More bullshit [Archive] - Kiwi Biker forums

Macktheknife

24th July 2006, 17:51

Ixion

24th July 2006, 18:13

If the facts are as stated, the cop was out of line. There's a policy (not a law) that aloows a distance (I think it's 200 metres) after the sign before you get pinged. But it sounds like there might be more to the story.

EDIT. Ah. Found it. Here http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2005/speed-enforcement-guide/

When enforcement is taking place in an area where drivers are making the transition from a higher speed to a lower speed area, vehicles should not be targeted within 250 metres from the point where the speed limit changes unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as protecting people operating at road works or to ensure the safety of children near schools;

BTW, I love this bit from the same source

* staff may use a motor cycle as a power source for a laser speed detector, but are not to pursue speeding motorists themselves when undertaking this activity due to the risk of damage to the laser device.

Not worried about damage to the cop, only the gadget!

yungatart

24th July 2006, 18:43

Funnily enough, Speights bud got an identical letter re his infringement. Makes you wonder if it is actually worth going to the trouble of writing to the police as it appears nobody there bothers to read your letter. They seem to just hit the print button to spew out endless copies of their form letter....

PS to mr red repper - you know who you are- we are NOT defending our boy, just stating the facts- keep your finger off the button!

WINJA

24th July 2006, 18:47

fuck the pigs , those cunts should all be ashamed of themselves

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 18:48

If I understand correctly, the guy concerned slowed down to 50 within 100mts of the posted sign, is that right?
If so I would have thought that this should have been waived.
What about scumdog and others give their input on this one, how much room do you have to slow down to the new limit?
I also see that the fine was paid, bummer, I would have sent another letter, just to wind then up and have another go. Seems a bit harsh to me anyway.
Ixion posted clarification of what I said in the original letter (250m). Trouble is, the system won't allow a second round of letters - would just go straight to court. Not worth the hassle & (possible) extra expense in court costs to fight an $80 fine. Hence my bringing attention to HP revenue gathering being a FACT.

gamgee

24th July 2006, 18:57

They are running more and more like a large faceless business everyday, and the number one purpose for the existence of business is the maximisation of profit for it's shareholders, ie the government. Anyone for an uprising?

onearmedbandit

24th July 2006, 18:59

Someone red repped you over this??? What a joke! Nothing better to do huh?

yungatart

24th July 2006, 19:02

Someone red repped you over this??? What a joke! Nothing better to do huh?
Yeah - y'know the type - little tosspot, little penis, little brain, big sprotsbike, ego - completely outta whack..

paturoa

24th July 2006, 19:04

send it to your local labour MP

- no wait!

- silly me!

- if you do that, and they change it, they will have to invent another tax or increase and existing one!

paturoa

24th July 2006, 19:05

Yeah - y'know the type - little tosspot, little penis, little brain, big sprotsbike, ego - completely outta whack..

I got all those but didn't rep u!

marty

24th July 2006, 19:07

so what did speed did he get pinged for?

hXc

24th July 2006, 19:10

so what did speed did he get pinged for?
It was 65 in a semi-rural zone. Hardly any traffic, most of which was behind me; no pedestrians; no roadworks etc. Cop was a wanker

yungatart

24th July 2006, 19:11

so what did speed did he get pinged for?
65 ks, of course it could have been his mates behind him on their scooters, who knows? No Patouroa, it wasn't you - even if you do have all those attributes - you obviously have them well in hand:innocent:

yungatart

24th July 2006, 19:15

Yeah - y'know the type - little tosspot, little penis, little brain, big sprotsbike, ego - completely outta whack..
SPB - if the cap fits...... but I wasn't referring to you!

The_Dover

24th July 2006, 19:18

Yeah - y'know the type - little tosspot, little penis, little brain, big sprotsbike, ego - completely outta whack..

And it wasn't me either.

I've got a big penis.

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 19:21

And it wasn't me either.

