GTcarz - Automotive forums for cars & trucks. - *NEW* Anti-Street Racing Law. Explanation and Our Response

Ok Street Racing Sluts time to listen up. I may not be the most respected member here or even the most active. But when it comes to the law I have $45,000 worth of LL.B. to back my thoughts up. The purpose of this thread is twofold. 1) To explain to you legit racers, n00bs, civic nation sluts and the unclean masses the new laws and what they mean to you if you're caught. 2) To detail EXACTLY the sort of response I expect from these laws given the sentances. You may want to print this off and read it or you may want to burn out your retina's, either way it's worth reading. So without further ado:

The Bill:
Description and Analysis
Bill C-65 contains ten clauses. Clause 1 defines street racing. Clauses 2 and 3 provide that street racing is an aggravating circumstance. Clause 4 provides for driving prohibition orders. Clauses 5 to 10 introduce consequential amendments to reflect the changes proposed in the previous clauses. This discussion will focus on the substantive amendments introduced by the first four clauses of the bill.

A. Definition of “Street Racing” (Clause 1)
Clause 1 of the bill defines “street racing” for the purposes of the Criminal Code.(41) The new definition, which will appear in section 2 of the Code, is stated in general terms, unlike, for example, the definition in the British Columbia statute.(42) This could be, among other things, because the definition in the bill relates to two offences – criminal negligence and dangerous driving – that are already described in the Code.(43) It can apply to a broad range of activities, and it relates both to organized street racing and to improvised events.

The bill uses the expression “race with another motor vehicle” (emphasis added), which implies that two or more vehicles participate in it. The proposed definition therefore does not seem to include a race against the clock, in which only one motor vehicle is involved.(44) As well, the expression “motor vehicle” is already defined in section 2 of the Code,(45) and it might mean that a race between, for example, motorcycles, snowmobiles or all-terrain vehicles could be characterized as a “street race.” On the other hand, under the definition in the bill, the “race” must take place in a public place.(46)

B. Aggravating Circumstance (Clauses 2 and 3)
1. Offences in Question: Criminal Negligence and Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Bodily Harm
The principles of sentencing are set out in sections 718 et seq. of the Code. They include the aggravating factors listed, non-exhaustively,(47) in paragraph 718.2(a). In addition to that list, Bill C-65 makes street racing an aggravating circumstance. On the other hand, street racing is an aggravating circumstance only where the individual who engaged in it has been convicted of criminal negligence causing death(48) or bodily harm(49) (s. 2 of the bill), or of dangerous driving causing death(50) or bodily harm(51) (s. 3 of the bill). The bill thus applies only to street races that result in death or bodily harm(52) and that may be characterized, in criminal law, as criminal negligence or dangerous driving.

On a scale of seriousness, criminal negligence is higher than dangerous driving.(53) The distinguishing factor between the two offences is the degree of carelessness or recklessness. For the offence of dangerous driving,(54) it must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused’s conduct amounted to a marked departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the same situation.(55) For the offence of criminal negligence,(56) the departure must be more marked. A negligent driver must have shown “wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.”(57)

There must be a causal connection between the street racing and the death or bodily harm caused, for both the offence of dangerous driving and the offence of criminal negligence. While that connection must be more than minor (de minimis),(58) racing with another vehicle may be enough to establish the causal connection, even where there was no direct collision with the victim.(59)

In addition, as indicated earlier, some of the rules to combat the street racing problem in the United States apply not only to the racers but also to organizers and spectators. Clauses 2 and 3 of Bill C-65 use the expression “the offender was street racing” (emphasis added). In Canadian criminal law, a person who aids or abets a racer may also be considered to have been a party to the offence.(60)

There is also legislation in the provinces and the United States that provides for vehicles used for street racing to be seized and impounded. Under the Code, a peace officer may, without a warrant, seize a vehicle used for that purpose.(61) The vehicle may be detained until the completion of the criminal proceedings(62) and forfeited on conviction.(63)

2. Imprisonment
The more serious offence, criminal negligence causing death, is punishable by life imprisonment,(64) while the less serious offences, criminal negligence and dangerous driving causing bodily harm, are punishable by imprisonment for a maximum of 10 years.(65) The maximum sentence for dangerous driving causing death is imprisonment for 14 years.(66)

There is no minimum term of imprisonment for the four offences to which the bill relates. A person convicted of any of those offences may therefore serve his or her sentence in the community, if the judge believes that to be appropriate.(67) That situation will not change if Bill C-65 is brought into force. The presence of an aggravating circumstance will not prevent the judge from imposing a conditional sentence.(68)

At present, imposing conditional sentences is a wide practice, even for a serious offence such as criminal negligence causing death.(69) The sentencing judge is required, under the Code, to consider all available sanctions less restrictive than deprivation of liberty.(70)

