Collected some revenue today

[pzkpfw]

But at least when YOU cross the double yellow lines ... you nothing will be coming the other way on your side of the road ... eh .. !!! Because It is against the rules ... right ... ???

Who said anything about double yellow lines? (Not, of course, that it makes a difference to the offence of crossing a yellow line.)

[rastuscat]

Believe it or not, there are things that are there that you might not see, sometimes. That's why people turn across the path of oncoming bikes. Trains too.

The folk who think it's okay to cross the centreline to straighten a piece of road don't allow for the fact that one day they might not see the oncoming thing they didn't see. Unlikely to be a train, but can't rule it out.

The best way to avoid hitting a vehicle on the other side of the road is to blindly comply with the REQUIREMENT (it's law, not just a good idea), to STAY ON YOUR OWN FECKING SIDE OF YELLOW LINES.

Right, back to the tea and shortbread. Deep breaths required.

[Zedder]

Never happened to me, but go read some of the stories of folk who have bikes that don't trigger some of the sensors. Most normal people will eventually just (after checking very very carefully that nothing is coming) go.

And you still equate legal with safe as though they mean the exact same thing. Sure, blasting through a red is illegal and unsafe. But carefully going through a red, in certain circumstances, may still be illegal - but might not be unsafe (in certain circumstances).

(Though again, never done it myself in a car or on a bike. Though I did get laughed at once, when I was 14 years old, sitting at a red on my bicycle one night with no cars for miles around. Can't win, can I?)

I never wrote I was equating legal and safe. Luctor et emergo? You're emerging out your arse!

[FJRider]

It does eh?

Is there some reason they're there that's not obvious in teh pic?

There is actually. As usual streetview wont give the best look at the road. It's the road between Alex and Roxburgh. This bit of the road is straight(ish) but rises and falls a few times ... and has caught a few out. (even with the double yellows ...

And quoting an imbedded image is verboten ... especially when THAT particular post was a dig at Gremlin.

[unstuck]

Just out of milton today heading towards balclutha, there was a car up front that overtook a van on double yellows with a corner coming up, only a couple of hundred meters to the passing lanes. Car that was coming around the corner luckily had an alert driver behind the wheel and moved over far enough not to collect the car that was over the lines. There are some real dangerous fuckers out there.:weird:

[scumdog]

In sport, work, some leisure activities, or anything else governed by a set of rules, people will follow them without a second thought. They realise if everyone plays to the same set of rules the system must be fair to all. Yet when it comes to the road, the most deadly game of all, people think they have the right to analyse the rules and only follow those which they agree with.


Ain't THAT the truth!!

(If it was in a game that the rules were being broken in we would hear the screams of 'foul' and no-fair ref!' all the way to Africa.)

[flyingcrocodile46]

In sport, work, some leisure activities, or anything else governed by a set of rules, people will follow them without a second thought. They realise if everyone plays to the same set of rules the system must be fair to all. Yet when it comes to the road, the most deadly game of all, people think they have the right to analyse the rules and only follow those which they agree with.

That is probably why the rules of games never get changed eh. :rolleyes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

Ain't THAT the truth!!

(If it was in a game that the rules were being broken in we would hear the screams of 'foul' and no-fair ref!' all the way to Africa.)

Off side! Get back behind the line. {edit.. I mean you, here, now}

[FJRider]

Right, back to the tea and shortbread. Deep breaths required.

What ... !!! No donuts .. ???

[pzkpfw]

I never wrote I was equating legal and safe. Luctor et emergo? You're emerging out your arse!

Yeah, I probably didn't word it well, but I was commenting on your habit of saying things like "Forget about the legality and being safe, it's only a red colour.".

This implies { red = illegal to go = unsafe to go }; i.e. that it's all the same thing.

(And again, I can't recall any time I've gone through a red, for any reason.)

[FJRider]

(If it was in a game that the rules were being broken in we would hear the screams of 'foul' and no-fair ref!' all the way to Africa.)

That's only when somebody endangers US. When WE do it ... it's a "Professional Foul". :laugh:

Unless we get caught. Then ... it's no-fair ref. :yes:

Simple really .. :innocent:

[Scuba_Steve]

The best way to avoid hitting a vehicle on the other side of the road is to blindly comply with the REQUIREMENT (it's law, not just a good idea), to STAY ON YOUR OWN FECKING SIDE OF YELLOW LINES.

Right, back to the tea and shortbread. Deep breaths required.

Do you happen to have the exact law about said yellow lines??? I've tried searching before but never managed to find the exact writeup surrounding it.

[Ocean1]

There is actually. As usual streetview wont give the best look at the road. It's the road between Alex and Roxburgh. This bit of the road is straight(ish) but rises and falls a few times ... and has caught a few out. (even with the double yellows ...

I was on it a month ago, don't recall that particular bit, I'll take your word that the apparent 500M of clear road... isn't.


And quoting an imbedded image is verboten ... especially when THAT particular post was a dig at Gremlin.

Fixt. No problem with sensible rules.


Believe it or not, there are things that are there that you might not see, sometimes. That's why people turn across the path of oncoming bikes. Trains too.

The folk who think it's okay to cross the centreline to straighten a piece of road don't allow for the fact that one day they might not see the oncoming thing they didn't see. Unlikely to be a train, but can't rule it out.

The best way to avoid hitting a vehicle on the other side of the road is to blindly comply with the REQUIREMENT (it's law, not just a good idea), to STAY ON YOUR OWN FECKING SIDE OF YELLOW LINES.

Right, back to the tea and shortbread. Deep breaths required.

There's always things we might not see. But there's the thing, nobody else is responsible for my safety, that's all mine. So nobody else gets to dictate how I deal with issues surrounding my safety. I don't unnescessarily straighten out corners by crossing ordinary white lines let alone yellow ones, but I will if I think it's safer for me to do so.

That happens very very rarely and I've never been pinged for it, but it has happened and faced with the same situation I'd do it again without hesitation.

I agree with Croc, also, yellow lines are becoming so prevalent in areas where passing is pretty safe that people who used to hold them as absolute gospel now more or less ignore them.

Right. Back to Black Label and curry.

[rastuscat]

Do you happen to have the exact law about said yellow lines??? I've tried searching before but never managed to find the exact writeup surrounding it.

Couple of bits of law, actually.

No passing lines are covered here

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.9Passing where roadway marked with no-passing line
(1)This clause applies if a driver is at or approaching a portion of a roadway where the road controlling authority has, in accordance with any enactment, marked a no-passing line applying to traffic moving in the direction in which the driver is moving.
(2)The driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line, unless throughout the passing movement the driver keeps the vehicle wholly to the left of the no-passing line.
Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(6)

Keeping left (what we are discussing here) is covered here

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.1Keeping left
(1)A driver, when driving, must at all times drive as near as practicable to the left side of the roadway unless this rule otherwise provides.
(2)If a driver's speed, when driving, is such as to impede the normal and reasonable flow of traffic, that driver must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, move the vehicle as far as practicable to the left side of the roadway when this is necessary to allow following traffic to pass.
(3)A driver may drive in the right lane in the direction of travel when driving on a multi-lane road if—
(a)the driver is turning right, or making a U-turn from the centre of the road, and is giving the prescribed signal of that driver's intention to turn right; or
(b)the driver is passing; or
(c)the left lane is unavailable to the driver; or
(d)the driver is required by any provision of this rule to drive in the right lane; or
(e)a variable lane control downward-facing arrow sign indicates that the driver must drive in the right lane; or
(f)the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(g)the traffic in all other lanes is congested; or
(h)the traffic in every lane is congested.

Just from memory, of course. I hope I got all the commas in the right place. :rolleyes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

Couple of bits of law, actually.

No passing lines are covered here

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.9Passing where roadway marked with no-passing line
(1)This clause applies if a driver is at or approaching a portion of a roadway where the road controlling authority has, in accordance with any enactment, marked a no-passing line applying to traffic moving in the direction in which the driver is moving.
(2)The driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line, unless throughout the passing movement the driver keeps the vehicle wholly to the left of the no-passing line.
Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(6)

Keeping left (what we are discussing here) is covered here

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.1Keeping left
(1)A driver, when driving, must at all times drive as near as practicable to the left side of the roadway unless this rule otherwise provides.
(2)If a driver's speed, when driving, is such as to impede the normal and reasonable flow of traffic, that driver must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, move the vehicle as far as practicable to the left side of the roadway when this is necessary to allow following traffic to pass.
(3)A driver may drive in the right lane in the direction of travel when driving on a multi-lane road if—
(a)the driver is turning right, or making a U-turn from the centre of the road, and is giving the prescribed signal of that driver's intention to turn right; or
(b)the driver is passing; or
(c)the left lane is unavailable to the driver; or
(d)the driver is required by any provision of this rule to drive in the right lane; or
(e)a variable lane control downward-facing arrow sign indicates that the driver must drive in the right lane; or
(f)the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(g)the traffic in all other lanes is congested; or
(h)the traffic in every lane is congested.

Just from memory, of course. I hope I got all the commas in the right place. :rolleyes:

Geeze look at all those rules and I bet that is only half of them. Way too complex. I dunno about the comma but looking at all that gobbldygook makes me feel like a coma is coming on.

That sort of stuff is for the gods and doesn't apply to us mere mortals. If t ain't written big and bold on the road in max 2 syllable words then it don't apply to us.

[Zedder]

Yeah, I probably didn't word it well, but I was commenting on your habit of saying things like "Forget about the legality and being safe, it's only a red colour.".

This implies { red = illegal to go = unsafe to go }; i.e. that it's all the same thing.

(And again, I can't recall any time I've gone through a red, for any reason.)

I wouldn't say writing it once makes it a habit. Anyway, I try to keep my posts economical for the readers sake.

It's good that you can't recall running a red light. Cheers.

[Coolz]

That is probably why the rules of games never get changed eh. :rolleyes:

Nothing in life is a constant. It's called evolution. Though not all evolve.:rolleyes:

[swbarnett]

No, I think you're being a safe rider/driver who is proud of keeping to a skill set and laws as opposed to other idiots who think it's ok to endanger themselves and others.

I was utterly gobsmacked to read a post about actually choosing to cross the double yellow lines both on a bike and in a car. Get the fuck off the road if you can't be bothered to do it properly and safely.
Blindly sticking to the rules does not make for a safe driver. Also, driving outside the rules doesn't necessarily make for an unsafe driver.


In sport, work, some leisure activities, or anything else governed by a set of rules, people will follow them without a second thought. They realise if everyone plays to the same set of rules the system must be fair to all. Yet when it comes to the road, the most deadly game of all, people think they have the right to analyse the rules and only follow those which they agree with.
Ah, but who sets the rules for a sport? Ultimately it's the players (the governing body usually being made up of current and retired players). On the road the rules are set by a bunch of beurocrats that know nothing about driving.


