BC government is at it again

[jhmed]

I don't think that governmental agencies will have to actively pursue artificially raising insurance rates for JDM vehicles - This is probably illegal and definitely immoral.

Considering that ICBC is a government agency, I figured it's not much of a leap for them to try that route. It seems to me to be a natural progression... if you can't prove the car is unsafe thru inspections, then prove the characteristics of the vehicle (aka RHD)are unsafe. If that fails, make sure that the public cannot easily insure them even if they increase the importation age limit to twenty-five years of age...

I agree it is immoral, but this is the government after all... I'm sure that if they really wanted to implement something of that nature, they would have the logistics worked out in a way so that it could not be easily contested.

 

[Previa Diesel]

I don't think there's been a single one of us who would argue with ICBC's position that passing or left-turns can sometimes be a harrowing experience in a JDM, even downright dangerous for someone not accustomed to it.

Are you serious? If any kind of passing is a "harrowing experience" then an idiot is driving. You don't pass until you are certain it is possible to do so safely. Period. It is also easy to move over to the right slightly and see up the RH side of the vehicles in front. You shouldn't be passing on anything but a long straight and IMO with two lanes in your direction of travel. Otherwise calm down and leave earlier.

RHD makes people more cautious in passing; "there's no debating this fact."

When making a LH turn in a RHD it is actually easier to look for pedestrians and obstructions (unless you're in some rice rocket) on the left rear, as you don't have to turn your head so far to see them. I have zero problems turning left. "There's no debating this fact."

How many hundred thousand LHD cars are being driven in Japan on the LH side of the road without any apparent safety problems?

 

[jhmed]

I *do* drive a rice-rocket... one that is only a few inches from the ground, not a few feet. It does prove to be a challenge in visibility despite your claims to the contrary.

I agree that any kind of passing or left turns should be done safely, but when you have a redneck from Calgary in a large Chevy pick-up who's more than willing to drive over you to complete a turn rather than wait because you can't see past the other redneck in the Dodge pickup making a left at the opposite side of the intersection and the posted limit for the straight-thru traffic is 60 but everyone does closer to 90km/h then that can make it a harrowing experience (left or right-hand drive)... there's no debating that fact. I know because I live it every day in this God-forsaken city.

 

[crushers]

Well, in the cases of the JDM vehicles I've been exposed to, yeah, JDM cars are not equipped with identical/better safety equipment than their North American counterparts. It's been quite inferior (in my experience) as a matter of fact... Are they still designed to be safe? I would say that while being operated in the 'environment' in which they were designed to be driven, they probably are. Take them out of that 'environment' into one like ours, and not-so-much.
I mean, you said it yourself when you quoted your TC source... "that European cars are not designed for Canadian roads and are unsafe in our enviroment..."

Terry MacDonald (if I remember his last name correctly) of Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation told me that it was kids in Edmonton heavily modding Skylines and Silvias and driving wild that attracted their attention in the first place and prompted that letter to be released about the safety inspection requirements.

The more loopholes we find, the more ways the government will invent to try and shut it down. They don't have the proof right now to decide that RHD vehicles are dangerous, but when they get the proof this will happen. It doesn't matter whether it's started by Automobile Retailers Associations, the insurance industry, or a rash of automobile accidents. Once someone is hurt it will only a matter of time. Next step will be to go after the ability to insure. If no one with a JDM can get insurance, no one can drive them...

first allow me to say, this thread has developed into a very interesting read. some good logic being used and discussed. thank you for participating.

the speed limits in Canada ae the same as/or very close to those in the rest of the world where these cars/trucks/vans are being used. the basic enviroment IS THE SAME as the rest of the world, you have high speed highways and congested back roads and city streets.
IT IS THE CANADIAN DRIVER that breaks the speed limit laws and the failue of the law enforcement to stop this. the plagerize an old saying "cars do not speed, people speed". yes, it will be the rebelious people that will bring an end to our joy. here is what i see as a big problem, when i was much younger i loved to speed. i didn't care how many tickets i got or how many people i scared as i zoomed past or cut off. none of this fazed me in the least. it was the high insurance premiums that STARTED to slow me down. what really slowed me down was the change of crowd i was running with. i can easily see this being the case with the adrenilin junky rice rocket car crowd. of course when the insurance costs get to high for junior daddy will step in and insure the unit and cry foul. in my experience it is the high insurance premiums that will slow down todays youth, not law enforcement, not deaths "he died doing what he loved" but the unability to insure.