In R. v. Khosa,(71) the British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed a conditional sentence of two years less a day. In that case, two young adults had been convicted of criminal negligence causing death. On 13 November 2000, they took part in an impromptu street race, which ended tragically in the death of a pedestrian who was completely uninvolved in the race. The factors that the Court took into consideration included the fact that the offenders had no criminal record and the fact that the race had not been organized.(72) The Court also pointed out that street racing is not an aggravating circumstance under the existing rules.(73)

On the other hand, some courts have held that street racing was indeed an aggravating circumstance and that deterrence was an important factor to be considered.(74) In R. v. Tang,(75) for example, the judge, who was dealing with a street racing case, handed down a sentence of four years’ imprisonment to a person convicted of negligent driving causing death and failure to stop at the scene of an accident.(76) The British Columbia Court of Appeal has even affirmed an exemplary sentence imposed on a 17-year-old young offender involved in street racing.(77) After convicting him of negligent driving causing death and of driving while intoxicated causing death,(78) the trial judge had ordered that he be placed in custody for a period of one year.

Thus not all courts are in agreement on the question of whether street racing is an aggravating factor. The result can be marked discrepancies in the sentences imposed. Clauses 2 and 3 of Bill C-65 therefore require the courts to consider street racing to be an aggravating circumstance. To quote Chief Justice Lamer of the Supreme Court (since retired): “Where objectives such as denunciation and deterrence are particularly pressing, incarceration will generally be the preferable sanction.”(79)

C. Prohibition Order (Clause 4)
Under the existing provisions of the Code, a judge who sentences a person convicted of one of the offences to which the bill relates may, but is not required to, make an order prohibiting the offender from driving.(80) The order is therefore discretionary. Clause 4 of Bill C-65, like the provisions regarding orders in drunk driving cases,(81) requires that the judge make the order. Accordingly, in a street racing case in which an offender is convicted of either criminal negligence (causing death or bodily harm) or dangerous driving (causing death or bodily harm), the judge will have to prohibit the offender from driving in a public place, for a specified period. The order is therefore mandatory.

Another change made by the bill is the introduction of a minimum period of prohibition on driving. The minimum is one year, for the four offences to which the bill relates. On the other hand, the bill does not change the maximums already in place, and, unlike Mr. Cadman’s bill, does not establish a system whereby the length of the prohibition order would increase for each repeat offence.(82)

Discussion

The Public/Government Perception and the Reality.

Let's get right down to the heart of the matter. The Government/Public believe Street Racing kills. They believe this because every year 30-40 dumbshits in their parents or their own cars decide to "race" along some street whereby one dipshit loses control and kills an innocent bystander and/or himself.

Ask yourself, out of ALL the street races you have ever been to. How many people are walking up and down the street or driving there car along that street who DON'T want to be there. I can say that in my 15 yrs of racing I have not once seen a family of 4 or an elderly woman or an immigrant taxi driver walking along <enter favourite local street racing spot here> in an industrial or commercial area at 12pm-6am on a weekend.

So let me just write off the majority of these fatalities right now. The people who have died can't be brought back, but it wasn't some person who races as a hobby that did it, it was some punk in his mom's mercedes who can't handle 230 horsepower and is probably the type that hasn't even BEEN to a street race.

Conclusion: Most "street racing" fatalities aren't cause be actual street racers.

Next issue:

Street Racing as reckless and dangerous.

Again I'm speaking from experience here. There is a certain degree of risk to street racing, that risk is that you'll wreck your car, kill yourself and possibly a willing observer (again no body hangs out on our streets at 2am that aren't there to race or watch). Is it reckless and dangerous? Depends on who is handling what vehicle. To be quite honest anything in the hands of a lunatic is reckless and dangerous. But of the non-gino-shooter-ricer street racers how many of us our out there to show off? Raise your hand. The reckless part of it is often "considered" with spotters. Spotting not only Cops, but other traffic that we don't expect. Is doing 140 down a street reckless and dangerous? Not if you KNOW what you're doing and you ease off the instant you percieve what you're doing. There's probably not much I can say here to convince you, me or any of the anti-street racerites that it isn't reckless and dangerous, so I'll just leave it at this. The recklessness and danger associated with street racing is accepted by those who participate. No one wants to kill someone else or themselves. We undertake street racing because there are no local alternatives.

Conclusion: Reckless and Dangerous? Yes, in the wrong hands. But everything is dangerous in life, just to different degrees. I accept the danger and choose to operate my vehicle as safe as I can until there is an alternative.

Next Issue:

A local motorsports park

The Alternatives to street racing in Toronto, the GTA or most of Ontario for that matter aren't plentiful. There are not tracks or strips as ERASE or PACER would have us believe that are readily accessible from where we live. Sure you can make the argument about Cayuga, but that's 2 hours away. Where's the LOCAL race track? We have a bunch of unused land at the Old Downsview Air Force base, why couldn't a track be built there? Instead of giving more land to Wonderland or Mattamy/Georgian homes why don't the Feds and Ont Gov't get together and build a track on the Moraine? 80% of GTA street racing takes place north of Hwy 7, a track up there would be perfect.