I've got a big penis.
We want pictures ... we demand proof! Well, the ladies on here do anyway

hXc

24th July 2006, 19:21

It was 65 in a semi-rural zone. Hardly any traffic, most of which was behind me; no pedestrians; no roadworks etc. Cop was a wanker
Thanks for the red SPB. It really doesn't match with what I'm wearing sorry. You can have it back.

*Non-related to thread* Don't you hate pussy little fuckers with small dicks, big bikes and big egos that do whatever they want as long as it fucks someone else off? I've had enough of those bastards on KB

T.W.R

24th July 2006, 19:23

HP Gestapo at their best huh:Police: best just to soak it up & keep rolling :yes:

My 1st ever infringment was exactly the same, tried getting out of it, didn't work.

Being done for 111km/h cemented their precious quoter regime for me:ar15:

Waylander

24th July 2006, 19:27

Suddenly this is about red rep?

froggyfrenchman

24th July 2006, 19:32

Well Zac, welcome to the world of voluntary tax.

That really sucks guys, but for the record I once got a letter from them waiving everything, but i was 15 and had to surrender my licence for 1 month.

RantyDave

24th July 2006, 19:34

adds proof to the claims that revenue gathering is the function of the HP.
I don't actually think it is revenue gathering - the additional revenue for the government's coffers is pretty minimal compared to what we get screwed out of on a regular basis. No, this is a political thing. A policy has come down from on high to reduce road deaths. Someone has declared that the simplest enforceable thing that will reduce deaths is speeding and has come up with some figures on how many need to be stopped. These get turned into regional quotas, and eventually per officer quotas. That the original idea was to stop people from dying gets lost on the way.

They are fucking quotas though, all this shit about a lack of promotion prospects for officers that don't write tickets only goes to show how deep the rot is. On the bright side, the fact that the actual genuine front line police have to be hit with a 'your career will be fucked' stick indicates that they don't like it all that much more than we do.

Whole thing is pathetic though. If only it were possible to radar scan for arseholes in FPV's. Although "FPV" written across the back is a reasonably good indicator in my experience.

Dave

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 19:43

Suddenly this is about red rep?
It is when 'that individual' dishes it out to hXc & Yungatart in this thread. I got a green from him but the comment with it told me it was supposed to be a red

SwanTiger

24th July 2006, 20:01

I have no opinion on the circumstances of the ticket, however for future reference I know from experience a letter written by a third-party is not the way to go. In my opinion, had hXc written the letter himself, expressed remorse and admitted guilt and showed acceptance of consequences; The Officer reviewing the infringement would of been more inclined to waiver it.

Think about it, attitude and resentment or remorse and acceptance ...

No offence MSTRS, but when I read your letter I concluded two things; "hXc admitted guilt through your words to exceeding 50 kmp/h inside a 50 kmp/h zone", "his attitude towards the Police is now that of resentment".

Anyway, that's my perspective and I see the Police response un-reasonably lacking sympathy but definitely not biased by quota or anything else for that matter.

I too am young and have been pulled over by the Police a few times now; honesty, (genuine) remorse and most importantly acceptance goes a long way, or at least that's what I've learnt through experience.

EDIT: To make sure this is read in the context I intend; This is a reply to MSTRS initial post and not an argument on speeding.

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 20:05

Whole thing is pathetic though. If only it were possible to radar scan for arseholes in FPV's. Although "FPV" written across the back is a reasonably good indicator in my experience.

Dave
FPV = Fucking Police/Patrol Vehicle???
Hear what you are saying re revenue/quota. But the quota isn't just for tickets written, is it? Would be a mockery if all tickets written were waived eh?

Jantar

24th July 2006, 20:09

This one certainly should have been defended in court. Especially with two witnesses following.