cheers

 

[crushers]

I *do* drive a rice-rocket... one that is only a few inches from the ground, not a few feet. It does prove to be a challenge in visibility despite your claims to the contrary.

I agree that any kind of passing or left turns should be done safely, .

i will concur with your experience and it isn't just the low riders that are at risk. the drivers in Alberta in general suck, simple enough. it seems we give out drivers licenses to anyone (ever watch "Canada's worst drivers"? think about it, there should never be a show like this except that in Canada we really do drive badly.

i have not driven with you so i do not know how you drive, i am hoping you are one of the responsible ones but the point i am making is not everyone that drives a rice rocket is a bad driver. it is these people that should not be punished with the same brush as the problem cases.

banning RHDs does not solve the problem. if someone wants to drive like an idiot or wants 1000 hp under the hood, they can achieve this goal easily (with money) using a NA based platform and a JDM engine/drivetrain.

 

[crushers]

I have seen some vehicles having lights from a snowplow installed in order to meet provincial requirements, but having an "aftermarket" headlighting system raises some serious concerns as they haven't been engineered and are, at best, a stop gap solution.
.

this is the attitude we will be butting our heads against.

"havent been engineered" to do what? shine light down the road? they are a legal light properly engineered to do exactly what they were designed for. how is this a "stop gap solution"?

 

[Martin White]

As part of my job, I spend a HUGE amount of time driving. At this point, I have only anecdotal data, but I see how the small JDM rockets are driven every day. Almost without exception, every one I see driving is being driven by someone driving like they think they're on a race track. When I was younger, I was much more into speed than I am now. But I never drove at the speeds I see these JDM's going. I'm thinking mainly of Skylines which are very recognizable.

People driving Cruisers, on the other hand, may speed a little, but nothing like the Skyline guys, a vast majority of whom seem to think they're Tokyo Drifters, with the resultant accidents. No one buys a cruiser to drive fast.

So from my point of view, I imagine that the accident rate will get so high that it may well spark a reaction. But the same discussion happened with 5 litre mustangs about 10 years ago. Once they were mostly wrecked, the discussion stopped, for the most part.

Ultimately, it comes down to the driver, not the car. There are countries where the ratio of RHD and LHD cars is about 50/50, and people switch back and forth without problems.

I have to say this: if passing in an RHD is a "harrowing" experience, then the car doing the passing is being driven by someone who needs to improve their driving skills. Don't pass if it's not safe.

I also got a chance to actually sit in a Skyline last week. They are very, very low and there is no question that left hand turns in these cars would be much, much more challenging than in a LHD vehicle, particularly due to the number of tall SUV's and trucks on our local roads.

 

[Previa Diesel]

I *do* drive a rice-rocket... one that is only a few inches from the ground, not a few feet. It does prove to be a challenge in visibility despite your claims to the contrary.

I agree that any kind of passing or left turns should be done safely, but when you have a redneck from Calgary in a large Chevy pick-up who's more than willing to drive over you to complete a turn rather than wait because you can't see past the other redneck in the Dodge pickup making a left at the opposite side of the intersection and the posted limit for the straight-thru traffic is 60 but everyone does closer to 90km/h then that can make it a harrowing experience (left or right-hand drive)... there's no debating that fact. I know because I live it every day in this God-forsaken city.

OK Ricesketeers/Rocketeers, here are my suggestions:

1. Don't turn left when there's much traffic on the road. Go one block further and make three right turns instead. Difficult, huh?