The folk who think it's okay to cross the centreline to straighten a piece of road don't allow for the fact that one day they might not see the oncoming thing they didn't see. Unlikely to be a train, but can't rule it out.
You do realise (so I'm told by the interweb) that the British police are taught exactly this technique as a valid way to "make progress" and it's taught to the general public as well?

[Gremlin]

You do realise (so I'm told by the interweb) that the British police are taught exactly this technique as a valid way to "make progress" and it's taught to the general public as well?
The only extension I know is IAM, the Institute of Advanced Motorists, which is based off the police training.

Cutting corners is certainly not taught or permitted as part of an assessment. Using your piece of the road to full extent is taught, increasing sight angles for safety and visibility.

[Coolz]

Blindly sticking to the rules does not make for a safe driver. Also, driving outside the rules doesn't necessarily make for an unsafe driver.

I will try your advice next time I'm driving a truck.

[Berries]

Hmmm. More yellow lines marked to reinforce the keeping left rule rather than what they are intended for. It used to be safe to overtake on these bends until a good posi for the camera was found. Better photos here. (http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/otago/242438/police-ticket-dozens-crossing-centre-line)

[scumdog]

Hmmm. More yellow lines marked to reinforce the keeping left rule rather than what they are intended for. It used to be safe to overtake on these bends until a good posi for the camera was found. Better photos here. (http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/otago/242438/police-ticket-dozens-crossing-centre-line)

Cannot these brainless cretins drive without using the whole road????:crazy:

[slofox]

I see that all the time around these parts. Which is why I keep way the fuck left on every left hand bend in the highway.

[Edbear]

dumbing down the roads dumbs down the drivers.
& wrong, sooner TPTB start treating the licence as proof of ability to drive is the sooner we'll see an overall improvement of the standard of driving (& a lovely side-effect of an overall drop in driver numbers)


And the more rules/restrictions (many seemingly pointless) the more likely it is that people will not be able to find any logic in their structure that they can link with common sense and then they will reason that there isn't any reliable logic to using common sense when it doesn't equate to the rules/law/regulations etc. Then they start thinking (or not) that as long as there isn't a rule that explicitly says that something shouldn't be done, it must be ok to do it. Then we will need even more rules and pretty soon we won't be able to pick our nose or sratch our arse without a permit.

You both make valid points, but you need to consider the difference between the ideal, or what "should be" and the reality of what is.


That would work Steve - as soon as the drivers test was meaningful.
At the moment you can only treat it as proof that at some time the owner of the licence knew the minimum required to pass said test...<_<

Do you think it's the test per se, or the fact that anyone with an overseas or international licence can drive in NZ without sitting the test first? So many seem to be oblivious of the road rules, never seem to see signs and simply cannot adequately control a motor vehicle.

I see the need for testing immigrant drivers, making a Defensive Driving Course mandatory for geting a licence that includes making drivers aware of the consequences of stuffing up. This may possibly make a difference to the young males with far too much testosterone in their systems.


Don't ever pass on the left...


There actually isn't double yellow lines. The yellow line on the other side of the road has absolutely no relevance to you at all. All you can have is a single yellow line. The other side can then also have a single yellow line for them...

Sorry, correct technically.


In sport, work, some leisure activities, or anything else governed by a set of rules, people will follow them without a second thought. They realise if everyone plays to the same set of rules the system must be fair to all. Yet when it comes to the road, the most deadly game of all, people think they have the right to analyse the rules and only follow those which they agree with.

Sadly so true.


Blindly sticking to the rules does not make for a safe driver. Also, driving outside the rules doesn't necessarily make for an unsafe driver.


Ah, but who sets the rules for a sport? Ultimately it's the players (the governing body usually being made up of current and retired players). On the road the rules are set by a bunch of beurocrats that know nothing about driving.

Bollocks, the rules are made in consultation with the relevant advisory services and in discussions in the House and Caucus.

[FJRider]

Hmmm. More yellow lines marked to reinforce the keeping left rule rather than what they are intended for.

If the yellow lines were adhered to previously ... there probably wouldn't be as much of it. But if there's a few crashes due to dangerous overtaking in those "yellow lined" areas ... the only other option would be reduction in the speed limit for the area.

[FJRider]

I was on it a month ago, don't recall that particular bit, I'll take your word that the apparent 500M of clear road... isn't.


The piece of road in question is just south of the (uphill) passing lane ... that is on the south side of Gorge creek.

[Scuba_Steve]

Couple of bits of law, actually.

No passing lines are covered here

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.9Passing where roadway marked with no-passing line
(1)This clause applies if a driver is at or approaching a portion of a roadway where the road controlling authority has, in accordance with any enactment, marked a no-passing line applying to traffic moving in the direction in which the driver is moving.
(2)The driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line, unless throughout the passing movement the driver keeps the vehicle wholly to the left of the no-passing line.
Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(6)



Cheers Mr Cat, this is the best I found too. My problem is that I cannot find mention of what "no-passing lines" are, I've failed to find any legislation stating yellow lines are no-passing lines & no passing-lines are yellow.
Before people start, yes obviously we all know & accept that yellow lines mean no passing, I just want to see the legislation stating as much.
I know the keep left rule just fine, I just wish others would learn it's not only illegal to hang out in the right hand lane of a 2 lane road but also complete wankery & get back in the left hand lane where they belong so the rest of us can move on.




Do you think it's the test per se, or the fact that anyone with an overseas or international licence can drive in NZ without sitting the test first? So many seem to be oblivious of the road rules, never seem to see signs and simply cannot adequately control a motor vehicle.


Yes everyone should be tested before being allowed on NZ roads, I have even suggested a system for this making it viable to do so. Of-course the system could bring about a fail for both NZ & international drivers which alone is why the Govt would try & not introduce such a system

[Edbear]

Yes everyone should be tested before being allowed on NZ roads, I have even suggested a system for this making it viable to do so. Of-course the system could bring about a fail for both NZ & international drivers which alone is why the Govt would try & not introduce such a system

Might just email TPTB and see what response I get... :yes:

[rastuscat]

Cheers Mr Cat, this is the best I found too. My problem is that I cannot find mention of what "no-passing lines" are, I've failed to find any legislation stating yellow lines are no-passing lines & no passing-lines are yellow.

Your wish, Mr Taxpayer, is my public servant command.......

Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004
7.3No-passing lines
7.3(1)A road controlling authority may mark a no-passing line on a section of roadway if the road controlling authority considers that there is a risk to safety from vehicles that, when passing other vehicles (other than stationary vehicles or cycles) that are moving in the same direction, intrude into a lane that is being used by traffic travelling in the opposite direction.
7.3(2)A no-passing line applies to traffic that normally travels to the left of the line and must consist of a continuous yellow line not less than 100 mm wide that is marked approximately 100 mm to the left of either:
(a)another continuous yellow line; or
(b)a broken or continuous white line in the form described in 7.2(2)(a); or
(c)a dashed yellow line in the form described in 7.3(3); or
(d)a regular pattern of raised white or yellow pavement markers.
7.3(3)If practicable, a no-passing line must be preceded by a line not less than 100 mm wide and consisting of a series of yellow dashes, each of which is not longer than 15 m, to inform drivers of the existence of the no-passing line ahead.

Just off the top of my head, yet again. Commas included.

[Scuba_Steve]

Your wish, Mr Taxpayer, is my public servant command.......

Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004
7.3No-passing lines
7.3(1)A road controlling authority may mark a no-passing line on a section of roadway if the road controlling authority considers that there is a risk to safety from vehicles that, when passing other vehicles (other than stationary vehicles or cycles) that are moving in the same direction, intrude into a lane that is being used by traffic travelling in the opposite direction.
7.3(2)A no-passing line applies to traffic that normally travels to the left of the line and must consist of a continuous yellow line not less than 100 mm wide that is marked approximately 100 mm to the left of either:
(a)another continuous yellow line; or
(b)a broken or continuous white line in the form described in 7.2(2)(a); or
(c)a dashed yellow line in the form described in 7.3(3); or
(d)a regular pattern of raised white or yellow pavement markers.
7.3(3)If practicable, a no-passing line must be preceded by a line not less than 100 mm wide and consisting of a series of yellow dashes, each of which is not longer than 15 m, to inform drivers of the existence of the no-passing line ahead.

Just off the top of my head, yet again. Commas included.

Ah excellent, donut on me. :niceone:
I never looked at traffic control devices probably over looked it as by the title it sounds like rules surrounding temp traffic control rather than the permanent ones as well

[arcane12]

I was on it a month ago, don't recall that particular bit, I'll take your word that the apparent 500M of clear road... isn't.



Fixt. No problem with sensible rules.



There's always things we might not see. But there's the thing, nobody else is responsible for my safety, that's all mine. So nobody else gets to dictate how I deal with issues surrounding my safety. I don't unnescessarily straighten out corners by crossing ordinary white lines let alone yellow ones, but I will if I think it's safer for me to do so.

That happens very very rarely and I've never been pinged for it, but it has happened and faced with the same situation I'd do it again without hesitation.

I agree with Croc, also, yellow lines are becoming so prevalent in areas where passing is pretty safe that people who used to hold them as absolute gospel now more or less ignore them.

Right. Back to Black Label and curry.

Yes, no-one else is responsible for your safety (lets not argue that!) but when you are on the road you are behind the wheel (or sitting on top of) a dangerous device, and any mistake you make can impact on other people. Especially when crossing the centre line where you are more likely to meet oncoming traffic. So when you do so (and make a mistake) you are not only endandering your life, but could be endangering mine too!

Now being a little less dramatic, I used to cut the corners a bit back in the day, but really whats the point? I hope my driving (and soon my riding) has/will develop to the point that I can maintain a good, but safe speed around corners AND stay in my own lane. Everytime I chose to take an action that might break the law I have to think why am I risking my safety, and the safety of others?

[Jantar]

...


Ah, but who sets the rules for a sport? Ultimately it's the players (the governing body usually being made up of current and retired players). On the road the rules are set by a bunch of beurocrats that know nothing about driving.

Bollocks, the rules are made in consultation with the relevant advisory services and in discussions in the House and Caucus.

I do believe you have both said the same thing.

[Ocean1]

Yes, no-one else is responsible for your safety (lets not argue that!) but when you are on the road you are behind the wheel (or sitting on top of) a dangerous device, and any mistake you make can impact on other people. Especially when crossing the centre line where you are more likely to meet oncoming traffic. So when you do so (and make a mistake) you are not only endandering your life, but could be endangering mine too!

