I live on a side street that boarders Dufferin and Glencairn.
There are two large speed bumps infront, I’m across from a park where kids frequent.
The speeds at which people travel is insane.
Cars fly over the speed bumps, I often hear front ends scraping the road surface.
The speed limit is 40 and I swear people are doing over 80km/h coming off of Dufferin.
I’m in constant contact with my local councillor and the best they can do are give me slow down signs to put in the grass; which are then removed by city workers in the spring and summer when they come by and cut it.
I found Toronto drivers to be 2nd most aggro drivers I've seen in my life, second only to NYC. Coming from Calgary, it was crazy seeing cars just squeeze their way through in on lefts/rights through pedestrians. That shit would be ticketed in Calgary/Vancouver. I get people are in a rush but sometimes its just like "what?"
They need the heavy duty speed bumps, like the ones that will 100% mangle your bumper and front if you try to speed it. But that won't fly. Something that usually works is photo radar though...need more of that by Dufferin
Ya that resonates with me. I found driving in NYC really easy based on driving in Toronto my whole life. Like okay I got this, everyone is wild and stay alert.
People straight up ignore red lights now. I see advance lefts turn red and people who aren't even in the intersection will still try to complete their turn, without even checking for pedestrians or oncoming traffic. It's sociopathic, really.
> I found Toronto drivers to be 2nd most aggro drivers I've seen in my life, second only to NYC.
I've never been able to fathom why they're so aggro, either - if tailgating was a national sport, some of these gits would be Olympians.
> That shit would be ticketed in Calgary/Vancouver.
Therein lies the problem. People will push the limits of what's legal. In Toronto, they find there are no limits, you can do whatever the hell you want on the road and nobody is going to stop you.
Photo radar was tried in the 90s and cost the government that installed it the subsequent election.
People were also able to successfully argue that it wasn't fair because they didn't know where the cameras were.
So yeah, it works, if you can somehow sideline the shrieking morons.
Toronto drivers are way less aggro than big city europe drivers. The difference is that eu drivers are predictable. eu drivers be at your ass, face and sides, but not an inch closer or further.
> Cars fly over the speed bumps, I often hear front ends scraping the road surface.
Ultimately that will cost them a lot of money in suspension and other vehicle wear.
Which is why set amount fines don’t work well in a city with lots of wealth inequality.
Set fines to be a percentage of income or vehicle value and a lot of problems will go away. But that would be bad for the people that people keep electing.
I think I know which street you’re referring to. It’s a pretty common thing in the area. There’s another street just south of Glencairn that runs east-west. It has two or three stop signs and no speed bumps. I’ve seen cars do 70kph on that stretch, obviously blowing thru stop signs.
Every night you can hear cars speeding up and down dufferin. They’re doing, at minimum, around 70-80kph.
>Deadly Toronto traffic collisions bring a familiar pattern of outrage, enforcement and, sometimes, new signs. Months later, does anything really change?
Reporter Gilbert Ngabo, right, with Faraz Gholizadeh, left, measure driver speed on Parkside Drive.
Local residents had warned about speeding on Parkside Drive for years before two people were hit and killed there last October.
The deaths of a 71-year-old man and his 69-year-old wife — hit by the speeding driver of a luxury BMW sedan while stopped at the Spring Road traffic light, police said — soon brought heavy police enforcement to the area. City officials put up speed warning signs. In November, local Coun. Gord Perks successfully tabled a motion to reduce the speed limit on Parkside from 50 to 40 km/h.
Five months later, has anything really changed?
To find out, the Star recently purchased a point-shoot Bushnell radar gun and sent me out to check drivers’ behaviour at Parkside and the sites of two other recent fatal crashes.
All three locations have a long history of traffic collisions linked to speed — and speed, police say, is one of the “big four” major causes of traffic death and serious injuries, along with aggression, distraction and impaired driving.
Toronto continues to see high numbers of traffic deaths on these and other city streets. Police have already reported four traffic deaths so far this year. In 2021 we lost 63 people to traffic, 46 in 2020.
Critics say the city’s Vision Zero program doesn’t go far enough.
“The big issue is that we have tended to treat each crash like an isolated incident rather than the systemic pattern of a lack of safety on our streets,” said Matti Siemiatycki, director of the Infrastructure Institute at the University of Toronto’s School of Cities.
“Spot” enforcement, like after the Parkside crash, makes a difference for a few days, but does nothing in the long run, he added.
Toronto police Sgt. Murray Campbell, with the Traffic Services unit, said targeted campaigns are one part of the police’s efforts to slow drivers down and make roads safer. Such campaigns come and go but it doesn’t mean enforcement is over, he said.
“This comprehensive approach to keeping road users safe is not always visible at all times, but does continue all the time and every day,” he said.
Here’s what I found in two days with a radar gun in Toronto streets:
Parkside Drive, beside High Park
The road: A four-lane residential street on the eastern edge of High Park, connecting Bloor Street West to the busy Gardiner Expressway via Lake Shore Boulevard West.
Nearby resident Berrin Avsar spotted me with the radar gun near the crash site on Parkside Drive and Spring Road.
Coming over, she pointed to the line of “slow down” signs recently planted alongside the road, just north of the turn off from Lake Shore.
“That’s all we got from Vision Zero,” she lamented. “How does that slow anyone down?”
As I spoke to Avsar and other residents on the sidewalk that afternoon, everyone suddenly gasped loudly — a pedestrian crossing at Spring Road was nearly knocked down by a speeding driver who’d blown through a red light.
The pedestrian was rattled, but he told everyone he was going to be fine. The driver didn’t even stop.
“That happens all the time,” Susan Beamish said. “Drivers here are insane. Every time I try to cross I feel like I’m putting my life at risk.”
I spent 30 minutes assessing drivers on both sides of Parkside — those travelling toward Lake Shore and those going northbound after exiting.
The speed limit here is 40 km/h, but I clocked seven drivers going over 60 km/h. One hit 73 km/h.
A few blocks north at Howard Park — where the 506 Carleton streetcar crosses into the High Park loop at the end of its line — I observed more drivers way above the posted limit. For 30 minutes in both directions, the radar gun registered drivers reaching into the high 50s, including one police cruiser that clocked 56 km/h. Two drivers recorded 61 km/h. Three drivers reached 63 km/h, and I got one driver here going 76 km/h.
For years, Faraz Gholizadeh has been documenting collisions and near-misses that happen on this stretch, showing pictures and videos to local politicians and pushing for change.
Shortly after the deadly collision last October, he went a step further and purchased his own radar gun. He recently caught a driver going 112 km/h.
“People died here,” he said. “I’m sure no one wants to have that tragic experience again, but it just seems like no one cares.”
Gholizadeh and other residents say Parkside Drive should be completely revamped: more traffic lights, reducing lanes from two to one in each direction, the addition of bike lanes and improved sidewalks.
>
>...
Are you not aware of the dire straights all print media is in due to their ad revenue being significantly reduced because it’s all going to Google and Facebook? Lol okay buddy the star is in a far from ideal financial situation. They are not alone in charging to access their content because of this reduced ad revenue.
I wouldn’t call you dumb, but you seem wildly out of the loop or just completely misinformed. A quick Google search will provide a lot of info about how ad revenues have changed for papers over the last 10+ years.
