Common Ground: Ontario Liberal Party - by IdeaScale | Hot
The Ontario Liberals are currently looking for platform/policy ideas - and one of the top 3 is to raise the speedlimit to 120-130 on 400 series highways. So speak up - let your pols know artificially low speed limits are lame (look under "popular" on the site).

And if Ontario can be urged forward (unlikely, over the voices of the police, insurance co's and governments who are addicted to the revenue artificially low limits rake in), it could pave the way, so to speak, to more realistic limits elsewhere in Canada.

You do have to register to vote or add proposals, but it's just an email address and postal code (I used my brother-in-law's Hamilton code, I figured they might be inclined to ignore non-Ontario voters).

 

Ontario might think about focusing on something like increase the speed limit to 110 on major highways, just like in the rest of the provinces in Canada.

Judging by the zone change from 110 to 90 eastbound on the 1/17 @ the Manitoba/Ontario border... And the amount of cops handing out tickets the minute you cross.. I'm gonna take a stab in the dark and say Ontario doesn't really give a rats *** about anything other than revenue.

 

I'm not disagreeing - but the governing Ontario Libs have solicited public input on their policy direction - and this is a chance for Ontarians to speak up for realistic limits - when speeds are routinely 20-30 over, it's the law that's a problem, not the drivers. Setting artificially low speed limits not only encourages government and police speed ***** - "look, we caught xxx speeders in an afternoon on such-and-such stretch of highway - see how we're protecting you from yourselves!", but actually increases accidents, as well as congestion.

BC is no better - rare to find limits of even 100 in that province, let alone higher. Yet on the Coquihalla, I can be doing 140 in the slow lane and be getting passed.

 

They won't raise the limit in our lifetime. After all "speed kills", which they keep trumpeting like it's the truth. Well, I guess if neither vehicle was moving there would have been no collision, but that's really getting technical here. Poor driving kills, at any speed. The fact that almost every single driver on the 400 series freeways has **** poor diving skill, zero lane discipline and is busy sexting their crush as they drive is the real issue.

 

What is a safe upper limit? Are we going to have an actual lower limit too?
Speed doesn't kill, it's the difference in speed that kills.

Without proper driver training and certification for Ontario Motor Vehicle licensing (think Germany), I will always vote down on speed limit increases.

My life is more important than saving 6 mins on a 1 hour drive for every 10kph raised.

This is what Toronto deals with on a daily basis:

 

Watch the whole thing... The truth and valid thinking across Canada.

 

Don't let the Liberals be around after next election. They won't scrap Drive Clean. They may make promises but they are known to not keep to them. I think if we can convince another party to scrap drive clean (PC party already does I think) then we can focus on the speed limit. I am worried about getting more RX7s on the road rather then how fast the speed limit is. If you are smart you wont get a ticket.

 

I don't trust other drivers enough to raise the speed limit on 400-series highways.
People who do 80 or 90 getting onto highways would be more dangerous than they already are.
Raising speed limits on empty country roads in the middle of bum-tuck-nowhere? A possibility.

It seems the underlying reason people want to raise the speed limit is because it's giving the middle finger to authority. Settle down, Pennywise - just stop paying taxes if that's the case, I hear that goes over real well with the government.

How about we focus on something more pertinent to rotary owners and convince the liberals to scrap the ILLEGAL drive clean taxing, which is also on the table.

Take Action | Scrap Drive Clean.ca

Liberals must commit to scrap Drive Clean in economic statement | Scrap Drive Clean.ca

Liberals reject scrapping Drive Clean, refuse to repay illegal taxes | Scrap Drive Clean.ca

 

Agreed but they already have refused to scrap it so I say kick em out and bring in someone who can scrap it

 

Drive clean tax is WAYY more serious and affecting to rotary owners that a simple 10km/h raise on the highways

 

If they raised the speed limits on 400 series highways then people will start speeding even more than they already do. Itll just cause more accidents...and theres already at least 1 every day on the 400.

 

I'd like higher speed limits...in my mind at least. But in reality I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not. That is the problem, if they are raised some people will take that as a license to up the anti and go even faster. Now that's a problem ! I like fast but don't like it with the idiots and morons who do it with no regard for others.
Most people aren't capable of those type speeds. Not to mention when they are all driving at 110km with 2 car lengths between them.
Lets face it the 400 series are already out of control with people following WAY TOO CLOSE. None seems to get the fact that at those speeds stopping is impossible without nailing someone else ....that's only logical.....too little space equals too little room to stop.