Now being a little less dramatic, I used to cut the corners a bit back in the day, but really whats the point? I hope my driving (and soon my riding) has/will develop to the point that I can maintain a good, but safe speed around corners AND stay in my own lane. Everytime I chose to take an action that might break the law I have to think why am I risking my safety, and the safety of others?

You're not listening. If I believe it's safer for me to break a road rule than comply with it then I will do so. Every time. By implication such behaiour is both perfectly rational and safer for those sharing the road with me at that point.

I'd quote examples, but I'm sure your imagination, should you consult it would furnish you with examples where you'd behave similarly.

[chasio]

Your wish, Mr Taxpayer, is my public servant command.......

Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004
7.3No-passing lines
7.3(1)A road controlling authority may mark a no-passing line on a section of roadway if the road controlling authority considers that there is a risk to safety from vehicles that, when passing other vehicles (other than stationary vehicles or cycles) that are moving in the same direction, intrude into a lane that is being used by traffic travelling in the opposite direction.
-snip-

The stationary vehicle I knew about but this also says that I can cross a yellow line to pass a cyclist, correct? I have to say I have done this as it felt the safest way to avoid prolonged low speed torture or a good rogering from behind (think uphill twisties when driving), but I assumed I was actually liable for a ticket if the poliss disagreed with my reasoning.

[pzkpfw]

The stationary vehicle I knew about but this also says that I can cross a yellow line to pass a cyclist, correct? I have to say I have done this as it felt the safest way to avoid prolonged low speed torture or a good rogering from behind (think uphill twisties when driving), but I assumed I was actually liable for a ticket if the poliss disagreed with my reasoning.

Nice catch. I've often wondered about that on the back road from Tawa to J'Ville. To give cyclists a full size "safety bubble" I have to go over the yellows (except I don't on corners, where I don't have enough visibility; so in those cases I just slow down and wait).

[arcane12]

You're not listening. If I believe it's safer for me to break a road rule than comply with it then I will do so. Every time. By implication such behaiour is both perfectly rational and safer for those sharing the road with me at that point.

I'd quote examples, but I'm sure your imagination, should you consult it would furnish you with examples where you'd behave similarly.

Ok, I'll give you that one as with a re-read I realised you said SAFER. My mistake. Safety is what the laws are about.

However my point, which you may not have been listening to :eek: was that in most circumstances there should be no need to cut a corner. If so it probably means the road user who is cutting the corner did not plan the corner correctly. Most of the time a corner is cut the person is choosing to enter the other side of the road rather than drive better/safer. That choice, to increase the risk to other road users, should not be acceptable.

I will also mention that I am not a complete safety crazed individual. I understand that sometimes we have to make allowances for less than 100% safe practices - like allowing less than fully trained drivers on our roads! But how else can we learn? And motorbikes! They are death traps right? (lets also not get into a discussion on road 'stats') At some point we have to say 'Safe enough'. It's the choice to reduce the safety of others when there is no need that really gets to me. If it's fun to take the corner at a high speed (eg. increased risk) isn't it more fun to do so inside your own lane, increasing the difficulty of the maneuver? Meh, I do prattle....

[arcane12]

The stationary vehicle I knew about but this also says that I can cross a yellow line to pass a cyclist, correct? I have to say I have done this as it felt the safest way to avoid prolonged low speed torture or a good rogering from behind (think uphill twisties when driving), but I assumed I was actually liable for a ticket if the poliss disagreed with my reasoning.

Hmm, interesting. I was wondering how that was supposed to work given a car is around 2M wide, the 'bubble' is 1.5M and a road is around 3.5M wide. unless the cycle is over the fog line, you'd have to cross the line to give him the correct gap (which I do, with indication). I also slow and move over when I encounter a certain crazy runner in the mornings. (I am pretty sure he run 5+ kms every morning (7amish), next to open roads. Darn fit freaks ;) )

[swbarnett]

The only extension I know is IAM, the Institute of Advanced Motorists, which is based off the police training.

Cutting corners is certainly not taught or permitted as part of an assessment. Using your piece of the road to full extent is taught, increasing sight angles for safety and visibility.
It was referred to as "straight-lining" - cutting a corner that has a lot of visibility. As I said, my info source was not exactly the most reliable.

[swbarnett]

I will try your advice next time I'm driving a truck.
What advise? All I said was that sticking to the letter of the law is no guarentee of safety.

[swbarnett]

the rules are made in consultation with the relevant advisory services and in discussions in the House and Caucus.
I wouldn't trust those "advisory services" as far as I could throw them. As I said - "a bunch of beurocrats that know nothing about driving". And besides, the final decision is made by a politician.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I wouldn't trust those "advisory services" as far as I could throw them. As I said - "a bunch of beurocrats that know nothing about driving". And besides, the final decision is made by a politician.

The same clowns who ignored advice from thier own experts backed by over 50 years of specialist research, and allowed untreated framing for political expediency. That is making the cost of the chch re-build pale into near insignificance. Yup they have our best interests at heart :rolleyes:



Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of fools.

It's pretty simple really just go back through this thread and you can see which is which.

[scracha]

Now being a little less dramatic, I used to cut the corners a bit back in the day, but really whats the point? I hope my driving (and soon my riding) has/will develop to the point that I can maintain a good, but safe speed around corners AND stay in my own lane. Everytime I chose to take an action that might break the law I have to think why am I risking my safety, and the safety of others?

Nope, sorry....on wide open roads where I can see right through the bend and well beyond it and there's no other vehicles, then there's no way in hell I'm slowing down and taking unnecessary angle of lean just to stay in the left hand lane, especially in the wet. On left handers I have much better vision through the corner if I approach the bend on the "wrong" side. I am aware of not getting "caught" out on the wrong side of the road by an approaching vehicle suddenly coming into my FOV (like I said..I don't do it if I can't see well past the corner) and not confusing other drivers ahead or behind me. The confusing other drivers bit is important in NZ seein as it's considered naughty here.

You pay for all the road, not just one side.

[scumdog]

You pay for all the road, not just one side.

And you can pay for using all the road, maybe with your life.

Cos one day maybe somebody else was coming the other way and you didn't notice until it was too late.


(Hell ya don't think all those fatal head-ons were caused by people who were on the incorrect side of the road and KNEW there was another vehicle heading towards them, do you?)

But do as you want, you obviously know more than I...<_<

[swbarnett]

And you can pay for using all the road, maybe with your life.

Cos one day maybe somebody else was coming the other way and you didn't notice until it was too late.


(Hell ya don't think all those fatal head-ons were caused by people who were on the incorrect side of the road and KNEW there was another vehicle heading towards them, do you?)
It's a huge leap to lump a rider/driver who only does this "on wide open roads where I can see right through the bend and well beyond it and there's no other vehicles" with the drongos that do it with next to no visibility.


But do as you want, you obviously know more than I...<_<
Well, actually, in any given situation that you are not present they do.

[scumdog]

It's a huge leap to lump a rider/driver who only does this "on wide open roads where I can see right through the bend and well beyond it and there's no other vehicles" with the drongos that do it with next to no visibility.


.

Without being too indelicate there are ex-members of KB who had the same line of thought...

[Flip]

I have only come close to taking out one fellow biker. I found him doing the racing lines thing over the Lewis pass a year ago. I don't actually know how he did not end up as a perminant bonnet fixture on my Hilux. It was either I go over the bank or I take him out!

Oh he was on a motoguzi going for it.

[scumdog]

I have only come close to taking out one fellow biker. I found him doing the racing lines thing over the Lewis pass a year ago. I don't actually know how he did not end up as a perminant bonnet fixture on my Hilux. It was either I go over the bank or I take him out!

Oh he was on a motoguzi going for it.

And probably thought 'there's nothing coming, I've got a clear road' too.:rolleyes:

[rastuscat]

And probably thought 'there's nothing coming, I've got a clear road' too.:rolleyes:

Yeah, and when he got home he logged onto KB and started banging on about how safe it was, how there was nothing coming, how he had been riding for years and never crashed........yaddy yaddy yaddy.

Morning Scummy :rolleyes:

[willytheekid]

Collected some revenue today!

....did you Rastuscat?....you sure about that??

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8192881/Boy-racers-dodging-millions-in-fines

...cos thanks to the so called NZ "justice" system, the repeat offenders (Mostly boy racers) who thumb there nose at the law and clock up HUGE!!!! fines etc, are now walking out of court laughing!

...once again...OUR tax money at work! :mad:...and all your great efforts pissed into the wind!


(hope all is well mate...this bullshit has GOT to make you a little pissed)

[swbarnett]

Without being too indelicate there are ex-members of KB who had the same line of thought...
I agree with what you're getting at; there are indeed riders and drivers that think they can do it when they cannot.

However, it's all a matter of degree. What I'm trying to get at is that there are riders and drivers that are quite capable of making an informed decision about visibility and sight lines that result in a perfectly safe manoeuvre; even when using the other side of the road. They way you put it no-one should ever overtake because they can't be trusted to judge the amount of clear road to the next blind spot.

[Edbear]

I agree with what you're getting at; there are indeed riders and drivers that think they can do it when they cannot.

However, it's all a matter of degree. What I'm trying to get at is that there are riders and drivers that are quite capable of making an informed decision about visibility and sight lines that result in a perfectly safe manoeuvre; even when using the other side of the road. They way you put it no-one should ever overtake because they can't be trusted to judge the amount of clear road to the next blind spot.

And how do the cops and lawmakers determine who are the capable ones so as not to legislate against them or pull them over for a ticket ?

[Scuba_Steve]

And how do the cops and lawmakers determine who are the capable ones so as not to legislate against them or pull them over for a ticket ?

By introducing my licence system, then only capable drivers will be on road all others will be relegated to public transport & the PIG dept can be made redundant or upgraded to cops. everyone wins 'cept the political party to introduce such a system that'd see a large percentage of NZ off the road & thus large loss in votes

[Edbear]

By introducing my licence system, then only capable drivers will be on road all others will be relegated to public transport & the PIG dept can be made redundant or upgraded to cops. everyone wins 'cept the political party to introduce such a system that'd see a large percentage of NZ off the road & thus large loss in votes

Practical and realistic as always...

[swbarnett]

And how do the cops and lawmakers determine who are the capable ones so as not to legislate against them or pull them over for a ticket ?
The exact same way they determine who are the capable ones when it comes to overtaking. There are rules around overtaking with regards to clear road ahead; these can easily be applied to straight-lining.

[Edbear]

The exact same way they determine who are the capable ones when it comes to overtaking. There are rules around overtaking with regards to clear road ahead; these can easily be applied to straight-lining.