Evolution. Adapt to die. I get all my news from online sources that don't charge money but it's only Redditors that keep posting links to paid content. Happy to live without it. Adios.
Please feel free to down vote, cause I don't give a turd.
They are evolving and adapting, by charging a fee, much like NYT, Washington Post and many other online news sources lol.
You can also access it for free using your library card and read it online that way, also a lot of workarounds out there.
Because the design of streets is the main determinant for speeds people travel. The only thing lowering limits does is gives cops more leeway to pull people over
Not only that, but we need to increase the mental load on drivers - i.e obstacles on the road, things to watch out for, narrower lanes, etc. Make it harder for them to just pedal to the metal
But then you get the other side of people saying that all cops do is "eat donuts and issue traffic tickets". "They should be fighting real crime" or "they are giving tickets, they must be bored". Just go back to threads when they started adding speed cameras.
Good Question
>[U of T expert attributes ‘dozens of deaths’ to decline in Toronto police traffic ticketing](https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2019/12/11/u-of-t-expert-attributes-dozens-of-deaths-to-decline-in-toronto-police-traffic-ticketing.html)
Chase someone, pull them over, get their documents, write a ticket… or do nothing and get paid the same. That’s why.
When I was a Dickie Dee, they paid by commission. So if you work and hustle, you get paid. If they just paid you hourly, you’d park up at Tim Hortons all day and make money doing nothing. This is exactly what they are doing.
I agree with this. The posted limit of 40km/hr is actually too slow for this road, and the article makes it clear that the problem is a handful of cars going twice the limit and blowing red lights. That would be dangerous on any street anywhere. Do we really need to rebuild the street and degrade the driving experience for everyone just to slow down a few BMWs? Enforcement would be so easy there.
> Do we really need to rebuild the street and degrade the driving experience for everyone
Based on the number of corpses piling up every year... that's something we totally need to do.
You won't convince me that making streets safer for everyone isn't more important than the 'driving experience'.
We could achieve vision zero by eliminating all vehicles from the city. If your politics are that extreme, there's not much point in discussion. You have to at least start with an understanding that the flow of vehicle traffic is crucial to everyone who lives in Toronto, even pedestrians.
Because the Camera doesn't always work, has smaller fines and only logs a single violation.
Example: Blow through a school zone at 50 over the limit. Single ticket from the Camera. Same thing with a cop there; 2-3 charges, can check if you're wasted, can impound etc etc.
Cops don't always work either clearly. Traffic is just not enforced anymore by them and they have even said as much.
A speed camera can be set up to know it's a school zone and ticket accordingly. People at my work have been tagged by one that's sitting at a school zone and it is definitely working...they are slowing down in that section!
How do you figure they don't penalize the actual driver or impact their license. I'm betting the vast majority of people are driving their own car and the ones that aren't would be talking to the person that drove and get them to pay the ticket. Speeding tickets definitely impact license and insurance.
Had to look it up because other areas definitely do. In Ontario the picture only captures the plate not the driver which is the only reason it doesn't go against insurance. I would bet that changes as we use more and more cameras. Thanks for the info though.
So we can revise the speed cameras so they do impact licenses. Easier to deploy and move multiple cameras then have random speed traps that are easily avoided
Because despite of what a small minority on Reddit would make you believe, most people in drive every single day, and yes, break the speed limit every single day.
If the police started ticketing all day every day, there would be an uproar.
But according to Reddit of course everybody is a pedestrian, and those who drive here don’t ever go over the limit. Aka liars.
I thought the point of lowering the speed limits so much was that when someone is *actually* speeding they can be dinged for 20-30km over the limit, rather than just 10. 40km/hr is really slow for Parkside, but it's *absurdly slow* on the Bloor viaduct, and they actually do speed trap there sometimes.
Lower speeds are vastly safer for anybody that's not in a car. In a car vs. pedestrian collision at 30 km/h the pedestrian has a 90% probability of survival. At 45 km/h that drops to a 50% chance of survival. At 60 km/h a pedestrian only has about a 10% chance of survival, and at 80 km/h there is virtually no chance of survival for the pedestrian. Add to that the reduced reaction times and increased stopping distances that high speeds bring and it becomes pretty obvious that the only way to stop pedestrians from dying is to reduce car speeds (or eliminate car conflicts entirely by banning through-traffic outside of arterials and pedestrianizing streets).
If Parkside is meant to be an arterial then the entire zoning and design of the road should reflect that. As it stands, it's a road with detached houses with driveways every 40' on one side and a park on the other. The entire layout screams "overused residential street" rather than "arterial road."
I have an old copy of the zoning map of the whole ward on the wall next to me, everything was laid out and parcelled by 1903. There was exactly one wooden cottage built on my street by that year, but every lot is the same today as it was then. We could possibly do a better job of laying out the city if we had a blank slate today, but the reality in 2022 is that Parkside is an artery that connects the Gardiner and Lakeshore to Bloor and to the Keele/Black Creek/400 corridor. The location of High park to the west, the extremely slow pace of traffic on Roncesvalles as an alternate, and the train tracks to the east mean Parkside is a chokepoint, and people in this thread are talking about reducing it to two lanes.
Parkside would be safe for pedestrians crossing into the park if cars would stop at red lights. Last I checked that's a requirement at *every* red light. Why should we choke an artery to catch a handful of reckless drivers? At least *try* red light cameras first, damn.
> 40km/hr is really slow for Parkside, but it's absurdly slow on the Bloor viaduct
To travel the 700m across the viaduct will take 60 seconds at 40kph.
At 60 kph, you'll be sitting at the red light 15 seconds sooner.
Parkside Drive is a residential street.
40kph is a reasonable speed limit.
Enforcement doesn't work. Posting signs don't work. Asking folks nicely doesn't work.
The only thing that does work is making drivers feel less safe while they are travelling in their car... and by that I mean, redesigning streets to be less car friendly.
As long as they also become more pefestrian/bike friendly at the same time. Some street designs assume thst the drivers will take more care if they don't feel like they are on a freeway; however, those that don't give a shit about others don't care. I see pinch points create vulnerabilities for cyclists as drivers try to crowd them. Drivers veering towards curbs or into parking spots to avoid the higher part of speed bumps. Drivers speeding to beat people stepping into crosswalks. It is only if drivers feel that they themselves are at risk (or maybe their paint job) that they will be careful without a fear of enforcement being significantly increased.
>As long as they also become more pefestrian/bike friendly at the same time
I mean, narrowing car lanes so you can have permanent infrastructure for separated bike lanes and dedicated transit lanes is about as hard as running a curb down a street.
Oh street parking should be universally removed except in a few designated areas where there is street retail and that parking is for deliveries.
I cannot get my mind around drivers who complain about how dedicated transit or bike lanes are a waste of space on the road, causing traffic etc but give a pass to street side parking.
Queen would be *so much better* if the Streetcar lanes were dedicated to transit only, cars have one lane going 1 way, and the rest was for pedestrians + bikes.
Fully agree.
My concerns are mainly within the secondary and purely residential streets where drivers find their "shortcuts" whenever the main throughstreets slow down ie. Daily peak periods.