And we want to go faster.......duh......get rid of 2/3 rds the drivers and I'm in for higher limits. But with the congestion we have now....I think not.
Maybe an 9 pm to 6 am raise of 10kph might be ok....much less traffic then.

They are already so many big ***** out there that think they become the engine/motor when they get behind the wheel. You know the types....follow way to close but don't have the ***** to actually pass you. They just ride your *** like they are entitled to run you down for their own agenda.
Even when the road opens up and they could pass they don't. Farkin pussies...even my dear old Mom can tailgate. It takes a man with ***** to pass.

 

I really have trouble believing so many on this forum buy into the "speed kills" BS of the speed *****. Speed limits should be set at 85th percentile speeds - in other words, the speed at which 85 percent of drivers travel at or below. If speeding is widespread, then it indicates the speed limit has no relationship to the reality of drivers - the vast majority of whom will drive at a speeds reasonable for the road design and conditions. In Calgary, for example, where the speed limit is 100 on the Deerfoot - a generally poorly designed freeway, the legacy of Calgary city councils who emphasized low-cost over recommended engineering solutions - and the 85th percentile speed when conditions allow is around 115-120kmh. No, raising limits won't magically make a roadway that suffers from rush-hour congestion flow smoothly, but it can improve flow at off-peak times, and even at peak times (more below, in relation to lane behavior).

Setting limits lower than the 85th percentile speed just lead to increased accidents and congestion, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, due to increased speed differentials, because some motorists will stick to the limit even if it's set absurdly low - speed differentials being one of the number one causes of accidents. It also tends to lead to poor lane behaviour and driver courtesy generally, which also contribute heavily to both congestion and accidents. Specifically, when the limit is set low enough that nearly all motorists are comfortable traveling faster, drivers feel free to drive in any lane, and to not keep-right-except-to-pass or yield to the right for faster moving traffic. Watch the video RacerJason posted for more about how speed limits should be set based on studies by traffic engineers, not politicians and police.

Don't believe speed limits affect lane behavior? Prior to 1999, Montana had no daytime speed limit on Interstates and select (divided) State highways. A daytime limit of 75 mph was instituted that year to comply with requirements for federal highway funds. Accident rates on the previously unlimited highways doubled in subsequent years - despite the fact that the average speed on those highways both before and after was 75mph (120km). What changed? Drivers in the left lane no longer felt the need to yield the lane to faster moving traffic - leading to increased tailgating and unsafe passing on the right. And that was with a change that didn't even actually change average driver speeds. Utah a couple years back increased speeds on the Interstate to 130 (80mph) (the I15 in Salt Lake is set at only 120) - and they've seen accident rates decrease (small wonder, on stretches through southern Utah, if you drive just 130, you better stay the hell out of the way!).

Your provincial government has inadvertently opened the door to a driver-centric policy initiative being pushed on them by voters. Why wouldn't you take a chance and add your vote, even though the Liberals are unlikely to move on it? You can bet not just the Ontario Liberals are watching that survey, looking for policy ideas - the opposition parties will be too, so even if the Liberals don't buy in, another party might - BC's Liberal government did just that over a decade ago, when they promised to kill photo-radar (which they did, and speed traps, which they didn't). But it was part of what got them elected.

 

If they raised the speed limit in ontario I wouldnt get so many tickets when I visit.

 

As far as saying kill Drive Clean is a higher priority - it's not an either-or proposition. Although I would suggest that, politically, saying speed limits should be based on research and engineers' recommendations, not on the fund raising needs of the province or municipality, is going to be a far easier proposition to advance than to say that the owners of modified cars should be given a free license to pollute the air everyone breathes, for example. Just sayin'. That's a message that's going to be a hard sell - and trying to call it an illegal tax just opens one to being easily discredited, since it is not a tax, and the program is run on a cost-recovery basis - in other words, it doesn't contribute to general revenue.