Why won't they build one? Because they are too busy cutting the 1% off the GST, pandering to immigrants who turn out to be terrorists out to cut of the PM's head and other miscellaneous crap that really doesn't affect anyone's quality of life. Ask yourself honestly, when was the last time the Government used YOUR tax dollars to improve YOUR quality of life?

I was an avid skateboarder between the ages of 13-20, during this time there were no skateboard parks to be seen anywhere in Toronto, so we went downtown and skated, got kicked out by security, bullied by cops and eventually pushed into ghetto little make-shift skatepark warehouses. Finally about 2 years ago the City of Mississauga cracks and builds one right next to the Hershey centre, further to that the City of Toronto is planning on building several other skate parks. However it comes as no surprise to me though, all this "attention" to meeting it's citizens needs are about 10 years overdue. Who skateboards anymore? It's no where near it's peak in the 1990's. The point of all this bantering? They bowed to the skaters, but they won't built us a strip? What does it take....ashphalt, concrete barriers, and all the miscellaneous safeguards. Why not build one and sell it off to a private corporation to operate. Charge $15 a car. All you can race all night.

This is why. Because we've been demonized. We are the bane and scurge of society, we have killed innocent people pursuing our own selfish excitement and for that we shall never have a motorsports park here around Toronto.

Last Issue:

Street Racers response to the new laws.

So we're outlaws, not only that but we have targets painted on our license plates now (not that we didn't for the past few years since York Region and Peel OPP will give anyone and their Mom a ticket for an exhaust) but now more than ever. Question is do we learn from previous convictions. In my experience, No. Improper Seatbelts (see racing harnesses), Improper Exhaust (see GReddy 50-state legal, less than X decibals, 2.5" exhaust), Unneccessary Noise (see above). Etc etc. Has this detered me? No. It may be a privilege to drive, but it's a RIGHT to express myself. I consider my car a statement and a hobby. What statement does it make? 'Life is a *****, if you have money you can buy nice things, nice things get you laid, the man aims to prevent you from getting laid by giving you fines, fines don't deter my desire to "pimp my ride", especially when I know I'm minding my own business with my double-double and boston cream donut at 2am in a Tim Horton's parking lot with no intention of racing, rather I'm there to raz the Italians about there draw with the USA.' We are painted as racers even if we don't race. Big exhaust? street racer. 19" rims? street racer. Exhaust and intake? street racer. What ever happened to legitimately enjoying the performance of my car? I'm not racing at 4pm in the afternoon on Eglinton, but I'm treated like it. Biligerance gets me no where. So I take the and let it slide. The cop is a prick and I haven't touched even 1km over the speed limit. I'm getting jacked, just because. This isn't street racing enforcement, it's harassment. Simple premise: Not everyone who modifies their car, races. Not everyone who races, modifies there car. $45,000 350Z Roadster, $6k in modifications, $1,500 rims, DVD player, PS2, some skank shotgun. Think I'm racing. Get bent. My cars nicer than your house. There isn't a chance in the world I'm racing this. So let me get to my point....

Hypothetically you're a loser, loser in the sense that you repeatedly get caught street racing and you've gone to jail several times, you persist, not because you are the personification of Paul Walker, rather it's what thrills you. For some thrilling is flossing after they brush, while others prefer taking it in two holes at the same time, for you it's about showing the Cobra next to you that pushrods don't have on Rotaries. In a second you're racing, out of no where comes a cop. He's behind you, if you push it you can probably make it down to the corner, hang a right and keep booting...in 15 seconds you can be at 200 km/h. There isn't a chance in hell if you make it to the end of the block he'll catch you. Why slow down, it's not that you fear jail, it's the fact that if you go back it's PERMANENT.

This is now OUR reality. Multiple time loser and your 1 year or 3 year stints could become a permanent vacation in Kingston, and I don't mean on one of your Fraternaties Queens Panty raids. I'm talking about Paul Bernardo's house.

So if you are ever confronted with this situation: Take off, risk your life, rack up more charges if you are caught OR stop and go to jail for life. I would SERIOUSLY recommend you take your chances with you Grand Theft Auto/Gran Turismo 4 driving skills. If you get caught you're ****ed. Why stop?

WHY STOP?

That is my answer to the Politicians who think these tougher laws will stop/prevent more deaths. If we are as irrational as they say we are, are we REALLY going to stop for a police officer if we are facing life imprisonment? You're not. If you're going out it's in a blaze of glory, twisted metal and KABOOMS, it's not in the back of an Impala. Life Imprisonment as the sentance will only cause more deaths. Not deaths as a result of street racing, rather deaths as a result of the pursuits which will now occur from offenders who won't stop.

I'm not advocating escalating your average every day ticket and speeding fine into full out pursuits. But in the case of those who really are going back to jail for good. Godspeed.