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 20:17

yungatart

24th July 2006, 20:20

This one certainly should have been defended in court. Especially with two witnesses following.
We talked about it, but it is only $80 and no guarantee of getting off (at least $130 would be added to the bill)

bobsmith

24th July 2006, 20:55

FPV = Fucking Police/Patrol Vehicle???
Hear what you are saying re revenue/quota. But the quota isn't just for tickets written, is it? Would be a mockery if all tickets written were waived eh?

I thought it stood for "Fucking piggy vehicle" or "Fucked up piggy van"

anyhow, it's interesting that whenever you point out that the pigs are... well fucking pigs... someone comes and red reps you for it, been on the receiving end of it a few times, hell I feel one coming towards me now.. fucking pig lovers, I only like my bacon dead, skinned and cut up.

fozz rock

24th July 2006, 20:55

How many points off your licence???

hXc

24th July 2006, 20:56

More than 10km but less than 20km = 20 demerits and $80

Drum

24th July 2006, 21:18

Bad form by that officer indeed!

If it makes you feel any better (and Im sure it wont) I recently got a ticket for 62 in a 50, in a rental car. Fine was $80, plus Avis charged me a further $25 for "administration costs"! Burnt.

avgas

24th July 2006, 21:44

WOW! they have improved that 'response' letter since i last got a ticket.
Mine was the same but it said
"Dear Sir/Madam" after they had put my name and address
"In reference to [insert fine number here]....."
and the signature was a photo-copy not real ink. I feel cheated

avgas

24th July 2006, 21:48

And who is the fucker that has dropped the speed limit to 80 in all the gorges i go to?

avgas

24th July 2006, 21:50

Good points Swanny. You may be right about the third person thing. I don't know and (small voice) haven't had a ticket for quite some years. It was hXc's first & if he displays an attitude as regards HP now, well I for one will not 'correct' him - they earned it.
Be careful with this one matey, i used to be in hXc's boots......after 3 runs from the cops, i hope he never decides to.

Switch

24th July 2006, 21:54

Sucks to hear about getting the ticket. Just goes to proove they have to meet a 'quota' to be reconised :nono:

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 22:07

Be careful with this one matey, i used to be in hXc's boots......after 3 runs from the cops, i hope he never decides to.
Nah, he knows not to run on a 250. But if and when he starts in on the 'bagging cops' thing, I will not be pointing out the 'marvellous' job they do. His experience has left a bad taste in all our mouths. A little public relations would have been a whole lot more effective in fostering the mythical 'road safety' message.

marty

24th July 2006, 22:18

MSTRS

24th July 2006, 22:30

my first thought was about the 3rd person letter - a waste of time, and in it, through your letter, you admitted the offence on behalf of your son. i understand your reasons for writing it, however it 1, should have come from him and 2, you should have done some quick research about the targetting of speeders within range of a change of speed sign... http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2005/speed-enforcement-guide/ i'm sure a different outcome would have happened
Offence admitted - well, perhaps...in conjunction with reference to the 250m thing.
Perhaps hXc should have written it. If there is a next time, he will.
And if there is a next time, there will be copious amounts of research
Thanks anyway

scumdog

25th July 2006, 00:25

And it wasn't me either.

I've got a big penis.

Shouldn't that be "I AM a big penis"?:nya:

candor

25th July 2006, 01:51

Yep - the revenue gathering myth is noew confirmed by leaked documents. Plice lose promotion chances if not achieving targets. Being made to aim for 3 ticket hourly its hard to see how they can be expected to go after truly maniac drivers they receive report of.

It has lately been discovered via official info requets that the entire road safety policy (its called 2010) revolves around addressing the greatest "enforceable risks" (defined as finable) as opposed to the greatest road safety risks. Which is why speeding not cellphone use or fatigue is what they hammer!

If you want a say re the dumb direction of transport policy the MOT is running a consultation round. Its well attended by bureaucrats and more real people are needed to go along. Details of meetings are on "safeas.govt" website. No bikers were at my local meeting far as I know. There are 14 meetings over next few weeks.

