Since the CAA published their survey revealing the #1 road safety concern for most Canadians is texting and driving, using cellphones while driving has been a hot topic in the news. Despite having a cellphone ban in effect for a year now, most of these reports indicate Ontario drivers are having a hard time putting their mobiles down.

February 14, 2011, marked the one year anniversary for Ontario’s cellphone ban and Toronto police celebrated by cracking down on drivers through their campaign, “Last Call: Whatever You Have to Say Can Wait,” reported CTV.ca. Since January, police say they’ve handed out 1,275 tickets (an average of 41 per day) for $155 fine each.

The Toronto Star reported earlier this month that $46,000 tickets were issued across Ontario within the first year of the provincial ban. The article also cites several studies which support the need for the legislation:

• A Canadian landmark study which found mobile use while driving makes motorists four times more likely to be in a collision.
• In a Utah study, they discovered cellphone users were more impaired in their driving skills than those who were drunk.

Illustrating that all Ontario drivers have been slow to change their behaviour, late last month a TTC bus driver was caught on film texting and driving (source: TorontoSun.com).

In other parts of Ontario, Cornwall Police Chief told the media he hasn’t seen an improvement since the legislation came into effect and in Sudbury, cops issue tickets while directing traffic (source: theglobeandmail.com).

In most cases, change happens over time. Getting a distracted driving ticket is one way to change behaviour, but as we learned in our last post, Study: Most Effective Approach with Teens, Texting & Driving, Ontario drivers can avoid negative reinforcement and embrace responsibility in contributing to safer roads.

What are your thoughts on cellphone bans and, based on the

While impaired driving is still worrisome for Canadians, a recent survey shows that texting while driving has risen to the top as being the most threatening to personal road safety.

Last November, Marketwire released a press release on a poll conducted by the Canadian Automobile Association which surveyed 6,000 Canadians about their road safety concerns. While drinking and driving has been the forerunner for over 10 years, these survey results revealed a cultural shift as 85% of respondents feel texting and driving is now the number one road safety issue today.

The poll also showed Canadians have every reason to be concerned about the dangers of texting and driving, “young Canadians, disproportionately those under 30, are texting while driving on a regular basis.” This is despite the fact that seven provinces have banned cell phone use while driving. (We reported the Ontario legislation for a cell phone ban back in 2008.)

From the press release:

“Legislation alone will not solve the issue. Enforcement along with public awareness and education are required, as well as a change in how we as a society view the habit,” said Mr. [Jeff] Walker [CAA Vice-President of Public Relations]. “It is a matter of our society making the practice of texting while driving socially unacceptable.”

As well, the poll found the problem is not a lack of awareness of the laws governing this issue. Canadians of all ages are familiar with laws in their respective regions banning the practice.

Although texting and driving came out on top in this survey, impaired driving is a close second with 83% of the survey respondents citing it as a major threat to their personal safety while on the road.

The press release declared the survey’s accuracy to be within 1.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

What’s your greatest road safety concern today?

While many still believe graduated licence laws are veiled cash grabs invoked by the government to pad the pockets of concerned agencies, studies comparing vehicular deaths involving young teen drivers seem to suggest otherwise.

Following up with our recent post, Study Links Male Teens with ADHD to Traffic Accidents, the Globe and Mail reported a similar study released in February, 2009, with results that imply graduated licence laws actually do work.

The study, conducted by the AAA (American Automobile Association) Foundation of Traffic Safety, compared car crashes connected to teen drivers between 1998 and 2007.

From the Globe and Mail:

“The analysis shows that about one-third of people killed in crashes involving drivers ages 15 to 17 are teen drivers themselves. Nearly two-thirds are passengers, occupants of other vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users,” it says.

In 2006, a previous analysis of car crashes in the U.S. involving teen drivers found that between 1995 and 2004, crashes involving 15-, 16- and 17-old drivers claimed the lives of 30,917 people, of whom 36.2 per cent were teen drivers and 63.6 per cent were passengers of teen drivers, occupants of other vehicles operated by adult drivers, non-motorists and pedestrians.

