smoke my pipe at the Klondike Days Parade, I'll wet my finger, figure out the wind direction, and smoke downwind of everyone. Can't you rabid anti-smokers be as gracious, once we've gotten out of your way? City council's rudeness in going so far as to ban private functions established for the sole purpose of enjoying the occasional cigar or pipe (along with a little port and stilton) suggests not.
The freedom to choose whether or not to participate in private voluntary endeavours is, in Canada, assigned by the Charter to the individual citizen. Canadians work together to ensure that our fundamental freedoms are not hijacked by the state in the idealistic pursuit of some unattainable utopia.
For example, a few percent of society is gay, yet we seem to be able to accommodate their freedom of association, even though some people find some of their behaviour to be artificial. A few percent of society is aboriginal, yet we seem to be able to accommodate their freedom of association, even though some people find some of their behaviour to be neolithic.
And yet, strangely, even though far more Edmontonians are tobacco aficionados, some people want to deny their freedom of association, because some people find some of their behaviour to be artifical, or neolithic. Shall we close the bath houses? Shall we close the sweat lodges? Shall we close the cigar clubs? What about public houses? What about churches? What about second-hand bad parenting?
People can accept a lot of restrictions on the commons in the name of getting along, but only to a point, after which there are all sorts of nasty names for those kinds of tragedy of government. Defining private establishments that provide non-essential services as being part of the commons is something our government should not do.
City council has overstepped the bounds of peace, order, and good government in the drafting and application of the new smoking bylaw. Edmontonians know that absolutism in the drafting or application of the law is not good government. Yet we have at hand the evidence from council's handling of the smoking lounges at the Canadian Legion, at the Keep It Simple club, and on aboriginal property.
It is wrong for city council to subvert the course of good government so as to attempt to deny behaviour that is legal and is protected by the Charter's clause 2 guarantees of the fundamental freedoms of belief, speach, association and assembly.
The responsible behaviour for council at this time is to rescind bylaw 13333 and return to the drawing board. Council's duty is to come up with regulations that (1) accommodate those who want to be secure from tobacco smoke, and (2) accommodate those who want to associate and assemble for the purpose of legally enjoying the company of fellow tobacco afficionados.
Never forget the words of John Stuart Mill: "Neither one person, nor any number of persons, is warranted in saying to another human creature of ripe years that he shall not do with his life for his own benefit what he chooses to do with it. All errors he is likely to commit against advice and warning are far outweighed by the evil of allowing others to constrain him to do what they deem his good."
We must all stand on guard against those who would violate our Charter's belief, speach, association, and assembly guarantees. We must not tailor our laws to placate a clique of anti-tobacco zealots riding around in the pockets of a cabal of opportunistic litigators. Zealots do not respect the rule of law in a tolerant democracy, they besmirch it. We don't want to do that.
Tolerant democracy isn't about endorsing a dominant ideology, it's about accommodating multiple perspectives within the law. If council and their advisers in the administration are telling us that they can't do that, then they are not earning their keep.
Cars adapted for street racing can be seized and destroyed, even if charges haven't been laid and a race has not taken place, Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant said Wednesday
Bryant might love his family and his dog, but that position is still pathetic in someone who ostensibly is charged with ensuring the freedom of citizens.
"People shouldn't be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people." V for Vendetta (Movie)
About time that the politicians got some backbone andset about to make the streets safer. Anyone who has that little intelligence that they will spend the big bucks to set up a vehicle for street racing deserves to have it confiscated. Next is to go after the manufactures who are clearly advertizint their high powered crap.
About time that the politicians got some backbone and set about to make the streets safer. Anyone who has that little intelligence that they will spend the big bucks to set up a vehicle for street racing deserves to have it confiscated. Next is to go after the manufactures who are clearly advertizing their high powered crap.
It's about time that the government did something about automobiles whose sole purpose is to kill pedestrians. As a physician I see the devastation caused by automobiles on a daily basis from vehicular trauma to deaths from diabetes and MI's which are directly the result of automobiles.