Speedracer

25th July 2006, 07:03

If the facts are as stated, the cop was out of line. There's a policy (not a law) that aloows a distance (I think it's 200 metres) after the sign before you get pinged. But it sounds like there might be more to the story.

and if you look around the LTSAs website on how they decide what the speed limit should be - they extend zones something like 200m to allow for cars slowing down.

SPORK

25th July 2006, 07:34

Thanks for the red SPB. It really doesn't match with what I'm wearing sorry. You can have it back.

*Non-related to thread* Don't you hate pussy little fuckers with small dicks, big bikes and big egos that do whatever they want as long as it fucks someone else off? I've had enough of those bastards on KB
do people really still get angry at red rep!?

sheeyit.

Lou Girardin

25th July 2006, 08:08

He should be defending it and calling the other riders as witnesses. There is no way the cop can be sure he was not checking the speed of one of the other bikes.
You do NOT pay these bullshit tickets. That's giving the parasites what they want.

Lou Girardin

25th July 2006, 08:09

We want pictures ... we demand proof! Well, the ladies on here do anyway

Too late! Freud strikes again.

Swoop

25th July 2006, 08:16

Very interesting to see that if this is about "reducing the road toll" - i.e. dangers on the roads, then the cop doing the u-turn in front of 2 bikes is contributing to the dangers on the roads.

The other issue is the fact that some other office-dwelling maggot has signed the form letter FOR the cop... He must have either been back out on the roads or down at the local Dunkin Donuts celebrating another kill...

yungatart

25th July 2006, 08:37

It seems that the only way to beat this inane behaviour by the cops is for all road users to study not only the road code, but the law as well.One wonders if the said policeman saw an opportunity with a young guy on an L plate riding with two school uniform wearing kids on scooters... would he have been so quick to pick up a forty y/o?

terbang

25th July 2006, 09:41

fuck the pigs , those cunts should all be ashamed of themselves

After all the indoctrination they recieve... Impossible!

Lou Girardin

26th July 2006, 16:17

I stand to be corrected, but I have never seen two speed restriction signs in succession for the same speed limit.

Deano

26th July 2006, 16:20

Those blanket letters are pretty much the only thing you will get from PIBS about the infringement. It is pretty rare to receive and individual one due to the sheer volume of letters asking to be excused from a fine.

Yet there seems to be no such lack of resources allocated into the issuing of the sheer volume of individual speeding tickets...

Ixion

26th July 2006, 16:20

Well, I have, but I assumed the second one was a "repeater". Cos I thought that they had to be every X metres in non built up areas . Or something. Or maybe something else. Could be something in it, I'll take a not in future.

(They could be repeaters and still have the effect described, of course - would just mean that if the restricted area was so short there was no repeater the cops couldn't ping you. Hmmmm )

marty

26th July 2006, 16:25

sorry d50 - the 2 sign thing is not a reality in rural settings

Indoo

26th July 2006, 16:29

I stand to be corrected, but I have never seen two speed restriction signs in succession for the same speed limit.

I've seen it on occasion in some rural towns which seem to stretch on forever. However theres defeinately no policy regarding 2 signs or anything. Theres only an internal guideline that unless the circumstances are exceptional tickets won't be issued with 250 metres of a change of speed sign. I'm guessing exceptional would be someone showing no signs of slowing down for the 50kmh zone within that 250 metre grace period etc.

It has no legal standing though, you can't defend a ticket in court because you were within 250 metres of a change of speed sign, by law as soon as you enter a 50kmh zone you have to be doing 50kmh or less. The only thing that stops you from getting a ticket for doing in excess of 51kmh as soon as you enter a 50kmh are Police internal guidelines - as far as the law is concerned your fair game.

Lou Girardin

26th July 2006, 17:10

It could be a guideline, i was told it was law when i was on STU.

Police are actually pretty leniant on a lot of things in traffic in that they could issue tickets for 51 and our radars and lasers are always calibrated slower than the actual speed to make up for claims of faulty speedos. I noticed this when i was looking at the calibration certificates for a STU car when i was at court two days ago.