This is compared with the more recent analysis of car crashes of 1998 and 2007, where 15-, 16-, and 17-year old drivers killed 28,138 people in the United States. This study concluded that 36.9%  were teen drivers, 63.1% were passengers of teen drivers and 31.4% were occupants of other vehicles operated by adult drivers, non-motorists and pedestrians.

“During the last decade, as states improved their teen licensing systems and AAA has helped parents get more involved, we have seen reductions in teen driver deaths and even larger reductions in the number of other people killed,” Darbelnet [Robert Darbelnet, chief executive officer and president of the American Automobile Association] says. “Clearly, measures put into place to save teen drivers help us all.”

The 51-million-member association is a strong proponent of graduated licensing and says that 49 states fall short of AAA guidelines, which have proven effective in reducing deaths among 16-year-old drivers by 38 per cent.

A report by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation – best practices for graduated licencing in Canada – compared programs in place in this country with those in other jurisdictions. It identified a number of proven components necessary for a multi-staged GDL program including:

• Minimum entry age
• Vision and knowledge testing
• Parental consent under the age of 19
• Minimum duration of 12 months
• Maximum of 24 months before retesting and advancing
• Accompanied by a supervisory driver for a minimum of 50 hours, including 10 at night and 10 in winter conditions
• Professional driver education and training
• Zero BAC (blood alcohol content) – same for the supervisor
• Night restrictions
• Passenger restrictions
• L (learner) sign or plate
• Stiff penalties, suspension and prohibitions for violations of the above.

Inexperienced drivers are most perceptible to distraction is the most pervading reasoning to graduated licensing. The critical relationship between time and distance has yet to be fleshed out in beginner minds, causing them to be especially at risk when closing speeds are outside their parameters of reference.

The AAA, TIRF and other organizations all stress that parental involvement is a key factor in these critical early years at the wheel. Do you believe that graduated licencing allows for a time differentiation where the driver learns enough to avoid crashes? We want to hear from you.

Research published earlier this month reveals male teens with disruptive behaviour disorders are more likely to be involved in traffic accidents. Findings suggest new legislation is needed for licencing drivers with ADHD and other related disorders.

Using Ontario healthcare databases to find correlations, the study found a higher than normal incidence of male teen drivers with disruptive behaviour disorders involved in car collisions. Results also show an association between young male pedestrians with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and traffic accidents.

Donald Redelmeier, lead author of the study and University of Toronto professor, says the results imply a need for stricter licencing requirements for those who are easily distracted due to a medically diagnosed disorder. From the Globe and Mail:

“Taking away peoples’ driver’s licences is not the solution,” Dr. Redelmeier said. “Instead we argue that ADHD ought to be considered just like diabetes and just like epilepsy. Specifically, if you wish to maintain a driver’s licence, you need to see your doctor and show that you are under good control.”

Published in the journal Public Library of Science Medicine, the study allowed researchers to determine that young men with ADHD were at a greater risk for road accidents than the general public. They did this by comparing hospital admissions during April 2002 to March 2009 of young men with ADHD involved in a crash with young men hospitalized for appendicitis.

It should be noted the actual prevalence of traffic accidents involving young men with ADHD could be underestimated, as the study only includes those aware of their disorder and who had access to medical treatment. Many cases of disruptive behaviour disorders go undiagnosed.

The Globe and Mail article points out that the exact causes of the crashes studied may never be known, but that the typical behaviour of those with ADHD suggest they are more susceptible to distractions and are unable to concentrate on one task for extended periods of time. Taken together, the findings from the study identifies a previously unknown potential risk to public road safety.

