Licence Challenge

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 6:56 pm

Scott Duncan presented an interesting question on his Google+ / Youtube page which I'll paraphrase:

https://plus.google.com/b/1002779756453 ... port/posts

Are there any cases of someone being arrested or such for driving without a license who had never applied for a drivers licence?

bmxninja357 · Post by **bmxninja357** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:36 pm

yeah. me once and one of my friends i think he said about 15 times or something. not to mention dozens(hundreds?) of youths taking mom or dads car. the law attaches to the roads more than the individual.

to be blunt aliens cold materialize a car and a synthetic human and it could drive. but when it got stopped it would be arrested/ticketed for driving without a license.

peace,
ninj

Bill Lumbergh · Post by **Bill Lumbergh** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:56 pm

http://canlii.ca/t/fpmfj

Interestingly, the kid in that case was acquitted because he was driving around on a campground road and not a public highway.

Post by **Judge Roy Bean** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:14 pm

Jeffrey wrote:Scott Duncan presented an interesting question on his Google+ / Youtube page which I'll paraphrase:

https://plus.google.com/b/1002779756453 ... port/posts

Are there any cases of someone being arrested or such for driving without a license who had never applied for a drivers licence?

Tens of thousands of "undocumented aliens" and kids get pulled over every year.

Most of them wouldn't be taken into custody unless there were aggravating circumstances like outstanding warrants, DWI, a serious accident or repeat offenses, i.e., not having proof of financial responsibility (as in, insurance). In many places, not having the insurance results in the car being impounded.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:21 pm

I started watching the video but gave up. I can't see the point of the argument, just more stupidity. The offense of driving without a license is exactly that, operating a motor vehicle on a public road while not holding a current valid driver's license. The law doesn't stipulate that drivers who have never held a valid license are exempt. If that was the case why would anyone, including the most law-abiding citizens, ever bother to get a driver's license in the first place? The law would be meaningless.

From Section 1 of the Motor Vehicles Act of British Columbia. I assume the laws of Ontario, where Scott Duncan lives, are similar;

Offences

13 (1) A person commits an offence if the person drives, operates, parks or is in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer on a highway

(a) without the licence required by this Act for the operation of that motor vehicle or trailer having been first obtained and being then in force,

(b) without displaying on it, in the manner prescribed, the number plates issued or designated by the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia or otherwise prescribed to be displayed on that motor vehicle or trailer for the current licence year of that motor vehicle or trailer, or

(c) that has displayed on it a number plate other than those issued or designated by the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia or otherwise prescribed to be displayed on that motor vehicle or trailer for the current licence year of that motor vehicle or trailer.

And, from the definitions section;

"highway" includes

(a) every highway within the meaning of the Transportation Act,

(b) every road, street, lane or right of way designed or intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles, and

(c) every private place or passageway to which the public, for the purpose of the parking or servicing of vehicles, has access or is invited,

but does not include an industrial road;

There are of course exceptions to the license requirement but none that even the most tortured interpretation of the law could be considered to include someone who has never held or applied for a driver's license.

Exemptions – registration, licence and insurance

3.1 (1) Section 3 (1) does not apply in respect of the following vehicles if they are used or operated on a highway only in accordance with the conditions in this section and in the regulations, if any:

(a) golf carts;

(b) industrial utility vehicles;

(c) a vehicle in a prescribed class of vehicles.

(2) This section also applies in respect of a trailer towed by an industrial utility vehicle to which this section applies.

(3) Section 3 (1) does not apply in respect of a golf cart or an industrial utility vehicle owned or leased by the owner or operator of a golf course if the golf cart or the industrial utility vehicle is used or operated only as follows:

(a) on a parking lot or driveway of the golf course;

(b) to cross a highway that intersects the golf course, for the purpose of travelling from one part of a golf course to another part of the same golf course;

(c) in the case of an industrial utility vehicle,

(i) on the untravelled portion of a highway immediately adjacent to the golf course, and

(ii) on the highway immediately adjacent to a worksite where the industrial utility vehicle is being or will be used or operated to perform work, for the purpose of unloading or loading the industrial utility vehicle from or to another motor vehicle or trailer.

(4) Section 3 (1) does not apply in respect of an industrial utility vehicle owned or leased by a person other than an owner or operator of a golf course if the industrial utility vehicle is used or operated only as follows:

(a) on a parking lot or driveway, by or on behalf of the owner or operator of the parking lot or driveway;

(b) to cross a highway that intersects a worksite where the industrial utility vehicle is being used or operated to perform work;

(c) at a worksite on the untravelled portion of a highway;

(d) on the highway immediately adjacent to a worksite where the industrial utility vehicle is being or will be used or operated to perform work, for the purpose of unloading or loading the industrial utility vehicle from or to another vehicle or trailer
;
(e) at a worksite located on a highway, provided the worksite is not accessible to the public.