Registration was tried with automobiles but it has proved be be an utter failure and prohibition appears to be the only solution. There is no need for anyone who lives in a large city to own an automobile and all of Canada's major metropolitan centers should be designate as automotive free zones in which the only vehicles present would be driven by police, the military or highly screened individuals who require them for work purposes (like doctors). Every individual who would want to drive in a city would be required to undergo a yearly psychiatric examination and licensing would require the approval of the individuals spouse who would be questioned if there had been any history of violence or road rage. Once an individual has been cleared to own an automobile, they would need to apply for a fuel acquisition certificate (FAC) which would allow them to purchase fuel and records of all fuel sales would be kept. If they wished to travel, they would need to apply for an Authorization to Travel (ATT) which would allow an individual licensed to posess an automobile to drive certain routes which would be specified on their ATT as well as the hours during which they would be permitted to operate the motor vehicle. In order to ensure compliance, each vehicle would be fitted with a GPS system so that the police could ascertain if the vehicle was being driven in accordance with the terms of the ATT.
Penalties for vehicular crimes are far too light and mandatory minimum sentences should be imposed for various vehicular offences. Unsafe storage of a vehicle should result in a mandatory 2 year jail sentence. The operator of such a dangerous piece of machinery should ensure that it cannot be stolen and this would require removing all four tires and the battery of the vehicle when it was not in use as well as mandatory steering wheel locks. Any unauthorized modification of the vehicle should also be severely punished. Certain vehicular modifications have no possible use among civilians such as large capacity gasoline tanks, camoflage paint schemes or bulletproof glass. Mere possession of a large capacity gasoline tank should result in a mandatory minimum sentence. All vehicular crimes should fall under the criminal code.
The advantages of severely restricting vehicles would become apparent very soon. Convicted felons would no longer be able to acquire vehicles either legally or illegally and such crimes as drive by shootings would be a thing of the past. Thieves would be restricted to carrying their loot on foot or on bicycles and would be easy prey for police who would travel in vehicles. The epidemic of obesity which threatens the Canadian population with extinction would be reversed as people would be forced to walk. This would result in immense savings to the health care system and the cost of automotive related diseases is estimated to be over $500 billion/year in Canada alone.
Within a generation Canada can become automobile free and the envy of other countries who are under the control of the death-dealing automotive lobby.
Lemm see, john...faster, more agile, better handling, meticulously cared-for cars make the streets more dangerous.
Yup. That makes sense.
It also means I oughtta get a civic medal for my 94 Taurus wagon...I don't even think of street racing that car.
loki: with regulations as well thought out, easily and clearly understood and well-intentioned (not to mention unarguably justified) as that, I see no reason to impose minimium sentences at all.
Best to simply execute offenders. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. I daresay your proposal lacks boldness as it stands.
Wow. What are all the folks with BMW's going to do. Those mothers are fast. Or stock Hemi Chargers?
I am going to buy a supercharger for my M3, then spend my last dime taking this one to the supreme court. Of course I will die penniless in prison for challenging this shaft of brilliance. My death more proof for these geniuses that high performance kills.
You can go ahead and throw this law onto the bonfire of liberties with all the other laws against non-crimes, thought-crimes and pre-crimes which people have been sucked into supporting.
It should be clear yet from the Caledonia fiasco, the GTA greendoggle - err, greenbelt - gun control, the War on Drugs and a thousand other government scams, that seizing property and instilling fear in the populace is the purpose of government, and not an accidental side effect of its self-appointed job "helping" people.
I couldn't be bothered reading the CBC article, but I'm sure they have some heart-wrenching quotes from victims of street racers, leading people to conclude that if you oppose this law you are a heartless fiend who wants to see little girls run down in the street. "Let us expand government or you'll kill little girls" ... now where have I heard that before?
posted by loki "highly screened individuals who require them for work purposes (like doctors). '"
Hilarious. Commissar loki has decided his profession should be excluded, even though we all know Doctors don't make house calls. I guess he needs his car to drive to and from hospital once a day. Everyone else with a job has to take a bus to theirs.
Loki, your eminence, your are a selfish, self centred, self important, unprincipled goofball.