Yup, and speeding, and Wof's/Reg. etc... :yes:

[swbarnett]

Yup, and speeding, and Wof's/Reg. etc... :yes:
The difference being that the overtaking laws have some basis in basic physics (except that they don't take account of the extra acceleration and small size of a bike; mostly around the placement of yellow lines). Speeding, well, let's just say that the reasoning is dubious at best, WOFs are on the way out and registration has no bearing whatsoever on safety (even the ACC part).

[scracha]

And you can pay for using all the road, maybe with your life.

Cos one day maybe somebody else was coming the other way and you didn't notice until it was too late.

That's like saying I didn't notice the car in front of me or the bend in the road.....a.k.a. pointless argument. If I'm too stupid to see something in front of me then it matters not what side of the road I'm on.



(Hell ya don't think all those fatal head-ons were caused by people who were on the incorrect side of the road and KNEW there was another vehicle heading towards them, do you?)

I think it was to do with people overtaking at stupid places, crossing the centre line where it's not safe to do so or losing control of their vehicle through travelling at too fast a speed.



But do as you want, you obviously know more than I...<_<

Funny how most of Europe manage to drive on far busier roads, at far higher speeds using both sides of the road where appropriate. For some reason they have waaaay lower road toll per capita too. Couldn't be summit to do with driver education now could it?


Look, dangerous driving is dangerous driving. Being on the "right" side of the road doesn't mean you're driving carefully any more than being on the "wrong" side of the road means you're driving dangerously. Arguments about the evils of speeding follow a similar vein.

It's obvious the cops and government know way more than I because it's obvious that every second state highway should have an 80Km/h speed limit and have two yellow stripes the length of the road.

[PuppetMaster]

Police discretion is non-existent. Passing over yellow lines is not always dangerous. The rapists (police) lost my respect ages ago, when common sense didn't matter and I got a ticket anyway, for taking action that saved my life.
Lucky that 4x4 driver didnt get cop raped.

[Dragon]

Police discretion is non-existent. Passing over yellow lines is not always dangerous. The rapists (police) lost my respect ages ago, when common sense didn't matter and I got a ticket anyway, for taking action that saved my life.
Lucky that 4x4 driver didnt get cop raped.

I find it stupid that if I where to hit a patch of diesel on the road and crash then I'm up for careless driving plus if I hit someone else its careless resulting in injury.

(recently had a friend get done for it even though people had rang in and stated there was diesal on the road but the courts looked at his car (considered to be a boy racer) and raped him)

[Edbear]

I find it stupid that if I where to hit a patch of diesel on the road and crash then I'm up for careless driving plus if I hit someone else its careless resulting in injury.

(recently had a friend get done for it even though people had rang in and stated there was diesal on the road but the courts looked at his car (considered to be a boy racer) and raped him)

When I had my accident the SCU concluded it was due to oil on the road and held me blameless. They checked my stated speed at the time was consistent with the damage, that my van had a WoF and was up to WoF standards, registered, that I had a current licence and was not under the influence if alcohol or drugs. In the emergency ward a very nice Police lady apologised but had to take a blood sample for testing.

If I should not have been on the road for any reason I may have faced charges despite not being at fault.

[Dragon]

When I had my accident the SCU concluded it was due to oil on the road and held me blameless. They checked my stated speed at the time was consistent with the damage, that my van had a WoF and was up to WoF standards, registered, that I had a current licence and was not under the influence if alcohol or drugs. In the emergency ward a very nice Police lady apologised but had to take a blood sample for testing.

If I should not have been on the road for any reason I may have faced charges despite not being at fault.

Car was wofed reged and certed he doesnt drink, car had passengers, blood tests came back clear

Hit a diesel patch on the haywoods at a corner car was doing 90km at the time driver behind him who witnessed it can confirm.

Car slid into and over center barrier was hit by two other cars

Kind of hard to work out speed when the car is completely wreaked from being hit by other cars

Was a 180kwatw skyline however and the cops just decided that he was being a muppet

[Edbear]

Car was wofed reged and certed he doesnt drink, car had passengers, blood tests came back clear

Hit a diesel patch on the haywoods at a corner car was doing 90km at the time driver behind him who witnessed it can confirm.

Car slid into and over center barrier was hit by two other cars

Kind of hard to work out speed when the car is completely wreaked from being hit by other cars

Was a 180kwatw skyline however and the cops just decided that he was being a muppet

If I was him I would have pursued the matter. I don't accept injustices and I don't go away until resolved.

[Zedder]

Collected some revenue today!

....did you Rastuscat?....you sure about that??

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8192881/Boy-racers-dodging-millions-in-fines

...cos thanks to the so called NZ "justice" system, the repeat offenders (Mostly boy racers) who thumb there nose at the law and clock up HUGE!!!! fines etc, are now walking out of court laughing!

...once again...OUR tax money at work! :mad:...and all your great efforts pissed into the wind!


(hope all is well mate...this bullshit has GOT to make you a little pissed)

Yep, it must be very frustrating for the cops.

Talking about tax money though, I met a cop last night who ran a station for a while. He thought he'd do the right thing and relieve the burden on the poor old taxpayers by making do etc, however TPTB gave him a bollocking and told him to stick to the budget?!?

[GTRMAN]

Car was wofed reged and certed he doesnt drink, car had passengers, blood tests came back clear

Hit a diesel patch on the haywoods at a corner car was doing 90km at the time driver behind him who witnessed it can confirm.

Car slid into and over center barrier was hit by two other cars

Kind of hard to work out speed when the car is completely wreaked from being hit by other cars

Was a 180kwatw skyline however and the cops just decided that he was being a muppet


Hmmmm, what corner? what were the road conditions? seems interesting that a skyline with all the driving aids on the planet couldn't deal with a momentary patch of diesel. Could it be that the driver was driving beyond his ability? not judging, just asking....

[FJRider]

Police discretion is non-existent. Passing over yellow lines is not always dangerous. The rapists (police) lost my respect ages ago, when common sense didn't matter and I got a ticket anyway, for taking action that saved my life.
Lucky that 4x4 driver didnt get cop raped.

Any time spent on the wrong side of the road is dangerous.

[Dragon]

Hmmmm, what corner? what were the road conditions? seems interesting that a skyline with all the driving aids on the planet couldn't deal with a momentary patch of diesel. Could it be that the driver was driving beyond his ability? not judging, just asking....

It was an R32 street legal that was used on the track

No Hicas
No ABS
etc

Not 100% if he still has p/s installed

Also he has alot of track time and 10years of driving expirence was just one of those things where he couldnt get it to stop.

Also in regards to fighting the system I fought a charge for over 2years and still lost it was a case of there word against mine

In order to fight the charge you need time and money to do it. The guy im talking about didnt bother fighting it as he couldnt afford a lawyer and couldnt get more time off work.

Shit happens sometimes it doesnt matter how good you are at driving you'll still have an accident

[rastuscat]

There is a spooky correlation between those who stay entirely on their own side of the road and those who don't get tickets for not keeping left.

Am I starting to see a pattern? Don't speed, don't get a speeding ticket. Wear your seatbelt, you won't get a seatbelt ticket. Don't park illegally, you won't get a parking ticket.

Amazing coincidence? :oi-grr:

[Scuba_Steve]

don't get a speeding ticket. Wear your seatbelt, you won't get a seatbelt ticket.

Well those 2 are bullshit from the start I've been done for both without breaking either (at the occasion they were given), also had a pink sticker on a perfectly fine & road legal bike, & had my keys taken for "skids" which never happened, tires were not hot & the car was not capable of it*.
They've also attempted claiming many a problems with my vehicles/driving over my younger years it seems they had an obligation to pull over any young driver & charge them with something regardless if how false it was... Got off a few because of entrapment & other "tricks" the PIGs liked to use
Most of this happened when I was ignorant of the law, I learnt me a bit & they tended to end the harassment early after that, unless they had something concrete like my ongoing lack of Rego (not such an issue in my older years I can afford it now)

[Zedder]

But wait, there more: If all else is going well in the first two cases, the bonus is ya might get to stay alive.

[Edbear]

There is a spooky correlation between those who stay entirely on their own side of the road and those who don't get tickets for not keeping left.

Am I starting to see a pattern? Don't speed, don't get a speeding ticket. Wear your seatbelt, you won't get a seatbelt ticket. Don't park illegally, you won't get a parking ticket.

Amazing coincidence? :oi-grr:

I just don't get it! In my 42 years on the road, I've had one $1.50 parking ticket about 30 years ago, and you know what? It was for illegal parking, of all things!!!

I've had one speed camera fine about 20 years ago, or around the time they first came into play, and again, it was for exceeding the speed limit!!! 61km/h in a 50km/h zone. I have also had one cop pull me over for speeding, doing 112km/h in a 100km/h zone!!!

What gives??? Why haven't I been targetted when I've been driving/riding legally???? :(

[PuppetMaster]

Any time spent on the wrong side of the road is dangerous.

I dont dispute that fact. Being in the correct (left) lane can be dangerous too. My argument is that a rapist will still ticket an individual regardless of the circumstances, safe or not. And lets not even go with what they are ticketing people for, if they were to be stricter on the more basic driving skills, keep left unless passing, using an indicator etc, the standard of driving may improve.

[Scuba_Steve]

What gives??? Why haven't I been targetted when I've been driving/riding legally???? :(

You were a teen/young driver before the PIG oppression started up in the early 90's. As I've gotten older the harassment from NZ's biggest gang has subsided with no change in my driving to instigate said subsidence.

Don't get me wrong they didn't all run oppression for their gang & Govt. Had 1 possibly 2 that were reasonable/respectable & Mr Cat seems to be old school in his ways too. But most I dealt with were wankers & before anyone starts, my attitude had nothing to do with it. I'd always keep my mouth shut until the PIG had set the tone for the encounter then I would simply replicate in kind, sure might not have helped things but it certainly didn't hinder them either. Did provide a laugh on occasions, especially when you get a PIG who thinks his position gives him power & superiority

[Zedder]

I just don't get it! In my 42 years on the road, I've had one $1.50 parking ticket about 30 years ago, and you know what? It was for illegal parking, of all things!!!

I've had one speed camera fine about 20 years ago, or around the time they first came into play, and again, it was for exceeding the speed limit!!! 61km/h in a 50km/h zone. I have also had one cop pull me over for speeding, doing 112km/h in a 100km/h zone!!!

What gives??? Why haven't I been targetted when I've been driving/riding legally???? :(

Maybe you're just not fun to be around...

[Edbear]

Maybe you're just not fun to be around...

Hurrumph! I can be fun! :confused:

[unstuck]

Hurrumph! I can be fun! :confused:

Pics, or it never happened.:niceone:

[Edbear]

Maybe the young one's can comment? There a quite a few newbies on KB.