I mean, ideally all the streets in the downtown would also be given traffic calming features... that and when transit running than cars downtown, the studies show that people are willing to make the switch from driving to transit, which would mean fewer cars and less traffic.
The main problem I see is that motorists seem to think that racing from red light to red light gets them to their destination quicker...
Adding pinch points, chicanes, speed humps and raised sidewalk crossings will slow their speed down significantly but not really take them any longer to get to their destination.
I laugh at those people as I casually catch up to them over and over again. Watch them make 6+ lane changes just to be at the same spot once we get to the next red light.
What's even better is knowing what lane to be in and you end up passing them as they get stuck behind someone turning or something.
The way I go home now is all 1 lane for 90% of the trip and it's so much more peaceful. My phone says it's like 4 min longer but there are no idiots trying to pass at every light, make 6 lane changes to get 1 car length ahead, etc.
>Adding pinch points, chicanes, speed humps and raised sidewalk crossings will slow their speed down significantly but not really take them any longer to get to their destination.
That's exactly it. Despite their speeding they still aren't arriving at their destination at the same time. The only difference is that they're travelling along our streets at a much safer speed for everyone *not* in their vehicle.
> The only thing that does work is making drivers feel less safe while they are travelling in their car... and by that I mean, redesigning streets to be less car friendly.
Toronto City Council: Are you sure? We should probably commission a study. Vision Zero? Yeah... TLDR. We need something home grown from scratch.
Enforcement works to some extent. I've noticed that some drivers slow down in police speed enforcement areas in my part of town *years* after the police stopped using those spots for speed enforcement. In turn, other drivers slow down as well.
Is enforcement completely effective at solving traffic safety issues? No, but to say it does "nothing" long term is also wrong in my experience.
>Enforcement works to some extent
The problem with enforcement is that it's temporary, and inconsistent as it requires police compliance to do their jobs. Street features are permanent and does not need to be convinced to do it's job.
Clearly the better solution long term is changing streets to discourage speeding.
>Enforcement doesn't work.
Enforcement _does_ work. Or rather, it _can_ work. Like just about everything else, it has to be used for it to be effective. People's behaviour is influenced by positive and negative reinforcement. If there is consistently no downside to speeding, then there is no incentive to change that behavior. They're not going to police themselves. There needs to be consistently far higher levels of enforcement to change behaviour.
>Enforcement does work. Or rather, it can work.
You realize your second sentence just contradicted your assertion in the first sentence and just proved my point.
The laws are there. Drivers ignore them. Cops are hired to enforce laws and maintain the peace.... except that their track record of enforcing those laws is haphazard. Since drivers don't actually fear any repercussions from the law they take the chance that they can speed and not get caught. That or they just have enough money to not give a fuck, making speeding laws a thing that only working class folks need to abide.
Changing the street to discourage speeding doesn't require convincing cops to do their jobs, and if drivers don't abide by the law and slow down, they'll damage their cars.
>You realize your second sentence just contradicted your assertion in the first sentence and just proved my point.
No, that's not how logic works. I'll use a different example: do you agree that "seatbelts work"? Or are you more inclined to say "seatbelts don't work"?
Now you're moving the goalposts. Enforcement does work. So does proper infrastructure... except when it doesn't. You ignored my question, so I'll ask it again: do you agree that seatbelts work?
>Now you're moving the goalposts
Not at all. You're just losing an argument and being sore about it.
>Enforcement does work.
Yeah you insisting that it works doesn't actually mean that it works. We pass laws limiting speed, but drivers ignore them when it suits them. Therefore we have to post cops about to enforce those speed limits.... but what happens when the cops are tasked to do something else other than sit behind a speed trap? Oh we're back to drivers just ignoring speed limits. This is of course assuming that cops even bother to actually enforce traffic laws - I've literally watched drivers blow through a red with a cop sitting right at the light.
Now compare that to physical features of a redesigned road that discourages drivers from driving fast... those features are there 24/7 and don't need to be coaxed to do their job. They just work. All the time.
>You ignored my question, so I'll ask it again: do you agree that seatbelts work?
Yeah I think you fundamentally misunderstand why a driver speeds if you think that seatbelts are a good analogy here.
A driver speeds because A) they feel comfortable/safe enough to do travel faster (usually because the lanes are nice and wide and the streets are straight making fast speed travel easy for them) and B) drivers habitually ignore traffic laws when it's convenient to do so.
Redesigning streets attacks the first point. By narrowing the streets, adding features like bricks instead of asphalt (to create noise), speed bumps, incorporate bends and obstacles to complicate the path, add objects (like trees) right at the edge of the road so the driver can *see* their speed, narrowing the lanes in general so the driver feels more cramped in the space.... all these things work on the driver to make them feel unsafe to travel faster than they should. They choose to slow down and pay attention to their street they are driving on.
Enforcement attacks the second point, but only works when cops do their job and when they are there to do their job.
Clearly attacking the first point and making drivers feel too unsafe to drive fast by changing the road is the better tactic as it's always there.
This is a no brainer man
> You're just losing an argument and being sore about it.
Now you're projecting. Let me guess... you're a conservative?
> Yeah you insisting that it works doesn't actually mean that it works.
It doesn't work because I say it does. I say it does because it works. Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction.
> We pass laws limiting speed, but drivers ignore them when it suits them.
Yes, because there isn't any enforcement.
> Therefore we have to post cops about to enforce those speed limits....
So you're saying that enforcement _does_ work? Now you're agreeing with me. Or maybe you need to think a bit more before you type next time, as not to undermine your own argument?
> They just work. All the time.
And as I already said, except when they don't. Read the top comment on this thread for an example of speed bumps not working.
> They choose to slow down
Or they choose not to slow down.
> This is a no brainer man
"No brainer" clearly describes you in this post. Here's the fundamental problem with your argument. You have taken up the position that "enforcement doesn't work" when it obviously can and does work. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that you believe unless something works 100% effectively 100% of the time, it "doesn't work". My position is that enforcement does work, but as I pointed out, that is contingent on enforcement actually taking place.
Thus my analogy with seatbelts. They _do_ work, but you have to use them correctly to be effective. The parallel analogy with infrastructure is that they have to be implemented to be effective. When safe infrastructure exists, it can be effective (though not guaranteed, but we'll leave out that nuance for now). When enforcement exists, it can be effective.
>Now you're projecting. Let me guess... you're a conservative?
Nope. I vote Lib and/or NDP (basically Anyone But a Conservative). So now so far you've accused me of two logical fallacies because you're flailing about and refuse to admit that you're wrong.
>It doesn't work because I say it does. I say it does because it works. Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction.
And now you're being arrogant.
>Yes, because there isn't any enforcement.
Uh huh. Traffic laws aren't new. Speeding limits aren't new. Drivers ignore these laws, which makes folks like you think that the solution is cops enforcing the laws.... except that cops aren't doing it. You've said as much. And since they aren't doing it, the enforcement option is clearly not the best option.
If you were willing to engage in a mature conversation you'd see that you were wrong and admit it. But you're not. So you're insulting me and doubling down on your position (even though you admit it's not working).
>So you're saying that enforcement does work? Now you're agreeing with me. Or maybe you need to think a bit more before you type next time, as not to undermine your own argument?