 

This morning driving to school I was at the ***-end of a train of cars doing 130 km/h in the left lane. At least 20 cars long doing 130. This is a regular occurance in the middle of the day on my easterly drive between Ajax and Oshawa.
Two months ago I was doing just about 150 km/h in my friends BMW on the 401/403 at 2 or 3am in the morning and an OPP caught up to me, rode beside me and shook his head. He didn't pull me over and I only slowed down to 130 while he kept driving on. There was NO ONE on the road and I was driving with two hands on the wheel dead-focused on what I was doing. I ended up making a trip from TMP in Cayuga to Ajax and back, with a stop in Mississauga, in quite a bit less than 2 hours.
Ontario already has one of the safest highway systems in North America according to StatsCan, so I don't think increasing the limit for the argument of safety is going to fly with anyone. Like that video says, it's not necessarily highways that are the issue with limit-laws, since I think 100km/h is a reasonable limit for 90% of the simpletons on these highways. A 50 zone near a school is fine, since that's what you CAN comfortably drive. 100km/h is FINE on the 401 because you CAN go faster comfortably and half the drivers do anyways without cops pulling you over unless you're doing something idiotic in combination with the speed in the first place. (I realize there are probably people who have been pulled over for doing 115 on the highway, but I'm speaking generally. When it's SAFE to do 120-130, no one is going to bother you. The argument that cars are safer and are able to drive much faster comfortably doesn't take into account the drivers behind the wheel of these cars. If you want to raise any limits, put a minimum merging limit on the damn on-ramps to make highway driving more efficient.

I don't believe an officer is likely to pull you over for doing 110-125 unless you're driving like an *** and tailgating/texting/talkingonphone/swerving or any combination of that. I've only ever gotten speeding tickets on roads like Taunton, Highway 11, Highway 7, etc. which I could see being increased in certain areas. There is a speed-trap constantly on the hills going east or west on Eglinton between Don Mills and Leslie. Why? No goddamn reason other than it's easy for them to catch people accidentally speeding on a down-hill section. It's places like THESE that need to have their speed limits increased, and not the 400-highways. It has to be selective process of assessing the places where limits are currently too low and not just a universal raising of 400-series highways, simply because that's where we travel most often.

If we were to petition for the government to change anything about road laws, it would be the testing system. Make license tests more demanding and make drivers more aware of how their cars behave in different conditions. That would increase road safety 10-fold compared to raising speed limits, in my opinion. Even my young drivers course 6 or 7 years ago now was stupefyingly easy to pass (for someone who understands cars), but compared to the test 8 months later? What a joke! I realize that's a different topic but the sooner we focus on the PROPER issues of driving in Ontario the sooner we'll get congestion/tickets/whatever it is that everyone is trying to accomplish here (besides legalizing their speeding habits). Here's an idea, implement a separate license allowing drivers to travel on highways versus just regular roads. Make it a seperate test that you have to pay a little more money for. Make driving on the highways a privilege. It would decrease the amount of people on the highways, make it safer to drive on, and best of all it would rake in some money to keep the gov't happy. I don't think people have the right mindset behind raising the speed limit.

In short, increase driver training and vehicular understanding, not speed limits. If we raise speed limits, we HAVE to raise awareness for the average driver of how a car behaves at high speeds.

Note*** If anyone can show me the research, and engineer recommendations based specifically on all of Ontario's 400-series highways saying EVERY stretch of the highway system can safely be raised, I'd likely change my mind based on evidence provided. Raising the limit between Oshawa and Kingston and Ottawa? Yes. Raising it in Brampton, Mississauga, Toronto? No. HELL Nah.

 

Very well put, covered most of the points I was going to raise and saved me from typing it out.

What people don't seem to understand is that there will always be some idiot doing 187km/h on the 400 series highways, it doesn't matter if the speed limit is 100 or 120.

The majority of traffic on the 400 series highways already travels at 115-125km/h. Raising the limit to 120 isn't going to make those same people drive between 135-145. People aren't exceeding the limit by 15-25km/h because they think they can get away with it, they're driving 115-125km/h because they feel that it's a safe speed for them to travel at.

If they raised the speed limit to 350km/h on the 400 series highways you wouldn't see everyone out there trying to drive around at full throttle in 5th gear. People would still drive at the speed they feel safe at. For those that are going to drive like a maniac, they're going to do it anyways.