2. Adapt a back up camera system to give you the left side visibility you need.

3. Carry a passenger you trust to be your eyes or use 1. above.

4. Turn left on a red like so many other jerks do. With your acceleration at least you'll do it quickly.

5. Get an "I LOVE REDNECKS" bumper sticker.

Now, can we get back to the question of how to prevent the threatened introduction of a 25 year exclusion on imports?

 

[jhmed]

I have to say this: if passing in an RHD is a "harrowing" experience, then the car doing the passing is being driven by someone who needs to improve their driving skills. Don't pass if it's not safe.

I also got a chance to actually sit in a Skyline last week. They are very, very low and there is no question that left hand turns in these cars would be much, much more challenging than in a LHD vehicle, particularly due to the number of tall SUV's and trucks on our local roads.

I'd be willing to bet money that my car sits as low, if not lower than that Skyline you were in.

After the safety upgrades this season, I want get a new suspension so I can sit a little higher... anyone had experience 'raising' a CR-X? LOL

The same dynamic is in place in my small car when passing as in left turns... visibilty. I have to sit so far behind a larger vehicle, like a Semi (which was the scenario I was imagining when I made that statement) in order to see around him, that when the road is finally clear it takes a long amount of time for me to actually get the speed back to finally pass. Maybe it just seems like a long time, I don't know, like slow-motion? There's been a couple times when I've had to drop to 70km/h to get far enough back to see, then get back to 110km/h to pass a Semi doing 90km/h in a 110km/h zone (which I found odd, they usually speed worse than anyone cuz they know where all the speed traps are). I only have a 1.6L engine which is rated at 160hp at the flywheel under optimal conditions... not a V6, not a turbo deisel engine like you guys. I didn't buy my car for speed. I'm not the kind of person who enjoys taking chances with my car. I'm not some punk kid in a rice rocket who drives at 180km/h down the #1 racing to try and beat my personal best time to any given distance...

I don't trust the drivers in Alberta no matter which side of the car I am on when I'm behind the wheel... period. I learned to drive in Langley, so I know that the driving dynamic is a helluva lot different for you guys in the lower mainland than it is here in Calgary. I don't know for better or worse, but it is definately different...

On the way back to Vancouver on several occasions I've almost been creamed head-on in my lane while some jackass tried to pass a vehicle (or many vehicles). I've been in situations where I've practically had to put my vehicle (not the CR-X, thank God) in the ditch more times than I'd care to remember and so it makes me a little more nervous and cautious about what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I have worked so hard to restore my car that I'd hate to see anything happen to it. Maybe because I only drive it on weekends ony from May Long til Labor Day and not all year round that has me more concerned about the whole event. As for me being a safe driver, I'll let my driving record speak for itself.

At any rate, my controversial statements about passing and left turns that so many people are taking issue with were made from MY perspective, from sitting in a sub-compact CR-X, which is a considerable distance from your SUV LandCruiser perspective. Yes, you guys probably *do* have it a bit easier in the visibility department being higher, but not all RHD vehicles are LCs just as not all RHD vehicles are sub-compacts and Skylines. Perhaps I should have added, "from where I'm sitting in my car" or something to that statement.

Also, we need to realize that when the government makes those kinds statements, like me, they are speaking from a perspective which may be different from your own. They sometimes have to encompass all vehicles and all drivers (the good the bad the young and the old) as a whole, some pieces of which may or may not be applicable to your or my situations... we have to show them our perspectives...

I'd be willing to bet that those same people at ICBC that are making those claims have not once driven a RHD vehicle on the open road. It's the same situation. I made my statments from my perspective without having been in a larger RHD vehicle, the same as you folks making your statements without having been in my vehicle. ICBC decision-makers are probably making their statements without having been in our shoes at alll.

How many times have you been asked 'How is it to shift in a RHD?' or 'Don't you find it weird?'. From ICBCs perspective I will bet they are thinking: 'It must be difficult to pass'. Maybe they have driven RHDs. Maybe they have only been driving cars like mine, which *do* make it more difficult to see. They need to be shown YOUR perspective then. What they really need is to road-test in actual real-world conditions and see about the validity of this issue.