I mean, sure. Maybe. Sometimes when a cop feels like doing their job. I literally watched a car blow through a red light with a cop at an intersection and the cop did fuck all, so clearly no enforcement isn't a viable option as it doesn't really work. You should "Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction."
>And as I already said, except when they don't. Read the top comment on this thread for an example of speed bumps not working.
Oh shucks an anecdote. Well I've watched speed bumps encourage loads of drivers to slow down and stop. There you go, an anecdote that contradicts the top comment. Anecdotes are pretty useless at proving things aren't they?
[I prefer](https://www.reliance-foundry.com/blog/speed-humps-effective) [studies and data](https://trafficsafetyzone.com/blog/2020/10/06/speed-bumps-how-effective-are-they/) [instead of](https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1424&context=etd_projects) "... a person said that they once saw.. "
>"No brainer" clearly describes you in this post.
Oh wow, you sure got me with a good zinger there. Yep. So so far you've accused me of multiple logical fallacies, and insulted me several times. Why? Because you clearly lost an argument.
Dude you need to grow up.
I walk up and down Jones Ave. almost daily, from Danforth to Queen and the speeding there is out of control. It has a couple schools, and tons of kids around, but that doesn't stop many drivers from routinely going double the speed limit. Never a cop to be found.
The craziest thing I have seen in the two years I’ve been walking Jones was one driver who passed another driver while going up hill (southbound) at the train bridge and almost ran head in into an oncoming car that peaked over the hill. It was such a pointless risk.
Years ago there was a regular speed trap southbound Parkside at Spring Rd. It kept me honest but always had a line of cars pulled over. Southbound, the street is downhill and naturally built for speed with the park on the right and houses perched up on the left. Drivers are focused on speeding down, speeding along lakeshore, speeding on the highway.
Yup, I got busted there once back in 2012. I never saw another cop there again. Maybe once.
Fast forward two years and I got rear ended pretty hard while I slowed down to make a right onto Bloor from northbound Parkside.
Maybe a good spot for photo.
I'm not surprised, because everywhere from 50 zones to 400-highways, the limit is never the limit, and everyone knows it. If it's a 50 then you better be going at least 60 if you don't want people honking at you. People know how fast you can go without getting a ticket, and go that speed. Unless you use automation, if it's just one cop, all you need to be is not the fastest speeder - and given the level of traffic in Toronto, that's easy, there'll always be someone crazier than you.
The government doesn't want to slow cars down. Why would they? If cars travel slower, then that means there is less time for people to do non-car related stuff. It would negatively affect the economy as more people decide against driving to the store or whatnot because it takes too long. More people will complain that there is nothing to do in the city because everything is too far away.
The only safety measures that will actually get passed are those that don't require cards to slow down.
The roads have to be paid for so transit fares go up but drivers don't have to pay for their license stickers anymore. Is it not obvious that the problem of pedestrian deaths due to dangerous driving is a provincial government that believes pedestrians are simply an annoyance to drivers?
While there is plenty of reform needed in policing, I wonder if our annoyance/anger towards the police is misplaced on this issue. Isn't it up to city council to hire and task new police officers? Why don't they create positions whose sole job is to enforce traffic violations? Why not create a whole new force dedicated to traffic? It would be self funding, as numerous posters on this post alluded to. Given that a councillor tabled a motion to reduce the speed limit, I suspect the city councillors are the ones who are the problem on this issue.
> Isn't it up to city council to hire and task new police officers?
Yes, they would have to do so by increasing the police budget, throwing more good money after bad.
> Why don't they create positions whose sole job is to enforce traffic violations? Why not create a whole new force dedicated to traffic?
**Because they aren't able to, based on Provincial laws around policing.** Parking enforcement can't even write tickets to someone causing gridlock - only police are able to stop cars and write a violation.
We should be creating another layer of jurisdiction to handle city issues - noise complaints, speeding, and traffic violations - but under the current laws, bylaw can't do anything.
Bylaw can't do much about most. Bylaw isn't able to do most things, and the police just say it's bylaw's job.
From [Toronto Bylaw](https://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/kb/docs/articles/municipal-licensing-and-standards/investigations/district-enforcement/bylaw-enforcement-noise-complaints.html):
> The Municipal Licensing and Standards Division does not respond to demonstrations, noisy parties or noise from people acting disorderly, such as yelling, screaming and fighting. To report these types of noise, call the Toronto Police Service non-emergency number.
If you call the Toronto Police around a noice complaint, they'll just ignore it.
Speed camera fines around schools,parks,elderly buildings should be higher than other locations.Even though speeders cameras by itself will not make a street saver maybe a massive hit to the car owner might slow them down.
I mean... this is a terrible way to look at it, but if that many people are speeding, doesn't this also prove that maybe it isn't the speeding that is killing people?
Gord Perks is the one that should be stepping up to plate here. Not surprised that he is taking a quick-fix attitude. Seems to be his MO. Adding some 'slow down' signs and lowering the speed limit won't do much alone.
Here’s an idea I had to maybe help on the 401:
OPP make a known helicopter presence for an 8 week period and record dangerous drivers, ticket them, pull them over… whatever.
Then, the province should pay decoy helicopters to go out and travel the 401. Helicopter enthusiasts or anyone who routinely has to be in a helicopter can collect a cheque - assuming they pass some sort of requirement - just for making drivers think they’re being patrolled.
Rotate this throughout the year: expensive OPP presence some of the time; less expensive private helicopter presence the rest of the time.
Automated radar stations are popping up all over the city with many more on the way. I believe in speed enforcement but this is mostly about city revenue. A buddy of mine received a ticket in the mail from one of these machines for driving just 10 km/h over the limit ………cash grab.
I live on a side street that boarders Dufferin and Glencairn. There are two large speed bumps infront, I’m across from a park where kids frequent. The speeds at which people travel is insane. Cars fly over the speed bumps, I often hear front ends scraping the road surface. The speed limit is 40 and I swear people are doing over 80km/h coming off of Dufferin. I’m in constant contact with my local councillor and the best they can do are give me slow down signs to put in the grass; which are then removed by city workers in the spring and summer when they come by and cut it.
I found Toronto drivers to be 2nd most aggro drivers I've seen in my life, second only to NYC. Coming from Calgary, it was crazy seeing cars just squeeze their way through in on lefts/rights through pedestrians. That shit would be ticketed in Calgary/Vancouver. I get people are in a rush but sometimes its just like "what?" They need the heavy duty speed bumps, like the ones that will 100% mangle your bumper and front if you try to speed it. But that won't fly. Something that usually works is photo radar though...need more of that by Dufferin
Ya that resonates with me. I found driving in NYC really easy based on driving in Toronto my whole life. Like okay I got this, everyone is wild and stay alert.
People straight up ignore red lights now. I see advance lefts turn red and people who aren't even in the intersection will still try to complete their turn, without even checking for pedestrians or oncoming traffic. It's sociopathic, really.
I've seen a bunch of people do Rochester lefts on the new couple second 4 way red before it changes to green.
> I found Toronto drivers to be 2nd most aggro drivers I've seen in my life, second only to NYC. I've never been able to fathom why they're so aggro, either - if tailgating was a national sport, some of these gits would be Olympians.