Dr. Redelmeier said physicians as well as individuals with ADHD and related disorders should be more cognizant of the fact they may be at a greater risk when driving or even crossing the street. It’s important they keep in mind principles of safe driving, such as avoiding excessive speed and minimizing other distractions, such as cellphones, and pay attention when they are crossing streets.

But Dr. Edmunds [an ADHD researcher] suggests there may be no easy solution to the risks outlined in the study. That’s because individuals with disruptive behaviour disorders seem to have trouble remembering to perform tasks that are ingrained in others, such as always checking their blind spot before changing lanes. Similarly, those individuals may not be able to react during an emergency situation the same way as the general population.

More research in this area is necessary before legislation is proposed but the study’s authors say at the very least their results command increased awareness to the risks for male teens with ADHD. At the most, the study concludes its results indicate a certain portion of preventable traffic deaths and disability.

If this study accurately identifies ADHD as a potential driving hazard, how do you think the Canadian government should handle driving and disruptive behaviour disorders?

Richmond, BC, is considering a companion animal sales ban on shopping mall pet stores in an effort to diminish the consumer demand fuelling the puppy mill industry. Store owners oppose the ban and say responsible retailers add benefits and credibility to the industry.

Following legislation already passed in two California cities, Richmond’s ban (the first in Canada) would allow adoption from animal shelters and buying from private breeders. Possible amendments to an animal sales ban may include permission for pet stores to offer animal adoption or work in conjunction with local animal shelters.

The supporters of the ban argue that pet stores do not screen owners before purchase and impulsive shopping contributes to the inhumane treatment of animals. From the National Post:

“Mr. Johnston [Richmond City Council member]) points to a CBC documentary, aired last year, that traced puppies sold in Canadian pet stores back to U.S. puppy mills, where dogs are bred in harsh, unsanitary conditions with little regard for health. The Humane Society of the United States has also linked pet supply chains to puppy mills. And the Richmond Animal Protection Society notes a steady stream of surrendered dogs, originally bought from pet stores, whose owners lose interest once their purchases outgrow the cute puppy stage.”

Richmond’s shopping mall pet store owners oppose the ban, saying their responsible business operations discourage impulse shopping. Some say their high prices encourage well-informed consumers. Others say they treat their business as well as they treat their store animals; they offer guarantees, professional advice and their animals are checked by veterinarians.

Pet store owners also argue that a ban may open up an even less regulated black market for puppy sales.

If you’ve been affected by the practices of shopping mall pet stores, please consider using Legal Action to recover any financial hardships you have suffered  in small claims court.

Do you agree with an animal retail ban for shopping mall pet stores in your city or province?

According to Ontario’s auditor general, Ottawa police have been handing out more traffic tickets than any other provincial municipality over the past ten years. In fact, the number of tickets issued in the capital city has increased very dramatically, and what is more worrying for some watchdogs is that this increase comes at the same time that traffic revenues were transferred to the city.

The recently-released auditor general’s annual report cites theses facts as a potential conflict. Ottawa was allowed to keep the revenue from tickets in 2001. Between 1999 and 2007, the number of traffic tickets written up by Ottawa Police jumped 155%. No other area of the province has seen such a jump, leading to the obvious question: are the tickets just a money grab by Ottawa?

York has also seen an increase in traffic tickets, but only by 95%. Toronto has seen an increase of 78% in terms of tickets being written up. Other cities in Ontario are seeing increases of 50% or less. The huge jump in Ottawa certainly seems conspicuous. The auditor general, Jim McCarter, has been asking whether the traffic practices might be influenced by the desire to promote revenues in the city. However, he was not able to find a firm answer so he raised the issue with Ontario’s attorney general.