I guess I'm just surprised that for all my ranting in the past couple days, you all focused on that statement to take issue with... LOL j/k. This is a great board and very friendly welcoming considering I have never even sat in a North American LC let alone a JDM one. I also like how we can agree to disagree and have an intelligent conversation without it turning into an Elementary School name-calling event... Very refreshing indeed!

 

[jhmed]

1. Don't turn left when there's much traffic on the road. Go one block further and make three right turns instead. Difficult, huh?

Been there, done that... doesn't always work depending on where you want to go. Knowing where all the left-turn advance arrow intersections are is a nice way around it though.

2. Adapt a back up camera system to give you the left side visibility you need.

I just finished restoring my car to stock from Rice-A-Roni and therefore I have no 'scoops' to hide it in... so thanks, but no thanks.

3. Carry a passenger you trust to be your eyes or use 1. above.

Girlfriend is blind. Tried using the seeing-eye-dog, but it didn't work out as I'd hoped.

4. Turn left on a red like so many other jerks do. With your acceleration at least you'll do it quickly.

I have no power in my rice rocket... it's all show, no go. I might as well be Flinstone-powered.

5. Get an "I LOVE REDNECKS" bumper sticker.

Then the Brokeback Mountain fans honk and wave, and want to get my phone number. Again, no thanks.

Now, can we get back to the question of how to prevent the threatened introduction of a 25 year exclusion on imports?

I'd love nothing better, but I seem to have offended a lot of people with my outlandish statements about left turns that I thought it worth responding. I wasn't aware that in the LC community left turns were such a sore spot. I felt like Michael Richards there for a while...

Thanks for all your helpful suggestions... I found them quite entertaining!

Now, let's get back on topic...

 

[dieseldan]

Wow this has been some interresting reading in a section that hasn't seen much action lately.

We own two RHD's - a TownAce which has been my wife's work vehicle and kiddie taxi, our family campmobile and last winter served as my back up ski hill unit when the snow was too deep for the car. We have safely logged more than 80,000 km on this van and have never experienced ANY situtation that made us want for a LHD. (drive-thru's excluded)

Passing in the Townie is np. While it is a turbo and still not powerful by any stretch of the imagination - passing must be done safely. If I can't see far enough down the road then I stay put. Parking, reversing, turning, lane changes is all done with mirrors and common sense.

Our importer didn't do anything to the headlamps and we had to take care of that after pissing off (unintentionally) too many oncoming drivers.. though the reg's hadn't really been clarified at that time as they are now.

Our cruiser has to be 10x safer than any other vehicle I have owned, and that would apply to the public also as it has been thoroughly gone over mechanically to the point of overkill- I can walk down the road from here and count dozens of NA domestics LHD's that are incredibly dangerous - tires, brakes, glass and so on.

But as Wayne said - it's all about the drivers. Legislating what I can and can't own is plain wrong in a case like this. So long as I meet the same standards as my neighbour or exceed them - piss off and find something useful to legistlate. And let's see some stats!! Some real numbers!

To say that RHD's aren't safe for LH Traffic is not only incorrect - it's stupid. Clearly stated by someone who has not spent any significant time behind a RH wheel in a LH world. Its a non issue.

None of this should be of any surprise - if it were only a few of us quietly going about our RH driving there would be no problem. A couple hundred like minded consumers hit the road every month and we may as well beg for legislation. Let's just do our best to ensure the result is as fair and reasonable as possible. (oxymoron yes but I think its the best we can hope for)


end rant.

 

[Previa Diesel]

”Fromage”: Right hand traffic vehicles are dangerous when operated in a left-hand traffic environment, there is no debating that fact.

It's nice to have your input as it shows the thinking on the regulatory side.

Around here we've debated that question plenty and came to a different conclusion, based on obvious, demonstrable facts.