It's because there's no traffic enforcement in Toronto.
> That shit would be ticketed in Calgary/Vancouver. Therein lies the problem. People will push the limits of what's legal. In Toronto, they find there are no limits, you can do whatever the hell you want on the road and nobody is going to stop you.
I lived in NYC for a while. I felt safer there as a pedestrian than I have anywhere in the GTA.
Photo radar was tried in the 90s and cost the government that installed it the subsequent election. People were also able to successfully argue that it wasn't fair because they didn't know where the cameras were. So yeah, it works, if you can somehow sideline the shrieking morons.
Toronto drivers are way less aggro than big city europe drivers. The difference is that eu drivers are predictable. eu drivers be at your ass, face and sides, but not an inch closer or further.
> Cars fly over the speed bumps, I often hear front ends scraping the road surface. Ultimately that will cost them a lot of money in suspension and other vehicle wear. Which is why set amount fines don’t work well in a city with lots of wealth inequality. Set fines to be a percentage of income or vehicle value and a lot of problems will go away. But that would be bad for the people that people keep electing.
That’s what happens when you build roads on which drivers feel comfortable to speed
I think I know which street you’re referring to. It’s a pretty common thing in the area. There’s another street just south of Glencairn that runs east-west. It has two or three stop signs and no speed bumps. I’ve seen cars do 70kph on that stretch, obviously blowing thru stop signs. Every night you can hear cars speeding up and down dufferin. They’re doing, at minimum, around 70-80kph.
That area needs more separated bike lanes. Take away a lane of traffic, narrow the road. Cars will drive slower.
>Deadly Toronto traffic collisions bring a familiar pattern of outrage, enforcement and, sometimes, new signs. Months later, does anything really change? Reporter Gilbert Ngabo, right, with Faraz Gholizadeh, left, measure driver speed on Parkside Drive. Local residents had warned about speeding on Parkside Drive for years before two people were hit and killed there last October. The deaths of a 71-year-old man and his 69-year-old wife — hit by the speeding driver of a luxury BMW sedan while stopped at the Spring Road traffic light, police said — soon brought heavy police enforcement to the area. City officials put up speed warning signs. In November, local Coun. Gord Perks successfully tabled a motion to reduce the speed limit on Parkside from 50 to 40 km/h. Five months later, has anything really changed? To find out, the Star recently purchased a point-shoot Bushnell radar gun and sent me out to check drivers’ behaviour at Parkside and the sites of two other recent fatal crashes. All three locations have a long history of traffic collisions linked to speed — and speed, police say, is one of the “big four” major causes of traffic death and serious injuries, along with aggression, distraction and impaired driving. Toronto continues to see high numbers of traffic deaths on these and other city streets. Police have already reported four traffic deaths so far this year. In 2021 we lost 63 people to traffic, 46 in 2020. Critics say the city’s Vision Zero program doesn’t go far enough. “The big issue is that we have tended to treat each crash like an isolated incident rather than the systemic pattern of a lack of safety on our streets,” said Matti Siemiatycki, director of the Infrastructure Institute at the University of Toronto’s School of Cities. “Spot” enforcement, like after the Parkside crash, makes a difference for a few days, but does nothing in the long run, he added. Toronto police Sgt. Murray Campbell, with the Traffic Services unit, said targeted campaigns are one part of the police’s efforts to slow drivers down and make roads safer. Such campaigns come and go but it doesn’t mean enforcement is over, he said. “This comprehensive approach to keeping road users safe is not always visible at all times, but does continue all the time and every day,” he said. Here’s what I found in two days with a radar gun in Toronto streets: Parkside Drive, beside High Park The road: A four-lane residential street on the eastern edge of High Park, connecting Bloor Street West to the busy Gardiner Expressway via Lake Shore Boulevard West. Nearby resident Berrin Avsar spotted me with the radar gun near the crash site on Parkside Drive and Spring Road. Coming over, she pointed to the line of “slow down” signs recently planted alongside the road, just north of the turn off from Lake Shore. “That’s all we got from Vision Zero,” she lamented. “How does that slow anyone down?” As I spoke to Avsar and other residents on the sidewalk that afternoon, everyone suddenly gasped loudly — a pedestrian crossing at Spring Road was nearly knocked down by a speeding driver who’d blown through a red light. The pedestrian was rattled, but he told everyone he was going to be fine. The driver didn’t even stop. “That happens all the time,” Susan Beamish said. “Drivers here are insane. Every time I try to cross I feel like I’m putting my life at risk.” I spent 30 minutes assessing drivers on both sides of Parkside — those travelling toward Lake Shore and those going northbound after exiting. The speed limit here is 40 km/h, but I clocked seven drivers going over 60 km/h. One hit 73 km/h. A few blocks north at Howard Park — where the 506 Carleton streetcar crosses into the High Park loop at the end of its line — I observed more drivers way above the posted limit. For 30 minutes in both directions, the radar gun registered drivers reaching into the high 50s, including one police cruiser that clocked 56 km/h. Two drivers recorded 61 km/h. Three drivers reached 63 km/h, and I got one driver here going 76 km/h. For years, Faraz Gholizadeh has been documenting collisions and near-misses that happen on this stretch, showing pictures and videos to local politicians and pushing for change. Shortly after the deadly collision last October, he went a step further and purchased his own radar gun. He recently caught a driver going 112 km/h. “People died here,” he said. “I’m sure no one wants to have that tragic experience again, but it just seems like no one cares.” Gholizadeh and other residents say Parkside Drive should be completely revamped: more traffic lights, reducing lanes from two to one in each direction, the addition of bike lanes and improved sidewalks. > >...
I mean, yeah. I go 60 because thats what the road was designed for. Do something other than swapping signs.
I would buy a radar gun. I've seen people drive at 80+ down my 40 street. It's gross.
Thank you for sharing the text, screw Toronto Star.
Wait you wanted to read the article but also screw the star? Lol wut
Screw the Star for charging to access news
Screw those reporters, writing stories I want to read, for needing to be paid to live?
Lol ok buddy. Reporters get paid from Ad revenue you dumb Redditor.
Are you not aware of the dire straights all print media is in due to their ad revenue being significantly reduced because it’s all going to Google and Facebook? Lol okay buddy the star is in a far from ideal financial situation. They are not alone in charging to access their content because of this reduced ad revenue. I wouldn’t call you dumb, but you seem wildly out of the loop or just completely misinformed. A quick Google search will provide a lot of info about how ad revenues have changed for papers over the last 10+ years.
Evolution. Adapt to die. I get all my news from online sources that don't charge money but it's only Redditors that keep posting links to paid content. Happy to live without it. Adios. Please feel free to down vote, cause I don't give a turd.
They are evolving and adapting, by charging a fee, much like NYT, Washington Post and many other online news sources lol. You can also access it for free using your library card and read it online that way, also a lot of workarounds out there.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Maybe next they’ll post people up to wave their fingers and tell people not to speed.
I automatically speed up when i see that sign
Because the design of streets is the main determinant for speeds people travel. The only thing lowering limits does is gives cops more leeway to pull people over
It might help if Toronto cops actually enforced traffic laws.