Ottawa police have their own explanations for the sudden spike in tickets. Police spokesperson Staff Sgt. Rock Lavigne notes that in 2002, the police targeted unsafe driving and speeding as top issues and as a result hired 18 officers for the city’s traffic enforcement and escort unit. The 42-member-strong-team can better catch aggressive drivers and speeding drivers, Lavigne notes. The fact that tickets increased by a third within the first year the new officers were hired does seem to suggest the extra officers may have played a role in the ticket increases. Lavigne also says that the city’s growth in 2001 may explain the extra tickets. In that year, the Ottawa police expanded their jurisdiction, which now includes Rideau, Osgoode, Goulbourn, Kanata, West Carleton, Cumberland, and Rockcliffe Park

Still, watchdogs find it hard to ignore that the money from tickets does into Ottawa’s general revenue coffers (once a small fraction of the proceeds are granted to the province). Ottawa’s police services board rejects that idea that there is anything underhanded or self-serving in the writing of tickets. According to West Carleton-March Councillor Eli El-Chantiry, who also served on the city’s police services board, Ottawa is simply proving more effective and innovative in clamping down on speeding.

There was a lot of action this year in Ontario’s traffic news and in celebration of year’s end, we thought it might be a good idea to recap major events. If you’ve missed any of the stories and they interest you, this is your chance to get caught up. Just follow the link to read the full news coverage.

January 20, 2008: New Ontario Holiday, a Legal Loophole? Speeders and other traffic violators had the opportunity to exploit Dalton McGuinty’s hasty new ‘Family Day’ holiday.

February 29, 2008: Should Winter Tires be the Law? Ontario was contemplating following Quebec’s lead in passing legislation for mandatory winter tire use. So far this law has not been passed in Ontario but it’s interesting to note that the Quebec winter tire law has caused a shortage of winter tires for the rest of Canada!

March 14, 2008: Ontario Regulates Paralegals: Understanding Bill 14. A very important highlight if you’re on this blog and looking for good legal representation. Ontario paralegals must now be licensed in order to help you with your legal troubles.

March 21, 2008: Does Ontario’s New Street-racing Law Violate the Charter of Rights? Ontario passes a new controversial law targeting street-racers, netting the government millions in fines within the first month to keep the streets clear of drivers going 50km/h and over.

April 5, 2008: Understanding Bill 203: Safer Roads for a Safer Ontario. This post breaks down this aggressive bill into its 3 constituents for easier understanding: street-racing, flashing lights, and drinking and driving.

May 30, 2008: Garbage Truck Nabbed for “Street-Racing”. Fueling the flames for the controversy surrounding the new street-racing legislation, the driver of a garbage truck was an unlikely street-racer caught in the act, along with an 85-year-old man and a 16-year-old girl who were also charged for `racing’ earlier this year.

Read the rest of this entry »

Montreal artist Michel de Broin was making a blatant statement about consumption when he transformed a luxury Buick Regal into a bicycle. But P.C. Derek Walsh didn’t appreciate the message when he spotted the strange looking car going 15 km/h on Toronto streets.

Walsh immediately pulled the Buick over, looked inside and saw that there was no floor, no engine and used candles for headlights. Caught in a YouTube video, the police officer looks in the vehicle, shakes his head and says, “Not even close to being legal.” He writes up a traffic ticket for operating an unsafe vehicle, seizes the car and leaves the artistic passengers stranded, wondering what to tell the Art Gallery.

Here is the YouTube video for your viewing pleasure:

Toronto Police Ticket Flinstone Car Art

As CityNews reported, Dean Baldwin, the driver of the ‘Flintstone Motor Art’, parked the Buick in front of Toronto’s traffic court ready to fight the traffic ticket. The traffic court judge threw out the case claiming that the modified Buick was no longer a vehicle and therefore the charge was inapplicable.

So as you can see through this example, with the proper defense, you can fight any traffic ticket and win. If you’d like the reassurance of having a professional handle your case, get Legal Action today!

It sounds like a board game but the city isn’t paying games. They are very serious in their new initiative of putting pedestrians before drivers and have proven it by implementing an experiment called the, “pedestrian scramble”.