Have you been harrassed or pulled over for no apparent reason?

[unstuck]

Maybe the young one's can comment? There a quite a few newbies on KB.

Have you been harrassed or pulled over for no apparent reason?

Yep, but not since I started growing my hair.:Punk:

[Edbear]

Pics, or it never happened.:niceone:

Might embarrass everyone... :shutup:


Yep, but not since I started growing my hair.:Punk:

How was your experience?

[unstuck]

I give as good as I get:Punk: Do unto others as they do unto you. Most cops I have dealt with have been bloody good buggers, even after doing some really horrible stupid shit. One copper here really had it in for me for some reason though(the one that finally caught me on my bike). But I have not seen him for a year or so.:shifty:

[Zedder]

I give as good as I get:Punk: Do unto others as they do unto you. Most cops I have dealt with have been bloody good buggers, even after doing some really horrible stupid shit. One copper here really had it in for me for some reason though(the one that finally caught me on my bike). But I have not seen him for a year or so.:shifty:

Anyone heard of a missing cop down that way?

[scumdog]

I dont dispute that fact. Being in the correct (left) lane can be dangerous too. My argument is that a rapist will still ticket an individual regardless of the circumstances, safe or not. And lets not even go with what they are ticketing people for, if they were to be stricter on the more basic driving skills, keep left unless passing, using an indicator etc, the standard of driving may improve.


Well, it seems some people were born to receive tickets - and other to dispense them

Gee, you and ScubaSteve must be in th efirst catagory - I guess?

[FJRider]

My argument is that a rapist will still ticket an individual regardless of the circumstances, safe or not.

MY argument is ... the "Rapists" you speak of are the least of my worries. It is the perfectly sane intelligent law abiding citizens that pull/drive/walk out/appear on THAT wrong side of the road without looking in the direction THEY are heading :facepalm:

Then .... BOTH of us say ... "where the fuck did he come from" ... :shit:

End results are not always good. But good luck with the practice .. when you practice it. And if you manage to kill anybody (other than yourself) ... chances are you wont get jail time. (going by past cases anyway) :shutup:

Your immediate/original statement of what may happen (re: Rapists) means their Policy/methods of law enforcement has been (is being) heard/felt. (Hence the paranoia) The Senior Rapists will be pleased. :laugh:



Have a nice day ... :sunny:

[Scuba_Steve]

Gee, you and ScubaSteve must be in th efirst catagory - I guess?

Haven't had to pay for toilet paper in years now... Just wish they'd send something better then the old public toilet wax paper

[scumdog]

Haven't had to pay for toilet paper in years now... Just wish they'd send something better then the old public toilet wax paper


I guess you paid your dues when younger - and now shifted roles a bit huh??

[rastuscat]

Well those 2 are bullshit from the start I've been done for both without breaking either (at the occasion they were given), also had a pink sticker on a perfectly fine & road legal bike, & had my keys taken for "skids" which never happened, tires were not hot & the car was not capable of it*.
They've also attempted claiming many a problems with my vehicles/driving over my younger years it seems they had an obligation to pull over any young driver & charge them with something regardless if how false it was... Got off a few because of entrapment & other "tricks" the PIGs liked to use
Most of this happened when I was ignorant of the law, I learnt me a bit & they tended to end the harassment early after that, unless they had something concrete like my ongoing lack of Rego (not such an issue in my older years I can afford it now)

Yo Skoober

I've had so many people do shit in front of me then deny it I guess I may have met you before.

Interesting how the view changes from the other side of the fence.

[swbarnett]

There is a spooky correlation between those who stay entirely on their own side of the road and those who don't get tickets for not keeping left.

Am I starting to see a pattern? Don't speed, don't get a speeding ticket. Wear your seatbelt, you won't get a seatbelt ticket. Don't park illegally, you won't get a parking ticket.
And, if you were a black man in '50s US, don't sit in the white section of the bus and you won't get beaten up. Law does mot always equal right or fair.

[Scuba_Steve]

Yo Skoober

I've had so many people do shit in front of me then deny it I guess I may have met you before.

Interesting how the view changes from the other side of the fence.

If you had meet me & I had done what you accuse, I wouldn't deny it. I also wouldn't admit it (thats stupid) but I wouldn't deny it.
But as per my examples I was not guilty of a single one of them (at the time accused). Definitely guilty of a few of them at other times & still am, but they were all bullshit at the times of the mentioned charges.
Norf Island cops aren't honest, trustworthy, friendly or helpful as a general rule

[scumdog]

And, if you were a black man in '50s US, don't sit in the white section of the bus and you won't get beaten up. Law does mot always equal right or fair.

No, but breaking it might prove expensive.

"Do you feel rich punk, well do you?"

(Apology to Dirty Harry Callahan)

[swbarnett]

No, but breaking it might prove expensive.
So you're saying it's OK to enforce an unjust law simply because it's law? Wasn't that used as a defence at Nuremburg (blindly following the orders of the policy makers)?

[Ender EnZed]

I just don't get it! In my 42 years on the road, I've had one $1.50 parking ticket about 30 years ago, and you know what? It was for illegal parking, of all things!!!

I've had one speed camera fine about 20 years ago, or around the time they first came into play, and again, it was for exceeding the speed limit!!! 61km/h in a 50km/h zone. I have also had one cop pull me over for speeding, doing 112km/h in a 100km/h zone!!!

What gives??? Why haven't I been targetted when I've been driving/riding legally???? :(

Didn't you also get a ticket for doing 56km/h on a holiday weekend in recent years? You reckless hooligan.


seems interesting that a skyline with all the driving aids on the planet

*snortle*

Do you mean the turbo? Or the subwoofer? Just which "driving aids" are you imagining the average (or any) Skyline to possess?

[GrayWolf]

Well those 2 are bullshit from the start I've been done for both without breaking either (at the occasion they were given), also had a pink sticker on a perfectly fine & road legal bike, & had my keys taken for "skids" which never happened, tires were not hot & the car was not capable of it*.
They've also attempted claiming many a problems with my vehicles/driving over my younger years it seems they had an obligation to pull over any young driver & charge them with something regardless if how false it was... Got off a few because of entrapment & other "tricks" the PIGs liked to use
Most of this happened when I was ignorant of the law, I learnt me a bit & they tended to end the harassment early after that, unless they had something concrete like my ongoing lack of Rego (not such an issue in my older years I can afford it now)


You were a teen/young driver before the PIG oppression started up in the early 90's. As I've gotten older the harassment from NZ's biggest gang has subsided with no change in my driving to instigate said subsidence.

I'd always keep my mouth shut until the PIG had set the tone for the encounter then I would simply replicate in kind, sure might not have helped things but it certainly didn't hinder them either. Did provide a laugh on occasions, especially when you get a PIG who thinks his position gives him power & superiority

Even at this 'tender' age, you still refer to the Popo as 'PIG's"...... reading your posts, my mind is drawn back to what Police friends I knew in the UK said... "what comes out of your mouth the first time you open it, words used/attitude... decides how much you'll be 'raped' to use the colloquial expression, and with how much fervour they'll find reasons to ticket/prosecute......

Wonder if there was a correlation in your past between this obscure reasoning and YOUR interactions with them??

[scumdog]

So you're saying it's OK to enforce an unjust law simply because it's law? Wasn't that used as a defence an Nuremburg (blindly following the orders of the policy makers)?

Wow, quantum leap dude.

A law YOU decided was 'unjust' = concentration camp torture and slaughter...:blink:

[GrayWolf]

Rastus, Scummie and all/any of our fine Revenue Collector's in 'Blue' :Police:
I've read all of your posts over this topic and personally think you should all be ashamed. After all, Revenue Collection is a business, is it not? yet you consistently FAIL to collect the possible full amounts. Like many other businesses yours chooses to operate on Public Holiday and Stat' days, yet unlike many other businesses that 'rape' their patrons on these days, you consistently fail to charge the 'obligatory' 15% Public Holiday Surcharge.... :shutup:

Bloody SHAME on YOU!!! :bleh::laugh:

[GrayWolf]

Didn't you also get a ticket for doing 56km/h on a holiday weekend in recent years? You reckless hooligan.



*snortle*

Do you mean the turbo? Or the subwoofer? Just which "driving aids" are you imagining the average (or any) Skyline to possess?

Was probably consulting the ''where to go'txt' instrukshuns from the Doris he's been knobbing

[Banditbandit]

So you're saying it's OK to enforce an unjust law simply because it's law? Wasn't that used as a defence an Nuremburg (blindly following the orders of the policy makers)?

Whoa ... no that does not follow ... neither does the Nuremberg link .. which was not about enforcing the law .. but the "following orders" defense ... as was also William Calley's defense for the My Lai massacre ...

If we accept that the laws are the community agreements for moderating behaviours then yes, the law is the law and needs to be enforced ... no exceptions ... some might think that some laws are unjust, are a joke and unecesasary - that is an argument for the community we live in ...

For law enforcement officers like Scummie - the law is the law and their job is to enforce it - not to argue about it's justice etc .. (courts are there to argue justice in specific cases) cops can engage in the community discussion as private citizens .. from a popo pov ... justice or injustice doesn't come into it - enforcing the community will does ... the law is the law.. no exceptions ...


277092

[unstuck]

And......Hating on all police because you have had a bad experience with 1 or 2, is like hating on all butchers for one butcher selling you a chop with no fat on. Even for someone with the emotional maturity of a preschooler, like me, that is just wacko.:weird:

[kiwi cowboy]

And......Hating on all police because you have had a bad experience with 1 or 2, is like hating on all butchers for one butcher selling you a chop with no fat on. Even for someone with the emotional maturity of a preschooler, like me, that is just wacko.:weird:

Come on stucky the butchers arent supposed to leave the fat on cos it causes obesity-dont you watch the bloody cooking shows were they cut all the fat off before cooking. ( they use the fat to put in the pies)

[unstuck]

Come on stucky the butchers arent supposed to leave the fat on cos it causes obesity-dont you watch the bloody cooking shows were they cut all the fat off before cooking. ( they use the fat to put in the pies)

No bastard is gonna cut the fat of my chops.:2guns:

[kiwi cowboy]

No bastard is gonna cut the fat of my chops.:2guns:

Mine ether :laugh: i select, i kill,i cut up,i cook,i eat no bastard gets there hands on my meat.
(mutton anyway, my other meat is by my choice:msn-wink:).