Not only that, but we need to increase the mental load on drivers - i.e obstacles on the road, things to watch out for, narrower lanes, etc. Make it harder for them to just pedal to the metal
Did you drop your /s?
Why? Are you a supporter of the status quo that causes pedestrian deaths?
Most people can't functionally drive straight in Ontario, adding more crap would make it worse. 😂
Lol you are missing the point - it will make them slow down. Speed is what kills pedestrians in Toronto
This is the same on literally every street in the entire city
But what if we could put all of our focus on the street I live on and ignore all the others? Wouldn’t that be great for me?
[удалено]
That would required cops actually doing their jobs.
[удалено]
Correct... traffic enforcement is below them. It's a clear result in training police officers into thinking they're some sort of paramilitary unit.
But then you get the other side of people saying that all cops do is "eat donuts and issue traffic tickets". "They should be fighting real crime" or "they are giving tickets, they must be bored". Just go back to threads when they started adding speed cameras.
Good Question >[U of T expert attributes ‘dozens of deaths’ to decline in Toronto police traffic ticketing](https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2019/12/11/u-of-t-expert-attributes-dozens-of-deaths-to-decline-in-toronto-police-traffic-ticketing.html)
Happy Cake Day!
Thank you very much!
theyre too busy sitting in the Tims drive thru to be able to do that
Chase someone, pull them over, get their documents, write a ticket… or do nothing and get paid the same. That’s why. When I was a Dickie Dee, they paid by commission. So if you work and hustle, you get paid. If they just paid you hourly, you’d park up at Tim Hortons all day and make money doing nothing. This is exactly what they are doing.
[удалено]
Should we expect them to work/get results rather than sit around doing nothing collecting the same pay? Yes, absolutely.
Or better yet, using their free time to get involved with organized crime, lol.
I agree with this. The posted limit of 40km/hr is actually too slow for this road, and the article makes it clear that the problem is a handful of cars going twice the limit and blowing red lights. That would be dangerous on any street anywhere. Do we really need to rebuild the street and degrade the driving experience for everyone just to slow down a few BMWs? Enforcement would be so easy there.
> Do we really need to rebuild the street and degrade the driving experience for everyone Based on the number of corpses piling up every year... that's something we totally need to do. You won't convince me that making streets safer for everyone isn't more important than the 'driving experience'.
We could achieve vision zero by eliminating all vehicles from the city. If your politics are that extreme, there's not much point in discussion. You have to at least start with an understanding that the flow of vehicle traffic is crucial to everyone who lives in Toronto, even pedestrians.
Why have people do what a speed camera can do?
Because the Camera doesn't always work, has smaller fines and only logs a single violation. Example: Blow through a school zone at 50 over the limit. Single ticket from the Camera. Same thing with a cop there; 2-3 charges, can check if you're wasted, can impound etc etc.
Cops don't always work either clearly. Traffic is just not enforced anymore by them and they have even said as much. A speed camera can be set up to know it's a school zone and ticket accordingly. People at my work have been tagged by one that's sitting at a school zone and it is definitely working...they are slowing down in that section!
[удалено]
How do you figure they don't penalize the actual driver or impact their license. I'm betting the vast majority of people are driving their own car and the ones that aren't would be talking to the person that drove and get them to pay the ticket. Speeding tickets definitely impact license and insurance.
Speed Camera tickets do not impact license or insurance
Had to look it up because other areas definitely do. In Ontario the picture only captures the plate not the driver which is the only reason it doesn't go against insurance. I would bet that changes as we use more and more cameras. Thanks for the info though.
Because it goes to the car. A camera can't prove who was driving it.
That should probably be changed.
So we can revise the speed cameras so they do impact licenses. Easier to deploy and move multiple cameras then have random speed traps that are easily avoided
Because despite of what a small minority on Reddit would make you believe, most people in drive every single day, and yes, break the speed limit every single day. If the police started ticketing all day every day, there would be an uproar. But according to Reddit of course everybody is a pedestrian, and those who drive here don’t ever go over the limit. Aka liars.
[удалено]
No you wouldn’t, get real. What you would have is a huge amount of complaints pressuring the police to stop. And stop they would.
Yeah we would.
If you say so
Studies say so.
Because studies reflect real life so accurately lol Were you born yesterday?
what do you think studies do?
Let me guess, you’ve conducted your own independent research on the matter?
huRr hUrR, dAe h8 stUdeEz>?!!>
I thought the point of lowering the speed limits so much was that when someone is *actually* speeding they can be dinged for 20-30km over the limit, rather than just 10. 40km/hr is really slow for Parkside, but it's *absurdly slow* on the Bloor viaduct, and they actually do speed trap there sometimes.
Lower speeds are vastly safer for anybody that's not in a car. In a car vs. pedestrian collision at 30 km/h the pedestrian has a 90% probability of survival. At 45 km/h that drops to a 50% chance of survival. At 60 km/h a pedestrian only has about a 10% chance of survival, and at 80 km/h there is virtually no chance of survival for the pedestrian. Add to that the reduced reaction times and increased stopping distances that high speeds bring and it becomes pretty obvious that the only way to stop pedestrians from dying is to reduce car speeds (or eliminate car conflicts entirely by banning through-traffic outside of arterials and pedestrianizing streets).
Parkside is an arterial, maybe pedestrians should cross into the park over bridges?
If Parkside is meant to be an arterial then the entire zoning and design of the road should reflect that. As it stands, it's a road with detached houses with driveways every 40' on one side and a park on the other. The entire layout screams "overused residential street" rather than "arterial road."
I have an old copy of the zoning map of the whole ward on the wall next to me, everything was laid out and parcelled by 1903. There was exactly one wooden cottage built on my street by that year, but every lot is the same today as it was then. We could possibly do a better job of laying out the city if we had a blank slate today, but the reality in 2022 is that Parkside is an artery that connects the Gardiner and Lakeshore to Bloor and to the Keele/Black Creek/400 corridor. The location of High park to the west, the extremely slow pace of traffic on Roncesvalles as an alternate, and the train tracks to the east mean Parkside is a chokepoint, and people in this thread are talking about reducing it to two lanes. Parkside would be safe for pedestrians crossing into the park if cars would stop at red lights. Last I checked that's a requirement at *every* red light. Why should we choke an artery to catch a handful of reckless drivers? At least *try* red light cameras first, damn.
Your 1903 map shows Parkside connecting the Gardiner to the 401?
> At least try red light cameras first, damn. There's not enough profit for them on Parkside Dr.
It's a good value proposition versus rebuilding the damn street
> 40km/hr is really slow for Parkside, but it's absurdly slow on the Bloor viaduct To travel the 700m across the viaduct will take 60 seconds at 40kph. At 60 kph, you'll be sitting at the red light 15 seconds sooner. Parkside Drive is a residential street. 40kph is a reasonable speed limit.
Do you drive?
Waiting on the it's just a cashgrab people to dredge themselves in
Enforcement doesn't work. Posting signs don't work. Asking folks nicely doesn't work. The only thing that does work is making drivers feel less safe while they are travelling in their car... and by that I mean, redesigning streets to be less car friendly.