On August 28^th, reports the globeandmail.com, one of the busiest intersections of Toronto, Yonge and Dundas, turned into a free-for-all-pedestrians. The traffic light configuration stops all vehicles in every direction to allow pedestrians to cross the street in any direction they please, including diagonally.

Drivers will have to wait up to almost a minute before they are allowed to proceed, where as before the longest wait time was 30 seconds. Green lights for drivers have been reduced by almost 10 seconds to allow more crossing time for pedestrians.

Other cities, like Montreal, Tokyo, San Fransisco and Miami, have already implemented the ‘pedestrian scramble’ as far back as the 1950s. These pedestrian scrambles have been widely accepted and have had pedestrians dancing in the streets. By the way, here in Toronto we call it ‘pedestrian priority phase,’ as the term, ‘scramble’ immediately brings to mind disorderly conduct.

Other Toronto intersections for future consideration are:

• Yonge and Bloor
• Bay and Bloor
• Bay and Dundas

The article explains that the whole point of the scramble is for pedestrian safety as it completely halts the possibility of vehicles turning into streams of pedestrians. As you may have noticed, green light advances for cars arrive just prior to pedestrian green lights. Many pedestrians begin crossing the street as soon as they notice opposing car traffic has the red light, forgetting about the advanced green for cars.

The enigma here is that at Yonge and Dundas, cars cannot make left hand turns. Essentially the pedestrian scramble here is more ‘symbolic’ than pragmatic. Pedestrians will still be able to cross when cars have their green light while at other intersections where cars are allowed to turn, pedestrians will have to wait for their special signal. Critics suggest that pedestrians may become impatient at these intersections, increasing the incidence of jaywalking and the danger of traffic accidents.

It’ll be interesting to see if this initiative actually benefits pedestrians, and if drivers are able to cope with their increased wait times.

In last week’s post, we reported how the Provincial authorities claim the roads have been made safer through the one-year-old street-racing legislation. But critics say this is only one of many factors affecting the lower incidence of traffic fatalities. High gas prices are a likely suspect, and one American study seems to verify this idea.

The Transportation Research Institute at the University of Michigan reported recent results from their study, which covers 12 month ending in April, and found that as gas prices rose, driving and fatalities declined. They predict that if the same pattern continues for the rest of the year, Americans will be driving on roads that haven’t been this safe since Kennedy moved into the White House.

From the wheels section of The Star:

Sivak, who used data from the National Safety Council, National Center for Health Statistics and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration…predicts that highway deaths this year will drop below 37,000 for the first time since 1961 if the March and April trends continue. The government motor vehicle death count for 1961 totaled 36,285. The number of highway deaths peaked in 1972 at 55,600, then generally declined over the next two decades. For the past several years, the number has hovered above 42,000 a year.

NHTSA reported last week that motor vehicle deaths in the United States totaled 41,059 last year, the lowest level in more than a decade. And the Federal Highway Administration said Americans drove 12.2 billion fewer miles in June than a year earlier, the biggest monthly decrease in a downward trend that began in November.

Here’s what motor vehicular fatality trend experts say what’s happening:

• Drivers are reducing nonessential driving, at night and on weekends, which is not as safe as commuting in daytime and slowly in congested roads.
• Teenage and elderly drivers, who do not have disposable income, most likely are choosing more affordable travelling options.
• Rural routes, which have higher accident rates than urban highways, have seen traffic declines.
• Drivers are simply slowing down for the sake of fuel economy.

While this is an American study, we Canadian neighbours share similar economics with the States and it is no great leap to assume what affects them also affects us.

Interestingly, in another Star article, Stats Canada reported in July that deaths caused by motor vehicle accidents have fallen by 52% between 1979 and 2004. Apparently, the report suggested that this decrease was due to a hodgepodge of reasons, such as improvements in car safety features and the crackdown on drunk driving and speeding.

So this information begs the questions: Just how much has Ontario’s speed-racing law contributed to making our roads safe?