It would be interesting to hear your response on a point by point basis to the following:

Safety Advantages of a RHD Vehicle in a LHD Environment.
This is an revision of an earlier post of mine: https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=80177&page=10

A few months ago I spoke to a CVSE inspector in Victoria. It was clear that he really believed that RHD is unsafe in a LHD environment. I asked if there was any evidence to support that. He was not aware of any.

I believe a RHD vehicle has a number of safety advantages in a LHD environment

1. Cyclists coming up on the right is a major concern when making right turns in urban areas. In a LHD vehicle the only safe way to check for this is for the driver to look back over his right shoulder, thus loosing sight of what is happening in front of his vehicle. This method is actually specified in the commercial driver training manual. In a RHD vehicle the driver only has to drop his vision to the right hand mirror for an instant and he can see everything to his right rear without losing sight of what is happening in front of his vehicle.

2. When turning left in a LHD vehicle the left side windshield pillar is much closer to the driver’s eyes and therefore blocks more of his field of view (FOV). In a RHD the windshield pillar is farther away and therefore blocks much less of the FOV. That windshield pillar can easily obscure a pedestrian when turning left through an intersection for example. Futhermore, when turning left in a LHD the area of worst visibility is the LH rear. The LH driver's door frame and pillar* being very close to the driver’s eyes in a LHD vehicle, block the view to a great extent, even when the driver looks back over his left shoulder (and not many do). In a RHD however (some ricers excluded obviously) the LH door frame and pillar are much farther away and block much less of the view. The driver in a RHD also does not have to turn his head as far to look to his left rear, allowing his peripheral vision to cover more of the usual blindspot to the LH rear. I don’t have the software to produce drawings illustrating this, but it should be obvious from a ‘bird’s eye view visualization

*ie: the rear side frame of the driver's door and the pillar between the front and rear doors (if any)

3. At night it is much easier to see and follow the white line on the RH (curb) side of the road than trying to see the yellow line in the center against the headlights of oncoming traffic. By avoiding looking directly at the oncoming headlights the driver’s night vision is better and he is more likely to see pedestrians, cyclists, animals or other hazards on the RH (curb) side which are less easily noticed by drivers in LHD vehicles. Furthermore, most accidents at night probably occur between vehicles and hazards on RH (curb) side of the road.

4. In a head-on collision the impact is most likely to occur on the left front side; being seated on the right the driver is less likely to be injured and injuries if sustained are likely to be less serious.

5. When parallel parking in a RHD the driver has a much better view of the curb and the LH rear of the car in front of him. This means faster and better parking with less obstruction of the curb lane and the dangerous and illegal swerving into adjoining lanes around vehicles trying to parallel park that we see so much of today.

6. In a RHD vehicle the driver gets out of the vehicle on the curb side rather than the road side. Obviously much safer for the driver as well as cyclists and other drivers. No more doors suddenly opening into traffic or following vehicles illegally swerving into adjoining lanes, or cyclists running into doors suddenly opened in front of them.

For most people, driving a RHD in NA is very easy and quickly becomes 'second nature'. In fact you begin to wonder why we drive on the left at all, given the advantages to RHD...a historical accident in fact.

Thus we see that the safety advantages of all kinds of RHD vehicles in a LHD environment actually greatly outweigh the safety concerns raised for only a segment of the RHD vehicles being used in this country. (Safey concerns that can be almost entirely resolved by common sense driving habits.)

In other words RHD vehicles are a NET SAFETY GAIN.

If ICBC or anyone else has data regarding RHDs, let them put it on the table. If they don't, the public and the people they elect can draw their own conclusions.

How many RHD vehicles have been involved in accidents in BC in which their RHD configuration was a/the causative factor in the accident?

 

[Previa Diesel]

If any Mudders have the software to produce drawings illustrating these points please do so, or PM with the info on what to use.

 

[jhmed]

If any Mudders have the software to produce drawings illustrating these points please do so, or PM with the info on what to use.

I don't understand what you mean, but I use the opensource program called The Gimp for any Photoshopping work I need to do. There's even a 'Photoshop skin' for it for Windows that will make it look just like Photoshop...

 

[jhmed]

It's nice to have your input as it shows the thinking on the regulatory side.