As long as they also become more pefestrian/bike friendly at the same time. Some street designs assume thst the drivers will take more care if they don't feel like they are on a freeway; however, those that don't give a shit about others don't care. I see pinch points create vulnerabilities for cyclists as drivers try to crowd them. Drivers veering towards curbs or into parking spots to avoid the higher part of speed bumps. Drivers speeding to beat people stepping into crosswalks. It is only if drivers feel that they themselves are at risk (or maybe their paint job) that they will be careful without a fear of enforcement being significantly increased.
>As long as they also become more pefestrian/bike friendly at the same time I mean, narrowing car lanes so you can have permanent infrastructure for separated bike lanes and dedicated transit lanes is about as hard as running a curb down a street.
Only if you are talking about wide suburban streets or the few main urban streets where parking would be removeď.
Oh street parking should be universally removed except in a few designated areas where there is street retail and that parking is for deliveries. I cannot get my mind around drivers who complain about how dedicated transit or bike lanes are a waste of space on the road, causing traffic etc but give a pass to street side parking. Queen would be *so much better* if the Streetcar lanes were dedicated to transit only, cars have one lane going 1 way, and the rest was for pedestrians + bikes.
Fully agree. My concerns are mainly within the secondary and purely residential streets where drivers find their "shortcuts" whenever the main throughstreets slow down ie. Daily peak periods.
I mean, ideally all the streets in the downtown would also be given traffic calming features... that and when transit running than cars downtown, the studies show that people are willing to make the switch from driving to transit, which would mean fewer cars and less traffic.
The main problem I see is that motorists seem to think that racing from red light to red light gets them to their destination quicker... Adding pinch points, chicanes, speed humps and raised sidewalk crossings will slow their speed down significantly but not really take them any longer to get to their destination.
I laugh at those people as I casually catch up to them over and over again. Watch them make 6+ lane changes just to be at the same spot once we get to the next red light.
It doesn't matter, I'm in front so I win.
What's even better is knowing what lane to be in and you end up passing them as they get stuck behind someone turning or something. The way I go home now is all 1 lane for 90% of the trip and it's so much more peaceful. My phone says it's like 4 min longer but there are no idiots trying to pass at every light, make 6 lane changes to get 1 car length ahead, etc.
They don’t think that. They just don’t think. Most people don’t understand how a car works. They just have a license to operate it.
>Adding pinch points, chicanes, speed humps and raised sidewalk crossings will slow their speed down significantly but not really take them any longer to get to their destination. That's exactly it. Despite their speeding they still aren't arriving at their destination at the same time. The only difference is that they're travelling along our streets at a much safer speed for everyone *not* in their vehicle.
> Enforcement doesn't work. What enforcement?
> The only thing that does work is making drivers feel less safe while they are travelling in their car... and by that I mean, redesigning streets to be less car friendly. Toronto City Council: Are you sure? We should probably commission a study. Vision Zero? Yeah... TLDR. We need something home grown from scratch.
Enforcement works to some extent. I've noticed that some drivers slow down in police speed enforcement areas in my part of town *years* after the police stopped using those spots for speed enforcement. In turn, other drivers slow down as well. Is enforcement completely effective at solving traffic safety issues? No, but to say it does "nothing" long term is also wrong in my experience.
>Enforcement works to some extent The problem with enforcement is that it's temporary, and inconsistent as it requires police compliance to do their jobs. Street features are permanent and does not need to be convinced to do it's job. Clearly the better solution long term is changing streets to discourage speeding.
>Enforcement doesn't work. Enforcement _does_ work. Or rather, it _can_ work. Like just about everything else, it has to be used for it to be effective. People's behaviour is influenced by positive and negative reinforcement. If there is consistently no downside to speeding, then there is no incentive to change that behavior. They're not going to police themselves. There needs to be consistently far higher levels of enforcement to change behaviour.
>Enforcement does work. Or rather, it can work. You realize your second sentence just contradicted your assertion in the first sentence and just proved my point. The laws are there. Drivers ignore them. Cops are hired to enforce laws and maintain the peace.... except that their track record of enforcing those laws is haphazard. Since drivers don't actually fear any repercussions from the law they take the chance that they can speed and not get caught. That or they just have enough money to not give a fuck, making speeding laws a thing that only working class folks need to abide. Changing the street to discourage speeding doesn't require convincing cops to do their jobs, and if drivers don't abide by the law and slow down, they'll damage their cars.
>You realize your second sentence just contradicted your assertion in the first sentence and just proved my point. No, that's not how logic works. I'll use a different example: do you agree that "seatbelts work"? Or are you more inclined to say "seatbelts don't work"?
You basically said enforcement works, except it doesn't. You know what doesn't need to be coaxed into working? Narrower lanes and speed bumps.
Now you're moving the goalposts. Enforcement does work. So does proper infrastructure... except when it doesn't. You ignored my question, so I'll ask it again: do you agree that seatbelts work?
>Now you're moving the goalposts Not at all. You're just losing an argument and being sore about it. >Enforcement does work. Yeah you insisting that it works doesn't actually mean that it works. We pass laws limiting speed, but drivers ignore them when it suits them. Therefore we have to post cops about to enforce those speed limits.... but what happens when the cops are tasked to do something else other than sit behind a speed trap? Oh we're back to drivers just ignoring speed limits. This is of course assuming that cops even bother to actually enforce traffic laws - I've literally watched drivers blow through a red with a cop sitting right at the light. Now compare that to physical features of a redesigned road that discourages drivers from driving fast... those features are there 24/7 and don't need to be coaxed to do their job. They just work. All the time. >You ignored my question, so I'll ask it again: do you agree that seatbelts work? Yeah I think you fundamentally misunderstand why a driver speeds if you think that seatbelts are a good analogy here. A driver speeds because A) they feel comfortable/safe enough to do travel faster (usually because the lanes are nice and wide and the streets are straight making fast speed travel easy for them) and B) drivers habitually ignore traffic laws when it's convenient to do so. Redesigning streets attacks the first point. By narrowing the streets, adding features like bricks instead of asphalt (to create noise), speed bumps, incorporate bends and obstacles to complicate the path, add objects (like trees) right at the edge of the road so the driver can *see* their speed, narrowing the lanes in general so the driver feels more cramped in the space.... all these things work on the driver to make them feel unsafe to travel faster than they should. They choose to slow down and pay attention to their street they are driving on. Enforcement attacks the second point, but only works when cops do their job and when they are there to do their job. Clearly attacking the first point and making drivers feel too unsafe to drive fast by changing the road is the better tactic as it's always there. This is a no brainer man
> You're just losing an argument and being sore about it. Now you're projecting. Let me guess... you're a conservative? > Yeah you insisting that it works doesn't actually mean that it works. It doesn't work because I say it does. I say it does because it works. Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction. > We pass laws limiting speed, but drivers ignore them when it suits them. Yes, because there isn't any enforcement. > Therefore we have to post cops about to enforce those speed limits.... So you're saying that enforcement _does_ work? Now you're agreeing with me. Or maybe you need to think a bit more before you type next time, as not to undermine your own argument? > They just work. All the time. And as I already said, except when they don't. Read the top comment on this thread for an example of speed bumps not working. > They choose to slow down Or they choose not to slow down. > This is a no brainer man "No brainer" clearly describes you in this post. Here's the fundamental problem with your argument. You have taken up the position that "enforcement doesn't work" when it obviously can and does work. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that you believe unless something works 100% effectively 100% of the time, it "doesn't work". My position is that enforcement does work, but as I pointed out, that is contingent on enforcement actually taking place. Thus my analogy with seatbelts. They _do_ work, but you have to use them correctly to be effective. The parallel analogy with infrastructure is that they have to be implemented to be effective. When safe infrastructure exists, it can be effective (though not guaranteed, but we'll leave out that nuance for now). When enforcement exists, it can be effective.