Perks if being a farmer:woohoo:

[rastuscat]

Rastus, Scummie and all/any of our fine Revenue Collector's in 'Blue' :Police:
I've read all of your posts over this topic and personally think you should all be ashamed. After all, Revenue Collection is a business, is it not? yet you consistently FAIL to collect the possible full amounts. Like many other businesses yours chooses to operate on Public Holiday and Stat' days, yet unlike many other businesses that 'rape' their patrons on these days, you consistently fail to charge the 'obligatory' 15% Public Holiday Surcharge.... :shutup:

Bloody SHAME on YOU!!! :bleh::laugh:

Funny. My mischievous side once caused me to tell a bloke his fine was $150 (seatbelt ticket) plus 15% for being on a public holiday.

I still chortle to myself at that.:Police:

[FJRider]

Mine ether :laugh: i select, i kill,i cut up,i cook,i eat no bastard gets there hands on my meat.
(mutton anyway, my other meat is by my choice:msn-wink:).

Perks if being a farmer:woohoo:

All those sheep. :woohoo:

So many choices ... <_<

[Zedder]

Even at this 'tender' age, you still refer to the Popo as 'PIG's"...... reading your posts, my mind is drawn back to what Police friends I knew in the UK said... "what comes out of your mouth the first time you open it, words used/attitude... decides how much you'll be 'raped' to use the colloquial expression, and with how much fervour they'll find reasons to ticket/prosecute......

Wonder if there was a correlation in your past between this obscure reasoning and YOUR interactions with them??

It's not good seeing all the "mouthing off", but maybe SS is simply pissed off with the perceived injustice of it all because I've noted he doesn't like to be bound by "unjust" laws or pressured by time frames. Just saying...

[rastuscat]

277113

Is that Skoober chasing me on his treddly...........

[Scuba_Steve]

Is that Skoober chasing me on his treddly...........

What? the one at the back that looks like he's falling off??? Yea that'd probably be me :Punk:

[gloplg]

Is that Skoober chasing me on his treddly...........

You're cheating aren't you RC using the motorbike. Shouldn't you be getting some of the donuts off peddaling in the pack????

Like your bike though.:drool::drool::drool::drool:

[FJRider]

Rastus, Scummie and all/any of our fine Revenue Collector's in 'Blue' :Police:
I've read all of your posts over this topic and personally think you should all be ashamed. After all, Revenue Collection is a business, is it not? yet you consistently FAIL to collect the possible full amounts. Like many other businesses yours chooses to operate on Public Holiday and Stat' days, yet unlike many other businesses that 'rape' their patrons on these days, you consistently fail to charge the 'obligatory' 15% Public Holiday Surcharge.... :shutup:

Bloody SHAME on YOU!!! :bleh::laugh:

And don't forget the ones they let off with a warning ... where will this madness stop .... :facepalm:


A large portion of the population are Dependent on the Benefit of your efforts provide ... :laugh:

[FJRider]

Is that Skoober chasing me on his treddly...........

I think he's about to pass you. Impeding the flow of traffic again were you ... ??? :confused:

[rastuscat]

It's entrapment. I'm lining up multiple IONs for following too close and failing to keep left...........:woohoo:

[scumdog]

It's entrapment. I'm lining up multiple IONs for following too close and failing to keep left...........:woohoo:

Yea but how can you catch them when you're on FRONT of them???:blink:

[caspernz]

Yea but how can you catch them when you're on FRONT of them???:blink:

He's got it sussed...the dead end alley trick :innocent: and an accomplice :woohoo:

[rastuscat]

.......and I have to call it work.......
damn.........life is good.

[scumdog]

.......and I have to call it work.......
damn.........life is good.


I feel your pain!!:laugh::rofl:

[Zedder]

Went for a ride today, no revenue for the gubbermint though.

Life's good alright.

[rastuscat]

no revenue for the gubbermint though.

It wont last.

Everyvun must pay !!

Nyahhhhhhhh ha ha haaaaaaaaa (maniacal laugh).........

[FJRider]

It wont last.

Everyvun must pay !!

Nyahhhhhhhh ha ha haaaaaaaaa (maniacal laugh).........

Must be something in the Rangiora water ... or this site has finally got to him ... :confused:

[Zedder]

It wont last.

Everyvun must pay !!

Nyahhhhhhhh ha ha haaaaaaaaa (maniacal laugh).........

I doubt that very much, there's way too much Scottish blood in the system.

[Zedder]

Must be something in the Rangiora water ... or this site has finally got to him ... :confused:

Yeah, sad really. Let's face it though, he's managed to stave it off for quite a while so he's put up a good fight.

[rastuscat]

I doubt that very much, there's way too much Scottish blood in the system.

Irony. I went to a Burns Night function in Rangoon last light.

Maybe you're right about the Scottish blod.

[sugilite]

Irony. I went to a Burns Night function in Rangoon last light.

Maybe you're right about the Scottish blod.
I'll say, to tight to even give blood the double "o"! :bleh:

[Madness]

I'll say, to tight to even give blood the double "o"! :bleh:

Using that logic you must be Scottish too. :bleh:

[Zedder]

Don't be bloody negative.

[rastuscat]

Don't be bloody negative.

With an attitude like yours how can you be on KB? Negativity is the new positivity, don't ya know.

[sugilite]

Using that logic you must be Scottish too. :bleh:

Aye, ya got me there laddy :msn-wink:

[kevie]

It wont last.

Everyvun must pay !!

Nyahhhhhhhh ha ha haaaaaaaaa (maniacal laugh).........

Are you highway patrol??????

If so ..... what are the circumstances a vehicle can A/Stop on a bus stop and B/ park on a bus stop?

(Park in my thoughts are when the driver has turned off the vehicle and exited it) otherwise in my understanding he has just 'stopped' not parked.

[Zedder]

With an attitude like yours how can you be on KB? Negativity is the new positivity, don't ya know.

Yes, it's all about matching the type.

[Waihou Thumper]

I thought crossing double yellow lines warrants instant disqualification, loss of licence?
Has this changed or was I always wrong?

[FJRider]

Are you highway patrol??????

If so ..... what are the circumstances a vehicle can A/Stop on a bus stop and B/ park on a bus stop?

(Park in my thoughts are when the driver has turned off the vehicle and exited it) otherwise in my understanding he has just 'stopped' not parked.

In the road code on the list of places you can not stop.

1. on a marked bus stop or taxi stand

2. closer than 6 metres to a bus stop marked only by a sign

[Zedder]

Well, a bit of a fail for "blood" themed puns there, so I'll just go and read a book...

[rastuscat]

Are you highway patrol??????

If so ..... what are the circumstances a vehicle can A/Stop on a bus stop and B/ park on a bus stop?

(Park in my thoughts are when the driver has turned off the vehicle and exited it) otherwise in my understanding he has just 'stopped' not parked.

parking means stopping or standing in an area of road not normally used for traffic flow.

if you wanna park in a bus stop, drive a scheduled bus.

[rastuscat]

Are you highway patrol??????

If so ..... what are the circumstances a vehicle can A/Stop on a bus stop and B/ park on a bus stop?

(Park in my thoughts are when the driver has turned off the vehicle and exited it) otherwise in my understanding he has just 'stopped' not parked.

parking means stopping or standing in an area of road not normally used for traffic flow.

if you wanna park in a bus stop, drive a scheduled bus.

[swbarnett]

Wow, quantum leap dude.

A law YOU decided was 'unjust' = concentration camp torture and slaughter...:blink:
Perhaps I wasn't clear. What you seem to be saying is that you'll enforce a law just because it's a law. Irrespective of whether or not you personally agree with it. I used the Nuremburg reference to illustrate that blindly following the orders of TPTB is no excuse for enforcing an unjust law. If you actually believe the law to just then I have no problem with your decision to enforce it (even though I may think it unjust). However, enforcing a law that you believe to be unjust simply because it's a law is hypocritical.

[swbarnett]

Whoa ... no that does not follow ... neither does the Nuremberg link .. which was not about enforcing the law .. but the "following orders" defense ...
It may not have been a statute but a military order amounts to the same thing.


If we accept that the laws are the community agreements for moderating behaviours
Ah, but this is where the law falls down. Laws are not community agreements, they are the personal agenda of one or more politicians.


then yes, the law is the law and needs to be enforced ... no exceptions ... some might think that some laws are unjust, are a joke and unecesasary - that is an argument for the community we live in ...

For law enforcement officers like Scummie - the law is the law and their job is to enforce it - not to argue about it's justice etc .. (courts are there to argue justice in specific cases) cops can engage in the community discussion as private citizens .. from a popo pov ... justice or injustice doesn't come into it - enforcing the community will does ... the law is the law.. no exceptions ...

Are you actually trying to say that the police that used to lay into any black man who chose to sit in the wrong seat on the bus were justified because they were enfrcing a law? Every police officer has a conscience and I expect them to use it. Civil disobedience is a perfectly valid way to change a law; a cop refusing to enforce a law they believe to be blatantly wrong is part of this. If they believe in the law they're enforcing then I support them in that enforcement, even though I may think they've got it wrong.

Remember - all that is require for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.

[Scuba_Steve]

parking means stopping or standing in an area of road not normally used for traffic flow.


are you sure?
I haven't looked into it, but I do know we have both no parking & no stopping signs about implying they are 2 different things.
I thought to be parked there was some requirement for engine to be off &/ the driver to leave the vehicle? like I said I could be wrong I haven't looked into legal definition of them.

[rastuscat]

are you sure?
I haven't looked into it, but I do know we have both no parking & no stopping signs about implying they are 2 different things.
I thought to be parked there was some requirement for engine to be off &/ the driver to leave the vehicle? like I said I could be wrong I haven't looked into legal definition of them.

parking means,—
(a)in relation to a portion of a road where parking is for the time being governed by the location of parking machines placed under the authority of a bylaw of a local authority, the stopping or standing of a vehicle on that portion of the road for any period exceeding 5 minutes:
(b)in relation to any other portion of a road, the stopping or standing of a vehicle (other than a vehicle picking up or setting down passengers in a loading zone or reserved parking area, and entitled to do so) on that portion of the road

Thats what the Road User Rule says. It doesnt say anything about the engine being off, the driver being present, anything like that. It just says stopping or standing.

The difference is shown by the difference between a bus stop and a bus stand. At a bus stop, folk can get on and off. On a bus stand, it's a place for a driver to stop his bus but not have people getting on and off.

No stopping and no parking...............surely it's clear what they mean.

Have a look at http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/traffic-control-devices-schedules.html#schedule1

That bit refers to what signs have to look like, and what they mean.

Youi could find all that stuff out by looking at online legislation, but I guess you'd need to know what to look for.

This link takes you to the Land Transport Rule : Traffic Control Devices 2004

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/results.html?catid=84

Its as boring as bat shit, but has the answers to your questions.

[Scuba_Steve]

Cheers Mr. RCat
The legislation site could definitely do with a better search engine, but then as mentioned I've never bothered to search out parking either (& didn't have time this morn) just seen the 2 different types of signs out on the street.

