A 49-year-old man is facing several charges, including the dangerous operation of a vehicle, after revving his car’s engine outside Winnipeg police headquarters.
A 49-year-old man is facing several charges, including the dangerous operation of a vehicle, after revving his car’s engine outside Winnipeg police headquarters.
According to a news release, the incident happened around 1:10 a.m. Saturday morning. Police said a “suspicious” Chrysler 300 was on Garry Street, when the driver started revving the engine “obnoxiously.”
When officers approached the car, it quickly drove off. Police said the driver was operating the vehicle erratically; running red lights, weaving through traffic, and hitting speeds around 90 km/h in the downtown core.
Multiple police units, including the Tactical Support Team and the Canine Unit helped stop the vehicle near St. Michael Road and Pulberry Street.
Then what ARE you focussing on? You cherry pick two points, Boise and arrest, comment on that you shouldn’t be arrested for noise… He wasn’t arrested for noise, that is cherry picked.
Then when I say this, you say that you were focussed on something else…
that he thinks noise alone is so offensive it’s arrestable.
So did the cops, which is why they started walking over to his vehicle.
This whole thing could have been avoided if the cops had just left things alone. But instead they had to go all freakout over someone reving an engine.
There’s a fair chance that with a good lawyer all charges get dropped as fruit of a poisoned tree. What a waste of effort and tax payer dollars.
In most modern nations, communities get to determine what is and is not allowed and what the punishment should be, through their local laws.
I don’t see a single thing wrong with throwing a public nuisance in jail for the night for doing something that has absolutely no purpose except to bother the community. You wanted to get the community’s attention? You got it buddy.
My concerns are the legal apparatus that can not distinguish between nuisance and protest.
I think protests against the genocide in Gaza are appropriate l, and I wouldn’t want people rounded up for being a nuisance.
I think the BLM protests were appropriate, and I wouldn’t want people rounded up for being a nuisance.
I think the protests around truth and reconciliation are appropriate, and I wouldn’t want those people rounded up for being a nuisance.
Basically, I’m just saying the knife cuts BOTH WAYS. Any laws that can shuffle people out of your sight for being something so poorly defined as a “nuisance” opens the gate for it to be applied against protests which are BY DESIGN disruptive to some degree.
The Jury is completely irrelevant because it’s after the fact. What matters is what the police can use as justification.
I’m saying that the bar needs to be raised for what the police can cuff you for. I am not in favour of “arrest them all and let the jury decide” approach to policing.
That’s why the police have to be able to present reasonable articulable suspicion that a specific law was being violated. Personally I would love to be arrested for peaceful protest. I have kids’ college to pay for and obvious civil rights violations are a quick settlement.
Really? If people in India stopped honking horns, how on earth would you know when to jump out if the way? The entire traffic flow in parts of India is based around always being able to hear what types of vehicles are where.
Honestly pointlessly revving an engine at any time should be illegal. There is no reason for that excessive noise. Many of these exhausts are loud enough to damage hearing (which should be illegal to begin with).
I would love to see laws or bylaws written and enforced to limit exhausts. Breathing their pollution is bad enough, people shouldn’t have to tolerate being exposed to noises loud enough to be considered hazardous on a worksite in their public spaces.
More strict enforcement of catching people doing burn outs and donuts in parking lots would also help. Many walk away with just warnings while a ticket or impoundment could be more effective
When officers approached the car, it quickly drove off. Police said the driver was operating the vehicle erratically; running red lights, weaving through traffic, and hitting speeds around 90 km/h in the downtown core.
Multiple police units, including the Tactical Support Team and the Canine Unit helped stop the vehicle near St. Michael Road and Pulberry Street.
The driver was arrested and officers discovered he had a quantity of methamphetamine in his possession.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Revving an engine at 1am is just asshole behavior. Good that the person got charged.
You can think it’s an asshole behaviour without thinking it’s appropriate to charge someone with a crime.
If I noise complaint a protest, should everyone e arrested?
Yeah did you read any of it?
He ran red lights, drive erratic, went up to 90kph in down town, ON TOP of behaving like an asshole
I’m responding specifically to the comment where the commenters SPECIFIC beef was revving an engine at 1am.