How much slower were your certificates?
Because in my day there was a 2 km/h tolerance on them.

MSTRS

26th July 2006, 17:23

However although i do not claim to be a traffic expert I did do a short secondment to traffic and one of the things if i remember correctly is that there are two speed signs in place where ever there is a change in speed. So basically you drive (or ride) past the first one and by law you cannot actually be given a ticket for breaching the speed limit until your about 150 metres from the second sign. ( I think normally they are about 800 metres apart).

Those blanket letters are pretty much the only thing you will get from PIBS about the infringement. It is pretty rare to receive and individual one due to the sheer volume of letters asking to be excused from a fine.

You can challenge the ticket in court which is the next step.

As far as the U turn goes i wasn't there but if it happened as it did the officer needs a kick up the bum.
2 speed signs? 800m apart? Not in the real world as it relates to this area - Fernhill would be lucky to be 800m long.
Form letters are just bullshit. One size does not fit all. Regardless of what your chemist might tell you.
Too late - paid up before getting all the skinny on the tolerance zone.
I wasn't there either, but 3 people were telling the same story. The prick in the patrol car needs more than a kick up the bum. But as usual, that won't happen. He got his quota so he's a good boy.:sick:

Scouse

26th July 2006, 17:45

The prick in the patrol car needs more than a kick up the bum. But as usual, that won't happen. He got his quota so he's a good boy.:sick:Would it have helped if Senior Sergeant Bryan Healy had sent you a box of tissues with his reply letter ?

scumdog

26th July 2006, 18:23

I stand to be corrected, but I have never seen two speed restriction signs in succession for the same speed limit.

Meeeh, from my knowledge the 250 metre thing is just a 'gentlemens agreement", the law says you have to comply with the speed limit posted AS YOU CROSS THE LINE.

Some drongo appealed his ticket because he believed he was only 247 metres inside the line - and screwed it up for everybody.

MSTRS

26th July 2006, 19:05

Did any of you see that article in the paper today about Constable Erwood (think his name is) and being charged for excess blood alcohol.

What do you think about that? Did anybody read the full story in the weekend herald? thats a tough one..
Tis a toughie....but the law says there is a limit after which you may not drive. It is good to see that an exception is not being made (at least in regards to being charged). The nod,wink and secret handshake shall no longer be used to excuse??:wait:

Big Chim

26th July 2006, 20:12

Hey HXC, if you want to get your monies worth just go and get drunk and disordally at whangamata over new years, just stay out of there wagons.

spudchucka

26th July 2006, 20:23

Probably people who do or did more traffic enforcement like Lou G or spud would be able to clarify.
Aside from three months on the booze bus I've never done any dedicated traffic work, GDB all the way.

MSTRS

26th July 2006, 21:16

Ooop sorry, I was thinking of scum
Weren't we all?:innocent:

scumdog

26th July 2006, 21:19

Ooop sorry, it is scumdog thats stu?

STU/Relieving - about a 25%-75% ratio.

And even the 25% is down to 15-20 in reality.

MSTRS

26th July 2006, 21:45

Mmmm yeah but he was the only one with 02 bottles nearby, the rest were over half an hour away.

I duno about me but if it was my best mate who was dying and needed 02 i dont know if i could say i wouldnt go to him.

Its a pretty tough call.
Didn't say the situation was fair. He's been charged - I would expect circumstances will dictate what the court outcome will be. That is as it should be.

jimbo600

26th July 2006, 22:03

Meeeh, from my knowledge the 250 metre thing is just a 'gentlemens agreement", the law says you have to comply with the speed limit posted AS YOU CROSS THE LINE.

Some drongo appealed his ticket because he believed he was only 247 metres inside the line - and screwed it up for everybody.