[rastuscat]

Cheers Mr. RCat
The legislation site could definitely do with a better search engine, but then as mentioned I've never bothered to search out parking either (& didn't have time this morn) just seen the 2 different types of signs out on the street.

Hey Skoober. Someone has hacked your account. It's the first time you've said anything nice to me, so it must have been someone else.:laugh:

[unstuck]

Love is in the air.:love::love::Punk:

[Scuba_Steve]

Hey Skoober. Someone has hacked your account. It's the first time you've said anything nice to me, so it must have been someone else.:laugh:

Hey :mad: this aint the 1st time


Cheers Mr Cat, this is the best I found too. My problem is that I cannot find mention of what "no-passing lines" are, I've failed to find any legislation stating yellow lines are no-passing lines & no passing-lines are yellow.
...


Ah excellent, donut on me. :niceone:
...

And it probably won't be the last, I give credit where credit's due but equally I do the opposite where due

[Banditbandit]

It may not have been a statute but a military order amounts to the same thing.


Not acording to the My Lai and Nuremburg decisions ...


Ah, but this is where the law falls down. Laws are not community agreements, they are the personal agenda of one or more politicians.

The theory of democracy (yes - I accept "theory") is that the politicians are our elected representatives .. and if enough people dislike the laws they pass they vote the bastards out ... The fact that they do not get voted out means the majority of the people support the laws they pass .. or at least don't give a toss ... and don't vote them out ...



Are you actually trying to say that the police that used to lay into any black man who chose to sit in the wrong seat on the bus were justified because they were enfrcing a law?

No - I'm saying in their own minds they were justified ... they may be wrong .. but they believed in their own justification



Every police officer has a conscience and I expect them to use it.

I'm sorry - I do not want to live in a society where the police officers have that power . That is way to much power for individuals to have an exercise ... a police officer who is opposed to abortion may take it into his own head not to arrest a person who has murdered an abortion doctor (because in his or her mind that murder was a justified killing) ... not a position we can be in ... when individual police get to decide the law ... That;s JUdge Dread territory ..



Civil disobedience is a perfectly valid way to change a law;

Yes - no argument there ...


a cop refusing to enforce a law they believe to be blatantly wrong is part of this.

Cops don't get to decide which laws to enforce or not ... Maybe they beleive it is wrong to punish people who castrate rapists? Or believe it is not wrong to shoot speeding motorcyclists? Cops do not get to make those decisions ...


If they believe in the law they're enforcing then I support them in that enforcement, even though I may think they've got it wrong.

Huh ???? ... So if they believe in EVERY law on our books enforcing those laws will not be wrong? Isn't that a complete reversal of your position???


Remember - all that is require for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.


I know that one well ... and get the quote right!!!

[Scuba_Steve]

The theory of democracy (yes - I accept "theory") is that the politicians are our elected representatives .. and if enough people dislike the laws they pass they vote the bastards out ... The fact that they do not get voted out means the majority of the people support the laws they pass .. or at least don't give a toss ... and don't vote them out ...


That's not democracy in theory, idealistic or even literal.
It is close-ish to the practice people falsely call "democracy" however. Except not getting voted out has no relation to support of individual laws passed & voting out doesn't change anything anyways, which is probably why there's no relation (other than the fact they're just like gangs. Would you like Bloods or Crips to oppress you?... choices, choices).

[willytheekid]

Love is in the air.:love::love::Punk:

277503

I have GOT to stop drinking coffee AND reading your post's :laugh:...apparently this is NOT a water proof laptop! :blink:

EVERYONE...SING ALONG!! (Its the disco version!!..Tom freakin Jones!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2-VGDF4y18

[unstuck]

I would love to throw my underwear at Tom, after being in the bush for a week or so.:love::Punk:

[Banditbandit]

Fuck ... after being a week in the bush I'd just love to throw it ...

[willytheekid]

I would love to throw my underwear at Tom, after being in the bush for a week or so.:love::Punk:

He was impressed with mine! :love:
277507
...even with the foot wide skid mark :sick: (mans a true professional!...ya just dont see THAT sort of commitment to fans nowdays:no:)

ps:Tom..if your reading this...stop calling!...No means NO!

[swbarnett]

The theory of democracy (yes - I accept "theory") is that the politicians are our elected representatives .. and if enough people dislike the laws they pass they vote the bastards out ... The fact that they do not get voted out means the majority of the people support the laws they pass .. or at least don't give a toss ... and don't vote them out ...
If only. The trouble is that you may like most of the laws a particular party enacted. You're not going to necessarily vote them out on the strength of the one you don't like.


No - I'm saying in their own minds they were justified ... they may be wrong .. but they believed in their own justification

...

I'm sorry - I do not want to live in a society where the police officers have that power . That is way to much power for individuals to have an exercise ... a police officer who is opposed to abortion may take it into his own head not to arrest a person who has murdered an abortion doctor (because in his or her mind that murder was a justified killing) ... not a position we can be in ... when individual police get to decide the law ... That;s JUdge Dread territory ..
A very good point you make here. I also don't want to live in the society you describe. However, I also don't want to live in a society where all the cops are midless automatons. What we need is a happy medium where the cops are able to exercise discretion in an attempt to achieve the intent of a law, not just follow the letter .


Cops don't get to decide which laws to enforce or not ...
And yet they do every day. They're instructed by their station cheif (or whatever the correct term is) that "today we're targeting xyz". Also, they don't stop every speeding motorist.


Huh ???? ... So if they believe in EVERY law on our books enforcing those laws will not be wrong? Isn't that a complete reversal of your position???
What I mean to say is that at least they're acting in accordance with their own principles. This at least means that they not acting hypocritically.


I know that one well ... and get the quote right!!!
Not that it really matters as the intent is still clear but what is the exact wording?

[Banditbandit]

If only. The trouble is that you may like most of the laws a particular party enacted. You're not going to necessarily vote them out on the strength of the one you don't like.

Yeah . theory is nice .. reality is different .. people rarely vote on one issue ..



A very good point you make here. I also don't want to live in the society you describe. However, I also don't want to live in a society where all the cops are midless automatons. What we need is a happy medium where the cops are able to exercise discretion in an attempt to achieve the intent of a law, not just follow the letter .

Yes .. a happy medium is OK ...




Not that it really matters as the intent is still clear but what is the exact wording?

You're right .. I was being pedantic (problem with working in Academia .. it makes you pedantic ..

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. " - Edmund Burke

[scumdog]

And yet they do every day. They're instructed by their station cheif (or whatever the correct term is) that "today we're targeting xyz". Also, they don't stop every speeding motorist.



I'll let you know the first time that happens to me...

Now and then there's special ops - like checking for drink drivers after a particular event and checking speeds etc near school when the new term starts (A waste of time but meh, them's the orders...:shifty:)

[FJRider]

And yet they do every day. They're instructed by their station cheif (or whatever the correct term is) that "today we're targeting xyz". Also, they don't stop every speeding motorist.




Yep ... I think I've got it right ... :shifty:

Monday: Those not wearing Seatbelts.

Tuesday: Those using a Cell phone while driving.

Wednesday: Those failing to indicate.

Thursday: Those failing to keep left.

Friday: Those impeding the flow of traffic.

Saturday/Sunday: ALL MOTORCYCLISTS.

[unstuck]

Yep ... I think I've got it right ... :shifty:

Monday: Those not wearing Seatbelts.

Tuesday: Those using a Cell phone while driving.

Wednesday: Those failing to indicate.

Thursday: Those failing to keep left.

Friday: Those impeding the flow of traffic.

Saturday/Sunday: ALL MOTORCYCLISTS.

Must be true, I got done on my bike on a saturday morning.:msn-wink:

[kevie]

In the road code on the list of places you can not stop.

1. on a marked bus stop or taxi stand

2. closer than 6 metres to a bus stop marked only by a sign


Maybe worth laying a PCA complaint about the CVIU then for making lotsa revenue stopping and inspecting trucks on the 2 bus stops at Te-rapa

In my opinion all the fines they have dished out hased to be ILLEGALLY done !?!?!?!? Would that not be true??

[FJRider]

Maybe worth laying a PCA complaint about the CVIU then for making lotsa revenue stopping and inspecting trucks on the 2 bus stops at Te-rapa

In my opinion all the fines they have dished out hased to be ILLEGALLY done !?!?!?!? Would that not be true??

You are obviously unaware ... that Legally they CAN.

If it's in the course of, and in the execution of, their duties. As they can (for the above) park anywhere us common people are not allowed to as well.

[kevie]

You are obviously unaware ... that Legally they CAN.

If it's in the course of, and in the execution of, their duties. As they can (for the above) park anywhere us common people are not allowed to as well.

:gob: oooohhhhh yeh :doh: Keep forgetting about the "Rules for us and the rules for them" clause

:thud:

[Asher]

I was driving south out of chch this morning and spotted a marked police camera van parked up on the left about 200m before a passing lane (the one just after a left corner and short down hill several kms past the synlait factory). What's the deal? I thought they weren't meant to patrol passing lanes.

[pzkpfw]

200m before? What's the problem?

(The real issue is having one at the end of the lanes.)


See: http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2007/speed-enforcement-guide/


•When speed camera enforcement is taking place in the area of passing lanes, vehicles should not be targeted within 250 (two hundred and fifty) metres of the finish of any passing lane.

[red mermaid]

Go for it then



Maybe worth laying a PCA complaint about the CVIU then for making lotsa revenue stopping and inspecting trucks on the 2 bus stops at Te-rapa

In my opinion all the fines they have dished out hased to be ILLEGALLY done !?!?!?!? Would that not be true??

[Asher]

200m before? What's the problem?

(The real issue is having one at the end of the lanes.)


See: http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2007/speed-enforcement-guide/

I forgot to mention there is passing lanes for both directions. They could probably try and justify their position by saying what you said but doesn't mean someone in the northern passing lane couldn't have spotted them and hit the brakes causing a crash.

[Scuba_Steve]

I was driving south out of chch this morning and spotted a marked police camera van parked up on the left about 200m before a passing lane (the one just after a left corner and short down hill several kms past the synlait factory). What's the deal? I thought they weren't meant to patrol passing lanes.

up here the popo cars themselves hide right at the start of the passing lane. It's quite common to see drivers go to overtake the 80km/h car ahead of them only to sharply swing back in the left lane upon spotting the PIG, through fear of scam. But hey it gives me a clear run :ride:

[swbarnett]

You're right .. I was being pedantic (problem with working in Academia .. it makes you pedantic ..
I can be a pedantic bastard myself at times (some would say all the time).

I was almost in academia; my wife is.