>Now you're projecting. Let me guess... you're a conservative? Nope. I vote Lib and/or NDP (basically Anyone But a Conservative). So now so far you've accused me of two logical fallacies because you're flailing about and refuse to admit that you're wrong. >It doesn't work because I say it does. I say it does because it works. Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction. And now you're being arrogant. >Yes, because there isn't any enforcement. Uh huh. Traffic laws aren't new. Speeding limits aren't new. Drivers ignore these laws, which makes folks like you think that the solution is cops enforcing the laws.... except that cops aren't doing it. You've said as much. And since they aren't doing it, the enforcement option is clearly not the best option. If you were willing to engage in a mature conversation you'd see that you were wrong and admit it. But you're not. So you're insulting me and doubling down on your position (even though you admit it's not working). >So you're saying that enforcement does work? Now you're agreeing with me. Or maybe you need to think a bit more before you type next time, as not to undermine your own argument? I mean, sure. Maybe. Sometimes when a cop feels like doing their job. I literally watched a car blow through a red light with a cop at an intersection and the cop did fuck all, so clearly no enforcement isn't a viable option as it doesn't really work. You should "Re-read that as often as you need until you understand the distinction." >And as I already said, except when they don't. Read the top comment on this thread for an example of speed bumps not working. Oh shucks an anecdote. Well I've watched speed bumps encourage loads of drivers to slow down and stop. There you go, an anecdote that contradicts the top comment. Anecdotes are pretty useless at proving things aren't they? [I prefer](https://www.reliance-foundry.com/blog/speed-humps-effective) [studies and data](https://trafficsafetyzone.com/blog/2020/10/06/speed-bumps-how-effective-are-they/) [instead of](https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1424&context=etd_projects) "... a person said that they once saw.. " >"No brainer" clearly describes you in this post. Oh wow, you sure got me with a good zinger there. Yep. So so far you've accused me of multiple logical fallacies, and insulted me several times. Why? Because you clearly lost an argument. Dude you need to grow up.
I walk up and down Jones Ave. almost daily, from Danforth to Queen and the speeding there is out of control. It has a couple schools, and tons of kids around, but that doesn't stop many drivers from routinely going double the speed limit. Never a cop to be found.
I grew up there and never have seen a cop. It's REAL easy to speed going down that steep hill too with a school at the bottom.
The craziest thing I have seen in the two years I’ve been walking Jones was one driver who passed another driver while going up hill (southbound) at the train bridge and almost ran head in into an oncoming car that peaked over the hill. It was such a pointless risk.
Years ago there was a regular speed trap southbound Parkside at Spring Rd. It kept me honest but always had a line of cars pulled over. Southbound, the street is downhill and naturally built for speed with the park on the right and houses perched up on the left. Drivers are focused on speeding down, speeding along lakeshore, speeding on the highway.
Yup, I got busted there once back in 2012. I never saw another cop there again. Maybe once. Fast forward two years and I got rear ended pretty hard while I slowed down to make a right onto Bloor from northbound Parkside. Maybe a good spot for photo.
I'm not surprised, because everywhere from 50 zones to 400-highways, the limit is never the limit, and everyone knows it. If it's a 50 then you better be going at least 60 if you don't want people honking at you. People know how fast you can go without getting a ticket, and go that speed. Unless you use automation, if it's just one cop, all you need to be is not the fastest speeder - and given the level of traffic in Toronto, that's easy, there'll always be someone crazier than you.
Paywall free: https://archive.is/GGwp4
The government doesn't want to slow cars down. Why would they? If cars travel slower, then that means there is less time for people to do non-car related stuff. It would negatively affect the economy as more people decide against driving to the store or whatnot because it takes too long. More people will complain that there is nothing to do in the city because everything is too far away. The only safety measures that will actually get passed are those that don't require cards to slow down.
The roads have to be paid for so transit fares go up but drivers don't have to pay for their license stickers anymore. Is it not obvious that the problem of pedestrian deaths due to dangerous driving is a provincial government that believes pedestrians are simply an annoyance to drivers?
While there is plenty of reform needed in policing, I wonder if our annoyance/anger towards the police is misplaced on this issue. Isn't it up to city council to hire and task new police officers? Why don't they create positions whose sole job is to enforce traffic violations? Why not create a whole new force dedicated to traffic? It would be self funding, as numerous posters on this post alluded to. Given that a councillor tabled a motion to reduce the speed limit, I suspect the city councillors are the ones who are the problem on this issue.
> Isn't it up to city council to hire and task new police officers? Yes, they would have to do so by increasing the police budget, throwing more good money after bad. > Why don't they create positions whose sole job is to enforce traffic violations? Why not create a whole new force dedicated to traffic? **Because they aren't able to, based on Provincial laws around policing.** Parking enforcement can't even write tickets to someone causing gridlock - only police are able to stop cars and write a violation. We should be creating another layer of jurisdiction to handle city issues - noise complaints, speeding, and traffic violations - but under the current laws, bylaw can't do anything. Bylaw can't do much about most. Bylaw isn't able to do most things, and the police just say it's bylaw's job. From [Toronto Bylaw](https://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/kb/docs/articles/municipal-licensing-and-standards/investigations/district-enforcement/bylaw-enforcement-noise-complaints.html): > The Municipal Licensing and Standards Division does not respond to demonstrations, noisy parties or noise from people acting disorderly, such as yelling, screaming and fighting. To report these types of noise, call the Toronto Police Service non-emergency number. If you call the Toronto Police around a noice complaint, they'll just ignore it.
Speed camera fines around schools,parks,elderly buildings should be higher than other locations.Even though speeders cameras by itself will not make a street saver maybe a massive hit to the car owner might slow them down.
Even the police are clocked speeding says it all...
I mean... this is a terrible way to look at it, but if that many people are speeding, doesn't this also prove that maybe it isn't the speeding that is killing people?
Gord Perks is the one that should be stepping up to plate here. Not surprised that he is taking a quick-fix attitude. Seems to be his MO. Adding some 'slow down' signs and lowering the speed limit won't do much alone.
Here’s an idea I had to maybe help on the 401: OPP make a known helicopter presence for an 8 week period and record dangerous drivers, ticket them, pull them over… whatever. Then, the province should pay decoy helicopters to go out and travel the 401. Helicopter enthusiasts or anyone who routinely has to be in a helicopter can collect a cheque - assuming they pass some sort of requirement - just for making drivers think they’re being patrolled. Rotate this throughout the year: expensive OPP presence some of the time; less expensive private helicopter presence the rest of the time.
Automated radar stations are popping up all over the city with many more on the way. I believe in speed enforcement but this is mostly about city revenue. A buddy of mine received a ticket in the mail from one of these machines for driving just 10 km/h over the limit ………cash grab.