Why do RCMP not enforce vehicle noise regulations?

Dear editor,
Now that spring and the 'driving season' are here, I have a simple question for Record motoring columnist Tim Schewe:
Why does the RCMP choose not to enforce Section 7.03 of the Motor Vehicle Act?

Dear editor,Now that spring and the ‘driving season’ are here, I have a simple question for Record motoring columnist Tim Schewe:Why does the RCMP choose not to enforce Section 7.03 of the Motor Vehicle Act?Said section states that, “A motor vehicle propelled by an internal combustion engine shall be equipped with an exhaust muffler consisting of a series of pipes and chambers which ensures that the exhaust gases from the engine are cooled and expelled without excessive noise.”Paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 also prohibit cutouts, removal of muffler plates or baffles, enlarging the exhaust outlet and attaching any device which increases the noise emitted. Table 3 of the section sets a maximum noise level permitted by light trucks at 83 decibels.I am certain that the pickups and motorcycles that routinely rattle the windows of my house are emitting way more decibels than 83. If the muffler fell of my car I would be making less noise than these super loud vehicles make every day of the week but I bet that I would not go for more than a couple of days before I was stopped by the RCMP and ordered to rectify the situation.So how does this work then? If I put oversize tires on a pickup, I can put “pretend mufflers” on it and make as much noise as I want? If I happen to own a Harley, I can throw the mufflers away and pretend I’m riding a fast bike while busting everybody else’s eardrums in traffic? The reluctance of the RCMP to enforce Section 7.03 of the MVA is particularly baffling when one considers that the drivers of these super loud vehicles always display aggressive driving behaviors in their quest to make as much noise as possible. While aggressive driving might be a subjective concept, 83 decibels is not.The RCMP could put a dent in aggressive driving by simply enforcing Section 7.03. At the moment this lack of enforcement is actually encouraging and promoting aggressive driving.Francois Lepine,CourtenayTim Schewe responds: This is one of the more “popular” complaints that people make to me, and you can see some of them on my DriveSmartBC website atwww.drivesmartbc.ca/search/node/motorcycle%20noise%20-right.During the course of my enforcement career I learned that unless the motorcycle had no muffler at all I was probably wasting my time writing a traffic ticket to the rider. Even then I once had a provincial court judge dismiss the ticket and after court tell me that it really wasn’t an important matter anyway.Simply testifying in court that the noise was excessive most often did not convince the justice to convict. Citizen complainants could have tipped the balance by appearing to testify but they were rarely interested beyond their complaint to the police.You mention the decibel levels set out in the regulations. They apply when the vehicle is being tested in a facility under specified testing conditions, not at the side of the road. They require a decibel meter to measure and I never had one available to me to use.I did take every opportunity available to me during my patrols to deal with noisy vehicles. I ticketed what I thought I could get a conviction for, ordered those with more defects than the exhaust to inspection and dealt with the balance by ordering the vehicle repaired. I have no doubt that if the newspaper prints the letter, there will be a reply from the “loud pipes save lives” faction. They are completely convinced that unless their motorcycles make significant amounts of noise to announce their presence that drivers of larger vehicles will fail to notice them and drive into them instead. These people are very difficult to convince that they need an adequate muffler.I disagree with you that a lack of noise enforcement promotes aggressive driving. A lack of aggressive driving enforcement promotes aggressive driving and that is definitely not happening.

Just Posted

Valley company reaching out to women near and far

Three Comox Valley business women know firsthand what good menstrual products can… Continue reading

B.C. storm totals $37M in insured damages

The December storm wreaked havoc on B.C.’s south coast

Miniature horses visit Glacier View residents

Glacier View Lodge residents had a couple of special visitors on Wednesday… Continue reading

Annual women’s march in Courtenay Saturday

The Women’s March was a worldwide protest on Jan. 21, 2017, to… Continue reading

Portables arrive for students on Hornby Island

Five portable classrooms have officially arrived on Hornby Island this week in… Continue reading

B.C. opioid crisis to get same world-renowned treatment approach as HIV/AIDS

A program that focuses on treatment as prevention will roll out Jan. 17

FOCUS: Canada’s revamped impaired driving law brews ‘potential for injustice’

There must be ‘trigger’ for cops to come knocking, Surrey MP says

Barack Obama to speak at Vancouver event

Former U.S. president will speak with board of trade in March

Former welfare clients still owed money, B.C. Ombudsperson says

Investigation found 2,600 people docked illegally for earning income

Prince George could get province’s second BC Cannabis Store

The first brick-and-mortar government retail location opened in Kamloops on Oct. 17

B.C. chowdery caught up in ‘rat-in-soup’ scandal to close

Crab Park Chowdery will be shutting down Jan. 20

Teen vaping is an epidemic: US government

E-cigarettes are now the top high-risk substance used by teenagers, outpacing cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana

Vancouver councillors unanimously approve motion declaring climate emergency

Vancouver joins cities like Los Angeles and London

Caribou herd disappears from Kootenays after last cow relocated

One cow from the South Selkirk herd and two from the Purcells were moved this week

Most Read