200 meter rule is part of your GIs mate

scumdog

26th July 2006, 22:06

200 meter rule is part of your GIs mate

NOT a rule - a guideline, 'good practice'

yungatart

26th July 2006, 22:11

NOT a rule - a guideline, 'good practice'
Not practiced very often tho?

jimbo600

26th July 2006, 22:19

NOT a rule - a guideline, 'good practice'

If its a GI wouldn't it be an instruction?

Or is it more of a case of an instruction to follow a guideline?

scumdog

26th July 2006, 22:22

If its a GI wouldn't it be an instruction?

Or is it more of a case of an instruction to follow a guideline?

That's it! - more for when leaving a 50Kph are than entering - if you know what I mean.

I follow it myself - saves arguments, more fair.:yes:

jimbo600

26th July 2006, 22:31

That's it! - more for when leaving a 50Kph are than entering - if you know what I mean.

I follow it myself - saves arguments, more fair.:yes:

Ere I'm a bit confused then. I thought it only applied when going from high to low speed.

Right my work has its own GIs. Its a GI to start at 0800, but being as thats merely an instruction to follow a guideline I might rock up at midday.

pritch

26th July 2006, 22:40

Did any of you see that article in the paper today about Constable Erwood (think his name is) and being charged for excess blood alcohol.

What do you think about that? Did anybody read the full story in the weekend herald? thats a tough one..

Didn't read the Herald but it was almost local and has had press and radio coverage here.

Life will now be slightly more difficult for sole charge rural cops who are now never really going to be off duty. Alternatively they can sit at home pissed with a bottle of asprin while their neighbours bleed to death on the road...

scumdog

26th July 2006, 22:41

Ere I'm a bit confused then. I thought it only applied when going from high to low speed.

Right my work has its own GIs. Its a GI to start at 0800, but being as thats merely an instruction to follow a guideline I might rock up at midday.

As far as I know there are no GI's saying you 'must'.

And it makes more sense to cut some slack for those slowing down rather than those that have been winding up speed for the last 400 metres in anticipation of the 70kph area, after all it's not a requirement that you HAVE to be doing 70kph as you cross the line.

But give the mid-day start a go and let me know how it works out eh?

Lou Girardin

27th July 2006, 08:16

That's it! - more for when leaving a 50Kph are than entering - if you know what I mean.

I follow it myself - saves arguments, more fair.:yes:

Isn't accelerating before a speed limit change a more deliberate act than slowing a bit less than needed when entering a lower limit?
And don't you need to justify a departure from general instructions?

Divot

27th July 2006, 09:55

hXc thought some of you might be interested to see these....
To me, it amply illustrates the bullshit that goes on, and adds proof to the claims that revenue gathering is the function of the HP.

In this case you dont have all the facts. Even in a court of law both sides of the story are heard before any judgement is made! To be fully in imformed you would require the notes made by the office at the time of the offence, which the aducatitor would have.

Deano

27th July 2006, 09:58

Yeah theres no point having a go about it with me.

It was just an observation. Nothing personal mate.

Pixie

27th July 2006, 10:39

Lou Girardin

27th July 2006, 12:08

Even in a court of law both sides of the story are heard before any judgement is made!

Of course. The JP's give both sides a fair hearing. Then agree with the cop.

MSTRS

27th July 2006, 12:14

Of course. The JP's give both sides a fair hearing. Then agree with the cop.
Hence the paying of the fine (albeit prematurely)
"We'll give him a fair trial, and then we'll hang him!!"

jimbo600

27th July 2006, 13:24

As far as I know there are no GI's saying you 'must'.

And it makes more sense to cut some slack for those slowing down rather than those that have been winding up speed for the last 400 metres in anticipation of the 70kph area, after all it's not a requirement that you HAVE to be doing 70kph as you cross the line.

But give the mid-day start a go and let me know how it works out eh?