While we are on definitions one argument I've run across from time to time is that the Motor Vehicles Act defines only deliberate collisions as accidents so unintentional accidents are not included within the juridiction of the Act. Capri Adarim brought this one up in a seminar I attended. This is just the usual sovereign stupidity argued by Charles Norma Holmes and others that the word "includes" in a definition really means "excludes everything except". Again from the Motor Vehicles Act;

Definitions

1 In this Act:

"accident" includes an intentional collision;

JamesVincent · Post by **JamesVincent** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:33 pm

Here the law is a lot easier on you if you have never had a license or have an expired license. If you get caught driving on a suspended or revoked then you're screwed without a kiss. There's not much choice left up to the officer anymore, if he runs your name through the database he has to write a ticket relevant to the offense. Impounding is up to the officers discretion, as is which exact ticket to write, but one or another you're getting ticketed. I should know, I've been pulled over for all 4 at one point or another. Also been ticketed for no insurance, though was pretty easy for me to explain and get out of. My ex was supposed to carry the insurance on the van and she canceled it without telling me. Got pulled over for a broken taillight and found out I had no insurance.

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:51 pm

the law is a lot easier on you if you have never had a license or have an expired license

That's as close as they get to having an actual point and maybe that's an area where the law needs to be improved.

It seems like it'd be plausible to continuously drive without a license, rack up a bunch of tickets and just ignore the tickets. Maybe amend the law to make it easier to ramp up from no license to prohibited from driving at which point jail and impounding vehicles is allowed.

Post by **notorial dissent** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 2:40 am

The law says that you have to have have a license to legally operate a vehicle on the public roads. No license, you get a ticket at the very least, and probably go to jail, at least around here, get your car impounded, oh yeah, dead bang certainly, and $1000 or later you get it back. The local authorities here, state and local have no sense of humor about it here. Since no license means no valid insurance, that is another ticket and fine. Lost your license and driving, even worse, they do lock you up, for all the above reasons plus driving while suspended or revoked, BIG FINE and usually jail time. All of the proceeding usually means from that point on, you will NEVER EVER get insurance for anything like reasonable. So driving with no license is really not a very good or bright idea.

Fmotlgroupie · Post by **Fmotlgroupie** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 2:57 am

Jeffrey wrote:
the law is a lot easier on you if you have never had a license or have an expired license
That's as close as they get to having an actual point and maybe that's an area where the law needs to be improved.

It seems like it'd be plausible to continuously drive without a license, rack up a bunch of tickets and just ignore the tickets. Maybe amend the law to make it easier to ramp up from no license to prohibited from driving at which point jail and impounding vehicles is allowed.

These things being provincially governed, the problem varies quite a bit from province to province. Let me recite what little I know (Alberta and a rather old version of the laws in BC).

In Alberta it is as you say, that driving without a licence (never had one or didn't renew it) is penalized by a ticket ($230) which if you don't pay it just becomes a debt you must pay to renew your license or register a vehicle. If the officer issuing the ticket gets the drift that the driver is pursuing the "just go without a license " strategy he can issue a summons instead of a ticket (pink carbon copy instead of the yellow one) which can do several things:
-compel court attendance, as the name implies
-allow a judge to impose a harsher penalty (up to $2000 and 6 months in jail)
-if you don't pay this type of fine you have to serve time in default
I don't thi there's any provision to suspend a driver's license (or lack thereof) for driving without a license but I could easily be wrong)

But it's up to the issuing officer so its a bit of a gamble. Fortunately most Freeman drivers work hard to motivate the officer dealing with them to charge them thoroughly

I know BC is revamping its traffic enforcement systems but back in my day (late 2000s) it had a fairly good system for people with no (or an expired) drivers license. (This is to the best of my understanding but I was pretty confident, rightly or wrongly):
-the first time you were stopped without a license you were given a ticket, and "vehicle impound candidate " was added to your driver license record
-the second time you still got a ticket, but your vehicle was impounded for 30 days
-the third time you were served with a license suspension, still got your ticket, and still got your vehicle impounded (60 days??)
-the fourth time you'd get charged with driving while suspended, vehicle impounded, etc, and the same thing each time after that.

On top of all that, driving anywhere in Canada that you are criminally prohibited from driving after a criminal code conviction (impaired or dangerous driving) (minimum 1year prohibition for impaired) OR are provincially suspended as a result of a criminal conviction (most provinces suspend such drivers indefinitely until they jump through some hoops to get their license back) is subject to a criminal charge of driving while prohibited (bigger fine, more likely to get jail time, and an entry on the criminal record).

All in all I think Alberta has a little ways to go in dealing with this particular problem, but overall just going without a license is unwise, albeit less unwise than driving while suspended or prohibited, which seems about right.

Fmotlgroupie · Post by **Fmotlgroupie** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:01 am

A related question of barrack-room philosophy is this: can you get your license suspended (or driving with a suspended license ) if you've never had a license in the first place?

