REPORT - Drinking and Driving in Canada 2015

TIRF New LogoFrom the document introduction: "This fact sheet summarizes findings about drinking and driving in Canada from the Road Safety Monitor (RSM), 2015, a national public opinion poll on road safety issues. The survey takes the pulse of the nation on key road safety issues by means of an on- line survey of a random, representative sample of Canadian drivers."

Unfortunately, BC is not well represented because "These data are based upon fatality data collected from 12 jurisdictions in Canada as the data from British Columbia (BC) were not available at the time that the 2015 Road Safety Monitor was prepared. Thus, all fatality data from 1995-2012 that are reported in this fact sheet excludes this jurisdiction."



Turn Signals

Well you got me Tim....................

Why do we need to use turn signals when no one is around? My understanding of the law is simply that any change of direction of the motor vehicle I am driving requires that I indicate my intention to make that change with sufficient time for others to be able to react to my intentions. There are a number of circumstances where turn signals are not legally required such as a lane that turns right at an intersection for example. To enter that lane a signal may have been required. My observance has been that the less we use these devices when not leagally required, the more chance there is that we will not use them when legally required. Turn signals are the only effective method of conveying to other road users what my intentions are. By not using turn signals, other road users have no idea what I am thinking or what I may do. If we all co-operated and used our turn signals properly to indicate our intentions then maybe other drivers on the road would be more courteous and roads would become a little safer. Thanks to those who use turn signals to indicate their intentions. I will yield to you!

Not sure that I agree with this assertion:


There are a number of circumstances where turn signals are not legally required such as a lane that turns right at an intersection for example.

While it's true that many drivers in committed turn lanes don't bother using their signals, that doesn't mean their behaviour is actually legal.

Let's see what the law says:

Signals on turning

170  (1) If traffic may be affected by turning a vehicle, a person must not turn it without giving the appropriate signal under sections 171 and 172.

(2) If a signal of intention to turn right or left is required, a driver must give it continuously for sufficient distance before making the turn to warn traffic.

(3) If there is an opportunity to give a signal, a driver must not stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving the appropriate signal under sections 171 and 172.

Ain't nothing there about not needing to signal even if the lane you're in requires you turn as proscribed.

And after all, how do you know it's a required maneuver? Rhetorical question, obviously you know this because there are road markings and in all likelihood signs that tell you this is so, you can see them.

But are those same signs and road markings visible to all other traffic at that intersection? Well the first thing to understand is that pedestrians are traffic. As are herded animals, riding bicycles ...

"traffic" includes pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, vehicles, cycles and other conveyances, either singly or together, while using a highway to travel;

So let's forget this idea that we're not required to signal turns, even when they're mandatory. Unless there is no other traffic, in which case it doesn't really matter, does it?


Google Ads