How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Copperlaw Your Own Question
Copperlaw
Copperlaw, Lawyer
Category: Canada Law
Satisfied Customers: 2019
Experience:  Lawyer and Retired cop. Drug expert, breath tech, negotiator, traffic specialist. Criminal, Family, Civil and others.
38596469
Type Your Canada Law Question Here...
Copperlaw is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Hello JustAnswer professionals.I just had a very simple

This answer was rated:

Hello JustAnswer professionals.

I just had a very simple question in regards XXXXX XXXXX written in the Highway Traffic Act in Ontario. I'm asking simply to see if I'm interpreting this correctly - regardless of if its a good/bad idea anyways.

My question is in relation to "Equipment" - Part VI; more specifically part (62) Lamps.
I'm employed with a security company in Ontario and I've considered purchasing a traffic advisory lightstick; however some really nice ones have a minor restriction on them that applies directly to Section 62 14, 14.1, 15, 15.1, 16, 16.1, 31 and 32 (These are all parts that refer to intermittent lights).
It should go without saying Blue/Red combination is bad news. Red/White combination is bad news. But this is where it gets interesting and I just want to ensure I'm reading correctly.
=================
Allow me to quote:
Red and blue lights to the front restricted

(14.1) In addition to the lighting requirements in this Part, a police department vehicle may carry lamps that cast red and blue lights, but no other motor vehicle shall carry any lamp that casts red and blue lights to the front. 2007, c. 13, s. 17 (2).

Red light in front

(15) In addition to the lighting requirements in this Part, a vehicle described in subsection (15.1) may carry lamps that cast a red light only or such other colour of light that may, with the approval of the ministry, be designated by a by-law of the municipality in which the vehicle is operated, but no other motor vehicle shall carry any lamp that casts a red light to the front. 1998, c. 35, s. 103.

Same

(15.1) The following are vehicles to which subsection (15) applies:

1. An ambulance, fire department vehicle, police department vehicle, public utility emergency vehicle or school bus.

2. A ministry vehicle operated by an officer appointed for carrying out the provisions of this Act or the Public Vehicles Act, while the officer is in the course of his or her employment.

3. A vehicle while operated by a conservation officer, fishery officer, provincial park officer or mine rescue training officer, while the officer is in the course of his or her employment.

4. A vehicle while operated by a provincial officer designated under the Environmental Protection Act, the Nutrient Management Act, 2002, the Ontario Water Resources Act, the Pesticides Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002 or the Toxics Reduction Act, 2009, while the officer is in the course of his or her employment.

5. A prescribed class or type of vehicle, driven by a prescribed class of persons or engaged in a prescribed activity or in prescribed conditions or circumstances. 1998, c. 35, s. 103; 2002, c. 4, s. 64; 2002, c. 18, Sched. P, s. 19 (2); 2007, c. 13, s. 17 (3, 4); 2009, c. 19, s. 68 (1).
====================
Your attention to the words: TO THE FRONT & IN THE FRONT

Unless I'm mistaken... according to the HTA I shouldn't incur a charge directly related to the lights if they were in the back - that's how it appears to me. I have not been charged, nor do I have said lights but I'm just trying to see if I've interpreted this correctly. Going back to what I had said 'minor problem' that would be, some have the tips lighted blue/red - I'm sure if I had them it won't stop the police from asking questions or demanding to be shown the lights and possibly having them try and charge for something like 'impersonating a police officer'.

So, JustAnswer professionals - have I interpreted these laws correctly?
In any case it's probably still a bad idea, but I'd like to know (you can imagine, police aren't that helpful) - trivial issue but still.

Thanks for your time and information, professionals.
I'm Fran, and I’m a moderator for this topic.

We have been working with the professionals to try to help you with your question. Sometimes it may take a bit of time to find the right fit. I was checking to see if you had already found your answer or if you still needing assistance from one of the professionals.

Please let me know if you wish to continue waiting or if you would like for us to close your question.Also remember that JustAnswer has a multitude of categories to help you with all your needs from Health, Pets, Computers, Cars, Finance, Law, to Home Improvement, and more.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I'm still interested in getting an answer.


It's not top priority just some information I was looking for - not like a charge has been laid or anything so it can wait longer.


 


Thank you.


Thank you. We will continue to look for a professional to assist you. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance while you wait.
Your interpretation is reasonable. If they are constant lights, not visible to the front, even by reflection, then they are not prohibited. However if the lights, either red or blue or both, flash or operate intermittently, then they are illegal facing any direction.

Subsections 62(14) and 62(32) cover these red and blue intermittent lights.

It is flashing lights they are trying to prohibit, so as to not confuse the vehicle with an emergency vehicle.

I hope this helps to clarify things for you. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance as I am happy to continue chatting.
Copperlaw, Lawyer
Category: Canada Law
Satisfied Customers: 2019
Experience: Lawyer and Retired cop. Drug expert, breath tech, negotiator, traffic specialist. Criminal, Family, Civil and others.
Copperlaw and other Canada Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thanks for the information; I mean the most logical answer though is to just not use the colour combination at all.


 


I find it interesting and odd at the same time, why bother putting Subsection 62 (14.1) and to word it like that, 'to the front' if you simply have 62(14) which restricts it all together - I guess the devil is in the details, needed to specify for Blue/Red and which vehicles.


 


Ah, the law. Known to have contradictions throughout, unnecessary parts, vague terminology, and loopholes - granted some law is cut & dry and airtight.


Anyways I do appreciate your time and the information provided.