Best to simply execute offenders. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. I daresay your proposal lacks boldness as it stands.
Thanks for the suggestion Ron. Execution seems rather wastefull, though, and I think that we should look at the Chinese example and use automotive criminals as organ donors. This would result in huge benefits to the medical system and would make up for the shortage of organ donors that would occur once automobiles were no longer as prevalent.
"Anyone who has that little intelligence that they will spend the big bucks to set up a vehicle for street racing deserves to have it confiscated."
Stop it. You're scaring me. Next you'll be confiscating someone's stereo system for having too many watts of power. That throbbing you feel in your chest from the bass in the car beside you has just got to be bad for one's health.
Bye, bye ATV's, snowmobiles and personal water craft. Those things are killers.
"Anyone who has that little intelligence that they will spend the big bucks to set up a vehicle for street racing deserves to have it confiscated."
Stop it. You'r scaring me. Who made you czar?
Next you'll be confiscating stereos you consider too powerful. That throbbing bass from the car behind you thats making your chest vibrate just has to be bad for your health.
Bye bye, ATVs. So long personal water craft and snowmobiles. People cannot be trusted to behave in a responsible manner, so away with you.
Meanwhile, it's the same fools who base their decisons on 'feelings' about things they've decided they don't like, rather than any common sense. These are the same fools who would block the Conservative's proposed bill calling for minimum sentences for serious crimes. CONSISTENTLY Give convicted street racers serious time and the loss of their vehicles and you'll suddenly see far less of this crime.
Apology for the double post. The second is a 'rebuild' of the first, which I thought I'd lost before posting.
loki: of course. My thinking was well-directed but insufficient. I was looking only at the savings; dead people have low maintenance costs. I missed the organ-donor factor because I wasn't thinking generously enough or with enough foiresight.
Please direct me to the nearest correction center. My shame is unbearable. I owe my fellow citizens so much more.
loki: you can't fool me; you are pimping for Minister of Health in the comming new Dion Government; aren't you?
I think we need a new movement to ban people who want to ban things.
I had to laugh at the tough talk. Something like .. * or their fast cars will be crushed into a cube shaped block of scrap*, or something similar.
There are two types of *Power Car* owners.
The responsible owner has a sleek powerhouse ride, but would never risk a street race.
These guys show up at Mission raceway on the weekend, open out the side exhaust ports and are careful to take every safety measure in organized drags.
The brightest of our leaders have a certified way to determine the difference between these two types.
They will carefully approach the suspect muscle car with an extended devining rod and thus crush only the *proven* street racer*s vehicles. 89% accurate. Guaranteed!= TG
From "thought crimes" ( 'Hate Speech" )
to
"car crimes..."
Who'd a' thunk it?
From "thought crimes" ( 'Hate Speech" )
to
"car crimes..."
Who'd a' thunk it?
so, the folks who brought us Caledonia, contraband ciggy crisis, 15% of Ontario's population with no family doctor, depression in eastern Ontario, tourism industry declining at a rate of 12% per year, etc, etc, etc, are now going to become self-appointed experts on "racing" cars????these idiots should get their heads out of their a$$es and focus on real problems, not these pseudo smokescreens designed to distract the voting public from chimpy mcliars real track record...but knowing the idiot trawna voter like I do, it will probably work.....LIBRANO MORONS!
All part of Ontario's crackdown on men and masculinity. Where is the ban on talking on a cellphone while driving, which causes more accidents than street racing?
My car right from the factory has a speedometer that goes to 220 km/h. If the government finds out can they confiscate it?
Oh great.
Now we live in a province where actual criminals--those who have been proven guilty of street racing in a court of law (supposedly)--get next-to-no punishment, in the form of house arrest in their parents' mansions, but where those who have not been proven guilty of street racing in a court of law, but are only suspected of being about to street race, can be decreed guilty and are punished.
McGuilty-Land is truly beyond parody. The most ridiculous juxtapositions are already in place.
Oh great.
Now we live in a province where actual criminals--those who have been proven guilty of street racing in a court of law (supposedly)--get next-to-no punishment, in the form of house arrest in their parents' mansions, but where those who have not been proven guilty of street racing in a court of law, but are only suspected of being about to street race, can be decreed guilty and are punished.