The answer is a clear yes in the jurisdictions I've worked in, but you'd be amazed how many people say "no" without, say, reading the relevant sections.

bmxninja357 · Post by **bmxninja357** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:23 am

a little study on how safe unlicensed drivers are.

https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/def ... d2Kill.pdf

hmmmmmm...
ninj

JamesVincent · Post by **JamesVincent** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 5:24 am

Fmotlgroupie wrote:A related question of barrack-room philosophy is this: can you get your license suspended (or driving with a suspended license ) if you've never had a license in the first place?

The answer is a clear yes in the jurisdictions I've worked in, but you'd be amazed how many people say "no" without, say, reading the relevant sections.

Very much yes. Something a lot of these fools who ride their bicycles all over the place, into traffic, going through stop signs and what not, don't realize. You can be pulled over, on your bike, and issued a motor vehicle ticket, just like a car. They are required to follow the same rules of the road as a car. You can get your drivers license suspended for something you do on a bicycle. I wished they had actually done this more when we lived in Maryland, I had actually been hit, several different times, by idiots going through a stop sign on a bike. And had some moron threaten to sue me, saying I had to yield right of way to him, even though he had a stop sign and I was traveling on a main road. There has been cases where kids have gotten their license suspended, before they even got one, for doing something stupid.

littleFred · Post by **littleFred** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 1:10 pm

Jeffrey wrote:Are there any cases of someone being arrested or such for driving without a license who had never applied for a drivers licence?

In the UK: yes. And a driver without a licence can be disqualified from driving for a period, which may seem pointless but it prevents him from even learning to drive and getting a licence during that period.

It is possible for a non-driver to be disqualified. I think these are only for offences related to motor vehicles, such as taking part (even as a passenger) in aggravated vehicle-taking, so I don't think driving disqualification can occur for other offences such as on pedal cycles.

Post by **grixit** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:31 pm

Judge Roy Bean wrote:
Jeffrey wrote:Scott Duncan presented an interesting question on his Google+ / Youtube page which I'll paraphrase:

https://plus.google.com/b/1002779756453 ... port/posts

Are there any cases of someone being arrested or such for driving without a license who had never applied for a drivers licence?
Tens of thousands of "undocumented aliens" and kids get pulled over every year.

Most of them wouldn't be taken into custody unless there were aggravating circumstances like outstanding warrants, DWI, a serious accident or repeat offenses, i.e., not having proof of financial responsibility (as in, insurance). In many places, not having the insurance results in the car being impounded.

I got arrested!
The car was impounded!
I could see no way
That i wasn't getting grounded!

--- The Beastie Boys

Wake Up! Productions · Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:33 pm

I am the first to admit that I was wrong ... when I am actually wrong.

This story popped up on the evening news tonight: http://www.newstalk1010.com/news/2015/1 ... ride-check

A RIDE stop in Innisfil had police officers baffled.

They said they stopped a 40-year-old man and asked for his license, only to find out he didn't have one and has never had one.

Allegedly, he'd been driving without a license his whole life.

He was charged with driving under suspension and driving without a licence.

Police say he was from Alcona, which is about an hour and a half north of Toronto.

Now, there is one part of this story that doesn't make sense to me. If he NEVER had a license, how can he be charged with "driving under suspension"? My only conclusion is that he did (at some point in his life) apply for a learner's permit - which may have been suspended.

In my "freeman" days, I contended that it is lawful to drive without a driver's license - if you have never had one, and if you had never applied for one.

This story is the closest I have found to these criteria, however, it does appear as though this man did actually apply for one, or at the very least, a learner's permit.

bmxninja357 · Post by **bmxninja357** » Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:51 pm

You driving privilege can be suspended for a bunch of reasons whether you have ever had a license or not. If a 13yr old steals a car their ability to obtain a license is suspended until they are 18. They never had one and are under the age of majority yet the law stands.

Peace
Ninj

Post by **notorial dissent** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 8:08 am

Wake Up FWIW, I agree with you, I don't see how they could get a driving while suspended if he'd NEVER had a license. Now there are several explanations though, he lied, the newspaper got it wrong, maybe something quirky in the law, or there was something left out altogether, but generally huh????

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 10:38 am

The Highway Traffic act explains:

Where by or under the provisions of an Act of the Legislature or a regulation made thereunder a permit or licence is suspended and the person to whom the suspension applies is not the holder of a permit or licence, as the case may be, the person shall be deemed for all the purposes of this Act or the regulations to be a person whose permit or licence, as the case may be, has been suspended.

http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK103

bmxninja357 · Post by **bmxninja357** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 11:02 am

think of it this way: the law applies to the road. if it has anything to do with the road the laws governing the road apply, be you pedestrian, driver, commercial, police or anyone else. licensed or not. drunk high sober or whatever. the applicability of the law emanates from the road.

thus if the penalty is suspension, it applies due to the roads law. and the suspension is against the privilege of getting a permit to operate upon it.

peace,
ninj

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 11:07 am

Legislators are dumb, (at least they are over here), but it's pretty ridiculous to assume they wouldn't patch the little "you can't suspend my license if I don't have one" loophole eventually.

Quatloos!

Licence Challenge

Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge

Re: Licence Challenge