[swbarnett]

I'll let you know the first time that happens to me...

Now and then there's special ops - like checking for drink drivers after a particular event and checking speeds etc near school when the new term starts (A waste of time but meh, them's the orders...:shifty:)
Good to hear. Maybe it's a bit different in the crowded north. I've seen many cases of illegal activity ignored. Admittedly minor stuff. As an example it does appear that the Auckland Police have decided that the laws surrounding lane-splitting are not worth enforcing*.







Not that I'm complaining.

[kevie]

up here the popo cars themselves hide right at the start of the passing lane. It's quite common to see drivers go to overtake the 80km/h car ahead of them only to sharply swing back in the left lane upon spotting the PIG, through fear of scam. But hey it gives me a clear run :ride:

Saturday there was a speed camera van parked (about halfway mark) on the passing lane between Taupiri and Huntly.

I agree the cars get warned the camera/or cop is on the lane and don't pass, then later in not so safe places, and often in frustration of the said slow vehicle they make risky passing moves ..... and the powers to be say the camera or cop is parked there in the name of road safety :facepalm:

[kevie]

The speed camera van was on the Ngaruawahia passing lane today ...... I pulled over and rang *555 and they saw no problem with it being there..... said speeding is speeding no matter where it is and no-one should be passing at more than 100km/h so the speed camera there is justified ............I told the call taker that I recon on a passing lane they are a contributor to poor road safety when on passing lanes as people don't pass, then in a more dangerous location try to pass, he didnt agree lol

[steve_t]

The coffers are running low...

In fact, so low that I see they're also going to chase the 49.5% Fringe Benefit Tax on businesses providing employees with onsite car parking :spanking:

[Dragon]

279944

Was going home last night Split though Pukura bay as no one knows how to merge

I was doing about 30km had to go around one guy who had moved to far over (im the red cars are black mufti cop is light blue dark blue is a truck)

went around one car moved back into the middle and split past a mufti cop

Had the guy in front of the mufti angle the car over to block me as I wasnt keen to try go past the truck with no space :s

sat behind the prick untill there was space and then went past him

next thing I know cops lights and siren are on myself and everyone in front of me move over to let the cop through and he pulls the guy that blocked me over :p

Was quite impressed haha

[oneofsix]

Was going home last night Split though Pukura bay as no one knows how to merge

I was doing about 30km had to go around one guy who had moved to far over (im the red cars are black mufti cop is light blue dark blue is a truck)

went around one car moved back into the middle and split past a mufti cop

Had the guy in front of the mufti angle the car over to block me as I wasnt keen to try go past the truck with no space :s

sat behind the prick untill there was space and then went past him

next thing I know cops lights and siren are on myself and everyone in front of me move over to let the cop through and he pulls the guy that blocked me over :p

Was quite impressed haha

Share the road, because you can't proceed doesn't mean you get to block others. Nice one Popo.

We are getting too many good cop stories on KB :clap:

[nadroj]

Heading to get some lunch today I saw a motocross bike being ridden on the main road in to New Plymout before ducking around the backstreet. I followed around the back street to see him riding along the footpath using his cellphone!:brick:

[Berries]

Heading to get some lunch today I saw a motocross bike being ridden on the main road in to New Plymout before ducking around the backstreet. I followed around the back street to see him riding along the footpath using his cellphone!:brick:
Bike packed up had it?

[nadroj]

Na - he was still riding......

[rastuscat]

Don't need a real bike anymore. Just download a motorcycle app from some clould thingy, safer than the real thing.:crazy:

[paturoa]

Don't need a real bike anymore. Just download a motorcycle app from some clould thingy, safer than the real thing.:crazy:

Have you been into the catnip again?

[rastuscat]

Remember to wear an e-helmet when riding your motorcycle app.......off the tonic just now. That's the problem

[thepom]

Wasnt you smoking on moorhouse ave and st david st today ?

[rastuscat]

One of my guys.

[Kornholio]

One of my guys.

Stink ow :doh:

[rastuscat]

Stink ow :doh:

Stink? You have no idea. I'll be washing my gear for weeks to get the smoke out of them.

[brp]

Whats with these honey traps at road works, one way out and at the end the boys in blue ?

Already been inconvenienced because of the diversion and further inconvenienced by being stopped for a WOF
and rego check. With 2% of all road fatalities due to a non WOF standard vehicle go and do some real work
like getting more drunk drivers off the road. Sheer revenue gathering to pay for earthquake damage.

Have some heart, 11,000 plus earthquakes, I for one out of many are still waiting for EQC payments going into the fourth year.

If you have to continue your senseless "WOF campaign" (Why do you think Key had the sense to bring WOF's out to once a year
for certain year vehicles) don't use the aftermath of the earthquakes to do your dirty work.

[scumdog]

With 2% of all road fatalities due to a non WOF standard vehicle go and do some real work
like getting more drunk drivers off the road. Sheer revenue gathering to pay for earthquake damage.



You're trolling right??

Or jusy naive?:confused:

[Scuba_Steve]

You're trolling right??

Or jusy naive?:confused:

Pot, Kettle, Black

But you're right, in no way shape of form will that money go towards earthquake damage.

[brp]

Who cares if does not go to the earthquakes in the end - revenue gathering anyway - you missed the main point - of having no morals !

[McFatty1000]

Who cares if does not go to the earthquakes in the end - revenue gathering anyway - you missed the main point - of having no morals !

But he did hit the nail on the head about the lack of repairs to the roads...
(Although all the reasons my car has needed repaired/has failed a wof since the earthquakes has been earthquake damage due to the roads - I'd be a little frustrated if I was pinged for that...)

[Kickaha]

With 2% of all road fatalities due to a non WOF standard vehicle go and do some real work.
How about you give us a breakdown on what they do vs "real work" some percentages and proper facts rather than just making shit up

Who cares if does not go to the earthquakes in the end - revenue gathering anyway - you missed the main point - of having no morals !
You missed the main point of not talking out your arse on where the money goes

But he did hit the nail on the head about the lack of repairs to the roads...
Whats the percentage of roads repaired vs those that are still waiting to be done and the rate at which they're being done?

[McFatty1000]

How about you give us a breakdown on what they do vs "real work" some percentages and proper facts rather than just making shit up


Whats the percentage of roads repaired vs those that are still waiting to be done and the rate at which they're being done?

http://strongerchristchurch.govt.nz/resources/statistics

From the scrit website, about 18% (lets call it 20%) of the road have been redone.
Which is good.
Until you see the state of the 'repaired' roads - a lot of what has been done are temporary fixes, and a lot of patches (doesn't make for a smooth ride/drive) and much of the new roading, in my area at least, has been done worse than the earthquake left it, or has become damaged again through it not being done to a reasonable grade (again, a lot of it is a temporary fix)

So, 20% done in near 3 years, we'll be really generous and say 10% a year? So a ten year repair cycle, not including what will need to be redone (a lot)

[rastuscat]

I started work as a Real Policeman yesterday. Supervising a group of General Duties Constables.

An hour and 9 minutes later, one of our bikes went up in flames.

I may just go back to my bike job. I think it was an omen.

[scumdog]

I started work as a Real Policeman yesterday. Supervising a group of General Duties Constables.

An hour and 9 minutes later, one of our bikes went up in flames.

I may just go back to my bike job. I think it was an omen.

Wasn't your old bike was it? -THAT would be an omen!

[Kickaha]

I started work as a Real Policeman yesterday. Supervising a group of General Duties Constables.
Did you check with BRP to see if that is "real police work" it might not qualify

[Kornholio]

Wasn't your old bike was it? -THAT would be an omen!

This puppy?

286532

[brp]

How about you give us a breakdown on what they do vs "real work" some percentages and proper facts rather than just making shit up

You missed the main point of not talking out your arse on where the money goes



Unless you work for treasury how would anyone in here know where the money goes - "robbing peter to pay paul"

The 2% is fact - prove otherwise ? When did you last hear of a road fatality accident due to a non WOF vehicle ?

Enough of going to the gutter with your remarks

[Kickaha]

Unless you work for treasury how would anyone in here know where the money goes - "robbing peter to pay paul"

The 2% is fact - prove otherwise ? When did you last hear of a road fatality accident due to a non WOF vehicle ?

Enough of going to the gutter with your remarks

So what you really mean was you were making shit up with nothing to back it up except possibly for the 2% bit and you haven't even provided any evidence for that

The reality is you along with pretty much everyone else (including myself) wouldnt have a fucking clue about what "real work" the police do and where or why it's focused on particular things

[brp]

So what you really mean was you were making shit up with nothing to back it up except possibly for the 2% bit and you haven't even provided any evidence for that

The reality is you along with pretty much everyone else (including myself) wouldnt have a fucking clue about what "real work" the police do and where or why it's focused on particular things

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10861731

Main point was the lack of morals by police for setting up WOF check points
directly as you exit a single lane route of roadworks due to the earthquakes.

Seems the normally vocal rastuscat who the post was for could feel the same

If we disagree we beg to differ

[scumdog]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10861731

Main point was the lack of morals by police for setting up WOF check points
directly as you exit a single lane route of roadworks due to the earthquakes.

Seems the normally vocal rastuscat who the post was for could feel the same

If we disagree we beg to differ

"walk a mile in their shoes"

You would be surprised at what these 'revenue gathering WOF check points' discover...

[Ocean1]

Unless you work for treasury how would anyone in here know where the money goes -

You would look at any one of dozens of web-based items like this: http://www.stuff.co.nz/data/8669829/Budget-2013-interactive

Snot difficult.

[Ocean1]

"walk a mile in their shoes"

That way the bastard's a mile away, AND you've got his shoes!

[Kickaha]

You would be surprised at what these 'revenue gathering WOF check points' discover...

How much of that 70.9 million dollars in infringement fees did you bring in you big donut muncher? :bleh:

[Akzle]

You would be surprised at what these 'revenue gathering WOF check points' discover...

scheming jews?

[Smifffy]

scheming jews?

They're the ones telling the cops to set up the CPs in the first place... :shit::facepalm:

[the oldstuff]

have not read the whole 30 pages of this thread but as far as keeping left goes I'm all for putting overseas drivers (tourists) on a nifty 50 for a day on open road before they can drive here. Those arseholes kill.

[Bison]

I started work as a Real Policeman yesterday. Supervising a group of General Duties Constables.

An hour and 9 minutes later, one of our bikes went up in flames.

I may just go back to my bike job. I think it was an omen.

As a career Traffic guy I resent your lack of insight. A free bike to ride and the authority to ride as fast as you like anywhere is REAL Police work....well, OK, not actually work.....;)

[felixx]

Rastuscat
I love your work mate.
I work in goon too!