He’s commenting on noise alone
The noise alone isn’t what he got arrested for.
Acknowledged.
That isn’t the point of the comment we are focused on.
Then what ARE you focussing on? You cherry pick two points, Boise and arrest, comment on that you shouldn’t be arrested for noise… He wasn’t arrested for noise, that is cherry picked.
Then when I say this, you say that you were focussed on something else…
What are you, fox news?
Ain’t my comment.
Sounds like the original commenter was focused on noise.
Edit that he thinks noise alone is so offensive it’s arrestable.
So did the cops, which is why they started walking over to his vehicle.
This whole thing could have been avoided if the cops had just left things alone. But instead they had to go all freakout over someone reving an engine.
There’s a fair chance that with a good lawyer all charges get dropped as fruit of a poisoned tree. What a waste of effort and tax payer dollars.
In most modern nations, communities get to determine what is and is not allowed and what the punishment should be, through their local laws.
I don’t see a single thing wrong with throwing a public nuisance in jail for the night for doing something that has absolutely no purpose except to bother the community. You wanted to get the community’s attention? You got it buddy.
My concerns are the legal apparatus that can not distinguish between nuisance and protest.
I think protests against the genocide in Gaza are appropriate l, and I wouldn’t want people rounded up for being a nuisance.
I think the BLM protests were appropriate, and I wouldn’t want people rounded up for being a nuisance.
I think the protests around truth and reconciliation are appropriate, and I wouldn’t want those people rounded up for being a nuisance.
Basically, I’m just saying the knife cuts BOTH WAYS. Any laws that can shuffle people out of your sight for being something so poorly defined as a “nuisance” opens the gate for it to be applied against protests which are BY DESIGN disruptive to some degree.
No, signs and saying words are not the same as revving an engine, and you won’t find a jury who disagrees.
The Jury is completely irrelevant because it’s after the fact. What matters is what the police can use as justification.
I’m saying that the bar needs to be raised for what the police can cuff you for. I am not in favour of “arrest them all and let the jury decide” approach to policing.
That’s why the police have to be able to present reasonable articulable suspicion that a specific law was being violated. Personally I would love to be arrested for peaceful protest. I have kids’ college to pay for and obvious civil rights violations are a quick settlement.
I wish that were the case, because it would provide financial incentive for police restraint.
If the hundreds of university kids who were arrested for Gaza protests hit the lottery, I’d be thrilled.
You’d think so but major civil suits I paid by the taxpayer instead of financially affecting the officer involved. That should change.
The cop station is NOT in a residential community. It’s in downtown Winnipeg with exactly zero residences nearby.
Unless they had it towed outside the environment, it exists within a jurisdiction.
It’s a way for the vehicle owner to broadcast to the world that they have a small dick.
2am everynight on Lakeshore Blvd in Toronto is when and where they advertise what small peepees they have.
I makes me want to buy sugar cubes.
That and honking horns. We need laws lime this here in India.
Really? If people in India stopped honking horns, how on earth would you know when to jump out if the way? The entire traffic flow in parts of India is based around always being able to hear what types of vehicles are where.
Turn signals.
In India, even the tuktuk drivers think they’re driving BMWs.
Honestly pointlessly revving an engine at any time should be illegal. There is no reason for that excessive noise. Many of these exhausts are loud enough to damage hearing (which should be illegal to begin with).
Seems like an obvious “disturbing the peace” infraction that could escalate if the person doesn’t stop when asked to by the police.
Not to mention, there are probably city bylaws in place around extended idling (pollution laws).
Not sure that the charge lines up perfectly with the behaviour though.
I would love to see laws or bylaws written and enforced to limit exhausts. Breathing their pollution is bad enough, people shouldn’t have to tolerate being exposed to noises loud enough to be considered hazardous on a worksite in their public spaces.
More strict enforcement of catching people doing burn outs and donuts in parking lots would also help. Many walk away with just warnings while a ticket or impoundment could be more effective
Riiight. The cop station is in downtown Winnipeg with exactly zero condo/apartments nearby.
So really, how annoying can it be? Oh right. Cops heard it so it must be REALLY BAD.
Pfft.