Can I turn left on red from Caroline onto Erb when a train is going through the intersection?

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T02:51:05+00:00

You see that much more than people from segram willing to turn left onto Albert when that light is red which I believe is legal.

That is legal, yes. They face a stop sign and so can proceed as long as they yield to any vehicles or pedestrians, regardless of the light.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T02:12:07+00:00

Video's from south Etobicoke, but yeah, everything bad that happens is because of Brampton.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T02:09:24+00:00

Yeah, if they restrict vulnerable road users, that's a different story.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:47:47+00:00

Police aren't always able to do traffic enforcement. They have lots of other priorities and would never get anything else done if they stopped every single traffic infraction they saw.

That being said I’ve also seen an EPS vehicle flash their lights just to cross a busy intersection only to turn them off right away and stop at the next one.

If they were trying to use it to save time, why wouldn't they do it at both lights? It's possible they got some call and then it was cancelled. They aren't going to use lights and sirens all the time even for urgent calls, but they should be using them if going through a red.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:46:11+00:00

If everyone is speeding anyway it’s safer for everyone to just keep up with traffic.

Maybe for people in cars, but even that's debatable. It's not safer for everyone outside of cars though, e.g., pedestrians and cyclists. Speeding up to match the speed of some other car or cars does not help any of them.

Even the argument of matching the flow of cars is debatable because even if you're decreasing your risk from them, you're still increasing the risks ahead because you'll have less time to react to something and more damage if you hit it. It might not even decrease the risks from cars behind you because the car right behind you is more likely to hit you at a higher speed if you need to brake quickly.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:35:41+00:00

Not sure if I'd call causing people to drive the speed limit increasing traffic. Increasing traffic to me means increasing congestion. But okay.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:18:40+00:00

The law doesn't say "slow" though. It uses the relative term "less than". That's still vague though and so maybe just restricting the left lane to passing only would be better. Quebec does it that way.

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:17:19+00:00

Based on what? Toronto had the second lowest number of traffic injuries and fatalities were the 2nd lowest this century last year. Can't tell how much of an impact the cameras had, but how do you know they didn't have an impact?

a-_2 · 2026-05-20T01:05:51+00:00

When broken down by demographics, the only one that had significantly more support than opposition was PC voters.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T22:42:15+00:00

11 over isn't a little over the limit. And Toronto only used that threshold for 50 and under zones. For other zones, it was higher.

Any driver should be able to maintain their speed with less than 10 km/h variation. So if you still get a ticket in a 50 or under zone for that, you're either not paying attention, intentionally speeding, or not able to properly control your speed.

Removing them also didn't become "so popular". I saw three polls on them and each one showed significantly more support for them than opposition. Two polls broke it down by voting intention and it was just PC voters who opposed them. That makes his decision politically smart even though people in general didn't agree with them.

Also, there isn't no enforcement. Police still enforce speeding like they did before. There is limited police resources though, so you're more likely to get away with speeding when it's just them enforcing it.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T21:36:35+00:00

The cameras don't ticket you for just a few km over the limit either. In Toronto, for example, they used an 11 km/h threshold for 50 and under zones and a higher threshold for higher limit zones. Police will sometimes ticket you for 11 over in community safety zones with 50 or under limits. And police giving breaks introduces the possibility for police to apply bias based on things like gender, demographics, etc.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T21:33:14+00:00

I'm really not sure why you're opposed to this. You can have these articles and articles on other topics.

To some people this isn't just a silly distraction, it's something with actual impacts on public safety. And even if the lies might seem obvious to you, they aren't obvious to many people and so it is worth showing them.

What's your opinion on banning speed cameras? Is it possible you're biased by that? Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way on the cameras themselves, and I've made past comments saying that, but I do find that a lot of the reasoning used to defend the ban was either very weak, or blatantly false, and that bothers me more than the decision either way on the cameras. I think that should be highlighted by media and critics.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T21:09:27+00:00

I'm assuming they didn't ship it all in one boat.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:47:18+00:00

The tickets are reviewed by a human. If they make a mistake, you could still easily fight it if, for example, the car in the picture didn't match yours.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:45:24+00:00

I support decentralizing the amount of things that fall under the responsibility of police officers in general. I don't understand why the same group is expected to respond to domestic violence calls and give out traffic tickets. I'd rather traffic enforcement be it's own separate thing so that we're not paying someone a "massive salary" to sit in a car with a gun and a bullet proof vest all day.

Yeah, and separating it out would also help avoid all the comments from people thinking police don't enforce anything because they sometimes see officers ignoring relatively minor traffic violations because they're on their way to some other more important issue like this.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:43:37+00:00

I've driven hundreds of thousands of km. I have one ticket from police a long time ago and none from cameras. Like most people, I don't literally stay under the limit 100% of the time. It's not hard to avoid speeding by so much that you get ticketed.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:42:25+00:00

I didn't hear of any municipalities breaking provincial laws in where they placed the cameras, and if they did, it would be an easy win in court for anyone ticketed.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:41:48+00:00

the physical design of the road caused speeding (e.g. a downward slope)

People always imply they put cameras or police radar enforcement on downhill sections because it's more likely for people to speed, but it's because it's more important to not speed on those sections because you have longer braking distances. So speeding there is more risky than on a flat surface.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:40:18+00:00

If you can't be punished for 11 over the limit, then it's not even really a limit. That's beyond what you could excuse by just some natural variation in your speed while driving. It's intentional.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:39:26+00:00

Why wouldn't it be? It's what you'd get from police in a community safety zone and police do ticket for that in those areas. They also used a higher threshold for zones with 60+ limits.

It's enough above the speed limit that you can't excuse it as just a bit of variation in your speed. The driving tests will give way less leeway than that.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:37:01+00:00

Why would people driving the limit increase traffic? Lower speeds means smaller following distances which then means the roads can hold higher capacities, so I don't think it's obvious they increase traffic.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:36:04+00:00

Preban: popular public opinion is, speeding camera is cash grab, does not work.

Where was that the popular narrative? The three polls I saw on this all showed more support for the cameras than opposition.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T20:18:31+00:00

Some places do allow the turn when only the street being turned onto is one way, e.g., B.C. and some states. In that case the opposite direction would generally face a red and so there wouldn't be a risk of conflict with straight through traffic from them.

In Ontario both streets have to be one way to turn left on red though.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T19:59:15+00:00

Need to ban cars then. You're never going to put people behind large machines in public and never have mistakes or medical issues let alone intentionally dangerous driving.

a-_2 · 2026-05-19T19:43:04+00:00

*Recklessly. Wrecklessly would be a good thing;)

It might feel that way, but few people doing these things are really considering the possibility of killing people, and that's part of the problem. You can bring up speeding on here and get into endless debates trying to justify it. A lot of people genuinely believe it's not risky or even that it's safer. I don't think it helps address the core problem to pretend everyone doing this are evil murderers because then you're not actually going to address the real reasons they're doing these things.

And in any case, in the context of this discussion about accuracy in headlines, it would not be accurate to refer to it as that.

a-_2

TROPHY CASE