McGuilty-Land is truly beyond parody. The most ridiculous juxtapositions are already in place.
Geothermal can't you recognise Loki's sarcasm, which was brilliant.
As shown by the recent court decision here in Toronto when you do kill someone through street racing there is no punishment anyway. Two years house arrest allowing the 2 killers to attend school doesn't sound too onerous does it, if so as they promised not to do it again, maybe we could lighten it up a bit.
Awesome loki!
Actually that sounds like North Korea... nice clean streets!
In a similar vein to Loki, I'm concerned about the potential for the expression of bigotry and racism in blogs. I think everyone who owns a computer with internet access should have it seized and crushed, lest they be tempted to write something bad or double-plus-bad in blogs. /sarc off
In a more serious vein, I am concerned about politicians, particularly those with socialist or communist leanings. Their ideologies are loaded with concepts and practices that are inherently bad for society. I think that any politician who exhibit socialist leanings should have their brain confiscated and crushed.
Back in the good ol' days we took our drag races out into the country and bagged the crap out of our engines and ourselves and only had to be worried about being skinned alive by Pop when we threw a rod or blew an engine.
These damned asians and nine irons are racing their bloody piss burners at high speed in residential areas. And because none of 'em can drive, they are causing major carnage.
My small town has turned into a big city in the last 40 years, and now, every night the screaming engines go all night long down the minor street behind my house. The speed limit is 60 clicks. That goes on until about 1:00 or 2:00 at night. Then there are the sirens and the ambulances adding to the racket.
I can live with all that; but what galls me is that these street fighter pilots usually take somebody with them when they erase themselves from the gene pool.
We need to take driving seriously. Running stop signs and red lights should be right up there with drunk driving. And racing in residential areas is a no brainer too.
In addition, we need places for these people to race. Something affordable where everyone can take part. As it is the Nanny State is just begging for rebellion from the young hellions that just want to enjoy some motor sport.
Crushing cars is just going to make more enemies for our cops.
How typical of a liberal government to declare war against things, rather than the people who use them. If Michael Bryant wanted to take useful action against these maniacs who street race, he should be demanding his Provincial Court judges sentence them to the maximum possible under the (new) law.
This idiocy will never get off the ground, btw. Where will it stop? Are they going to start crushing those classic Camaros/Chargers etc. where the (40yr+) owners have spent hundreds of hours souping up old '350s or '383s, but don't race them? Why not go after stock 'Vettes & Porsches? Hey! I've seen a couple of Lambos & DB7's here in the GTA: better flatten those too, eh?
Can you imagine the Toronto Police hooking up some Rosedale lawyer's 911 & hauling it off to the wrecker, because it's capable of doing 150 mph?
And not to harp on an old and tired subject, either, but - of course - none of this would be possible if Canadians were protected by a Charter of Rights worth the paper it was written on that guaranteed property rights.
mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm
In a country, where a school principal thinks that her school policy is superior to the Charter and Criminal Code, and where a school board superintendent thinks that the laws should not be taken literally, everything is possible for a provincial AG. This fucking country is full of people, for whom lawmaking is a part of life, despite they never ran for a public office.
If anyone seriously doubt's loki's scenario could happen, IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE (for gun owners).
On a related note the Ontario government will intern all males between the ages of 16 and 25. This should prevent most of the cars from being built in the first place.
If they were that serious about road safety then they would seize the cars of those convicted of drunk driving. But then again look at the demographic of those convicted of drunk driving vs. street racing; if I was a lefttard I'd be squeeking about racism right now.
You know, there has to be a way to use this to confiscate GOVERnMENT vehicles and their minions.
You know call in a tip on the MPP XYZ ( or his son) has a "powerful street racer" (tm) ....are about to race, or some high power lawyer with an M5...fool him into showing up for a street race.
Heck. It's almost tempting to buy a clapped out racer, and rev the engine a couple of times at a light to get it confiscated, surely somewhere there's a couple of lawyers willing to go after the government on this.
What legal morons we have.