Around here we've debated that question plenty and came to a different conclusion, based on obvious, demonstrable facts.

It would be interesting to hear your response on a point by point basis to the following:

Safety Advantages of a RHD Vehicle in a LHD Environment.
This is an revision of an earlier post of mine: https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=80177&page=10

A few months ago I spoke to a CVSE inspector in Victoria. It was clear that he really believed that RHD is unsafe in a LHD environment. I asked if there was any evidence to support that. He was not aware of any.

I believe a RHD vehicle has a number of safety advantages in a LHD environment



For most people, driving a RHD in NA is very easy and quickly becomes 'second nature'. In fact you begin to wonder why we drive on the left at all, given the advantages to RHD...a historical accident in fact.

Thus we see that the safety advantages of all kinds of RHD vehicles in a LHD environment actually greatly outweigh the safety concerns raised for only a segment of the RHD vehicles being used in this country. (Safey concerns that can be almost entirely resolved by common sense driving habits.)

In other words RHD vehicles are a NET SAFETY GAIN.

If ICBC or anyone else has data regarding RHDs, let them put it on the table. If they don't, the public and the people they elect can draw their own conclusions.

How many RHD vehicles have been involved in accidents in BC in which their RHD configuration was a/the causative factor in the accident?

OK, so let's assume Johnny imports his RHD, and makes it conform to all the sections of the CMVSS. They can't argue with that without changing the regulations. That's one for us...

Now they want to prove the RHDs are inherently dangerous... how will they do that? Accident data? Road tests? We must use evidence, not theory to prove the argument that RHDs are just as safe (after being modified to meet CMVSS standards) as a LHD car. I read on the Yahoo newsgroup a lady from England mentioning there's a lot of vacationers with LHDs visiting there with no issues... let's go the other way round....

Since they have no proof from North American accident data, let's ace them by producing evidence from France or Germany (both LHD countries) about their accident data regarding people coming from England, Ireland and Scotland (all RHD countries). Let's assemble this data NOW before they have a chance to get their North American data/road-tests completed... Anyone on here speak French or German very well? There's a lot of phone companies offering free Long Distance to Europe and Asia... I have already called Japan a couple times, but the language barrier is always an issue.

 

[Previa Diesel]

We must use evidence, not theory to prove the argument that RHDs are just as safe (after being modified to meet CMVSS standards) as a LHD car.

I'm not using theory, I'm using indisputable facts.

I'm not saying RHD are as safe as LHD; I'm saying they're safer.

(As for software, I'm looking for a program such as that probably used to produce accident scene plans - if there is such a thing.)

 

[1990 LJ78]

Time is not on our side..

Is there going to be an organization formed to fight this pending threat or not??
It is fine and dandy to discusse stuff but just when is the organizing happening..?? or better still when is it going to start??
Government guys are probably just watching this thread, saying we have this one in the bag
Just call me impatiant.
We do not have forever to get this stuff togeather..

Time is ticking away and here we are from what I've read, just jawing..

Just my attempt to get this thread back on track -- organizing

 

[jhmed]

I'm not using theory, I'm using indisputable facts.

I'm not saying RHD are as safe as LHD; I'm saying they're safer.

(As for software, I'm looking for a program such as that probably used to produce accident scene plans - if there is such a thing.)

Statements without evidence = theory.

Take pictures of the FOV from a North American 4Runner at an intersection then do the exact same from a RHD Hilux or whatever. Make sure that they are the same/similar ride height etc... to illustrate your point. If we get members doing this from a number of RHD vehicles at a number of intersections, then we have some EVIDENCE. Imagine you're in court: What would prove your point more, having documented EVIDENCE of everything you claim, or having the judge use their imagination? That's all I'm saying. We're on the same side here, you know...

You typing rants in large text will get us nowhere.