-Geoff

 

Hmmm... fair enough.
But then what about everyone who still thinks it's safer doing 100km/h? Are they going to get tailgated in the right and centre lanes because they should now be doing 110? What about the people who do 90? Perhaps these are just short-term questions and I need to think of the 5 years down the road (ha ha good pun) when everyone has adjusted.

The speeding infractions should stay at the same severity at their current speeds, I think. Not 50 over the limit but rather 150km/h would still be the same repercussions, at just 40 over. I think if the limit would be raised the 'unsafe' areas of speed (for the average driver) still remain the same.

 

This is a topic of conversation that truthfully would require me to actually have the conservation in person with someone.

As CS13B mentioned, driver training and awareness is absolutely critical to helping our roadways in regards to safety, congestion, and economics.

In the GTA, yielding to the right to allow someone to pass is an extremely rare occurrence from my experience. A 21 year old started at my work, and we were each transporting a car to brampton. He sat in the left lane the majority of the time, and stayed behind me. I was using the centre lane staying with the majority of traffic, and using the left lane to pass when the opportunity and necessity was present. I asked him afterwards why he did that, especially not letting several people by. I was quite upset, especially being that the company name was on the back of the vehicle. He told me he was instructed in 'driving school' to drive in a staggered formation. This boggles my mind as that is for motorbikes, and he doesn't carry an 'M' class licence.

Furthermore, the reality of our highway traffic act is that it protects the people who are driving far below the speed of traffic (not speed limit, but the speed at which the majority of vehicles are driving) are well protected by the laws. For example, if your travelling at 98km/h in the right lane on a 400 series highway, and someone merges onto the highway at 30km/h 5 feet in front of you, and you rear end them, the reality is that is your fault. Even though the person merging onto the highway has a legal obligation to merge at an appropriate speed most cops would ignore this fact.

Mandatory driver re-education, digital speed limits for major highways for individual lanes, and mandatory dash cameras are my three biggest wants for ontario roadways.

 

I think people should also keep in mind that many cars are poorly maintained. That is, not counting the loose nut behind the wheel, their engines, suspensions, brakes, tires, lights, signals, etc. may not be safe and there is no way to guarantee that.

 

The people who are doing 100 or 90 on the 400 series highways are going to have the same thing happen now that would happen if the limit is raised.

Today if you're doing 90 on the 401 you're an accident waiting to happen, people are doing 115-125 now. Making the Limit 120 isn't going to make them any more or less of an impending accident.

-Geoff

 

There are two different types of fault in motor vehicle accidents.

In your scenario, a competant officer would issue the person who merged at 30 one or more tickets (this is "police fault")

In terms of insurance, the person who was doing 98 would be considered at-fault. This is through FSCO's "Fault Determination Rules". This has nothing to do with the Highway Traffic Act.

-Geoff

 

There's a great book on the whole subject, sometimes a bit dry but a good read anyways:
Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us)

 

All I am going to add to this is that people need to understand that Ontario isn't just the GTA. Inside the GTA there can be a lower limit like 100 kmh on the 400 series highways, but there is no reason why it couldn't be 120 kmh in the more remote areas where almost everyone on the highways out there are already doing that and the only times you have an issue is when everyone bunches up for a radar trap or a cruiser sitting in the left lane driving at 110 kmh.

I drive a ton in the Windsor, Toronto, Montreal corridor as well as out west and in Quebec and in almost every other region of North America the posted highway speeds are higher than in Ontario. This doesn't include freakin' Ohio where the local municipalities use catching speeders as a way to maintain their public services.

I always have an issue every time I get off the plane in LA. I pull on to their highways and try to do my normal 110 to 115 kmh and I get swamped on all sides and I have to go into race mode to keep up. Traffic in many states in the US motors along at 80 to 90 mph, including big rigs and they don't have better drivers or more accidents than we do up here. Our stats aren't better due to our better and safer drivers, it has to do more with the increased congestion inside the GTA and the better design of the cars that has minimized ijuries more than the 100 kmh speed limit.

There is a whole generation of Ontario drivers brought up in the Nanny State of lowered government expectations who actually think an accident at 100 kmh is really going to be safer than an accident at 110. If you crash at either speed, its going to be bad.

rant off......

Eric

 

Can we not use the term "accident"? An accident would indicate that it was not preventable and there is no fault. They are "collisions". Someone is almost always at fault. There are few true "accidents".