You make some excellent points, but it needs to be something concrete and provable to ICBC and Transport Canada... We need to aproach this the way the government will. This is why they have proposed this change instead of just doing it. They are gathering evidence to prove their side in case someone challenges it. We need as much cold hard fact and as as much expert opinions as possible to counter their claims with. Let's get notorized statements from as many officials as possible that will support our position. Assemble data from other countries that allow both Left and Right hand drive traffic.

The only reason I seem argumentative with some of you is because I think some of you need to be pushed. I see a lot of people talking s*** on here, not quoting names or titles, relaying 2nd and 3rd hand information... you're the most intelligent group of JDM owners I've encountered and a lot of you seem well-connected. Let's make the calls, let's get this rolling... most important lets get s*** in writing. I plan on making my own phone calls after the Christmas holidays are over. Not one of you has stepped up and said: "I know a guy who works for Transport Canada, I'll call him January 3rd!" or whatever. i know some things like Notaries cost money, but let's work something out... If a member provides a receipt for a small expense like a notorized statement, we could all chip in. A $50 expense split 25 ways between members is only $2.00 + PP fees per member.... isn't it worth $2 each to keep our cars?

The most organization I've heard so far is an importer was going to put a petition on his website. That's great but he has a vested interest in this thing, he makes a living (or whatever) from the importation of JDM vehicles. Its no different than an Auto Industry Lobby getting a petition against RHDs. We need a group not affiliated with any importers who will do the same thing. No connections, no possibility of the government trying to say our position is one biased for monetary gain. If we are a group of well-organized and eductated enthusiasts then we stand a better chance of being taken seriously IMHO.

Just because I'm new to your realm doesn't mean I am some flash in the pan, fly by night 'Ricesketeer/Rocketeer' as you put it. I'm 32 years old, and I take my hobby very seriously, as do you as well. Let's put away the attitudes and start some constructive work. We have some great stuff here, lets make it something we can use to beat these fxxxers at their own game.

I will contact the Traffic Division of the Calgary Police tomorrow and find out if they use any software for traffic accident recreation diagrams. I will post my findings or PM you tomorrow.

 

[jhmed]

Is there going to be an organization formed to fight this pending threat or not??
It is fine and dandy to discusse stuff but just when is the organizing happening..?? or better still when is it going to start??
Government guys are probably just watching this thread, saying we have this one in the bag
Just call me impatiant.
We do not have forever to get this stuff togeather..

Time is ticking away and here we are from what I've read, just jawing..

Just my attempt to get this thread back on track -- organizing

I was typing the same thing while you posted! LOL


I think we should begin by designating people to do certain tasks:

Let's use the media to draw attention to our side of the story... I will contact the CBC and see if we can get some media coverage once we have some evidence and progress to show we are serious about this fight... They're making accusations without proof to the CBC let's go back to the CBC with proof to the contrary.
I will call Transport Canada in the New Year and see what I can find out.
I will call Calgary Police and try and get the name of software for Previa Deisel.

Someone call ICBC and get information, don't forget names and phone numbers, if you know someone then all the better, they can get you the info of who to contact.
Need someone who speaks German or French to try and get data from their respective DMVs about the accident rates of RHDs on LHD traffic routes.
Need someone to assist in proving WHY RHDs are more safe as Previa Deisel says. Let's take each one of his points and think of a way to PROVE it.
Need those people with contacts at motor vehicle inspection stations, traffic safety institutes etc... to sign a statement saying RHDs are not as big a threat to public safety as ICBC thinks it is...
Need an independent website to start the petition, not thru an importer but something that can be linked FROM numerous importers websites... maybe get as many importers behind this as possible: I know a few who'd support our initiative.
Someone on here mentioned they had a lawyer or two that said they would lend a hand if necessary. Call them please. If they can't/won't let's try UBC or UofA law students and see if they'd take our case at no charge - they'd make a hell of a name for themselves if they won!

If you have some other ideas of things to do post em up!

 

[Greg_B]

Just my attempt to get this thread back on track -- organizing

There is this mailing list, with input from other makes of RHD owners:

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/RHDTLC/

It is easy to use, creates a list of participants one can see, and you can access archives, post documents, pictures, files, etc...

gb