Turns out the 0800 start is a condition of employment, not a guideline. Not answering back when you are getting a reaming from the boss is a guideline however.

scumdog

27th July 2006, 13:39

Isn't accelerating before a speed limit change a more deliberate act than slowing a bit less than needed when entering a lower limit?
And don't you need to justify a departure from general instructions?

"Oh shit were coming up to a 50 area I better start slowing down" is a common event, hence I'm not so likely to ping them as long as they're slowing down.

But "Hmm, I think there should be a 70 (or100) around the next corner so I better get my speed up to that" is less likely a scenario, they just tend to be generally driving too fast

And if you happen to be doing 80kph in the 50kph area about 200metres from the 70 sign is it O.K.?
After all its 'only' 10kph more than the speed limit of the area that they're almost just about nearly into into.:wait:

Most common thing is:
"I thought I was in a 70"

"Why did you think that, did you see any other signs after you went past the last 50k sign?"

"No, I dunno, I just thought it":weird:

And the Court can decide if what I was doing was a breach of GIs should that day ever come.... won't worry me one way or t'other.

Swoop

27th July 2006, 16:15

Of course. The JP's give both sides a fair hearing. Then agree with the cop.
Yep, dunno why we have them since they are only for ceremonial purposes...

spudchucka

27th July 2006, 20:57

Not practiced very often tho?
You're in a position to judge on a national basis?

spudchucka

27th July 2006, 20:58

spudchucka

27th July 2006, 21:02

Of course. The JP's give both sides a fair hearing. Then agree with the cop.
Remember the link I posted for you recently? The JP's heard the defended speeding ticket that had been issued by an Inspector of police, not a constable and decided that they would, "give the driver the benefit of the doubt".

Lou Girardin

28th July 2006, 08:28

Remember the link I posted for you recently? The JP's heard the defended speeding ticket that had been issued by an Inspector of police, not a constable and decided that they would, "give the driver the benefit of the doubt".

Yeah OK spud, the exception that proves the rule. I had to stop myself from laughing in court sometimes. You watch the old farts pretending to delibarate on a matter and you know all the time they're checking how long it is till morning tea.

Fatjim

28th July 2006, 09:34

Lou Girardin

28th July 2006, 09:47

How slow are you legally allowed to drive in an open speed limit. I was under the impression that if you where doing less than 60k that was potentially ticketable?

If so, would a posted 50k sign at the end of an open limit be impossible to comply with?

There's a 40 km/h minmum on motorways. Travelling excessively slowly on other roads would come under inconsiderate use.

Fatjim

28th July 2006, 10:03

So if I drove (not rode, I'm not THAT stupid) at 45k on the open road that would be fine?

yungatart

28th July 2006, 13:39

You're in a position to judge on a national basis?
No, I didn't say that, I was asking a question, as one does when wanting clarification.

Squeak the Rat

28th July 2006, 13:49

Deleted because brain is not working. D'uh!

Lou Girardin

28th July 2006, 16:56

So if I drove (not rode, I'm not THAT stupid) at 45k on the open road that would be fine?

Try it on SH2 on a Friday afternoon before a holiday weekend.
You'll make lots of new friends.

madboy

28th July 2006, 17:51

You don't fight these bullshit little tickets in court unless you've got solid video proof of your case. Otherwise you're just pissing your money away. Cops never lie.

Now HXC can put the $130 he's saved in court costs into his bank, and earn interest on his new found respect for the HP. When he's got enough saved up for something with a bit more pootle than a 250, he'll never have to worry about a bullshit little ticket again.

Patrick

30th July 2006, 21:18

In my utopia no one would pay their fines for this shit.
What would they do?
Try to hold a million court hearings each year?
Lock all the non payers up?
That's why they target Joe and Jane Fine payer,it's too expensive to target the ones that just ignor the fines.
Suckers

Nah, I warn the goodies, the shitheads get whats comming. They are never going to pay, but the fines don't go away either... they build up and then they will do 20 hours community work for $1,000,000 worth of fines, but at least its 20 hours of "work" for a change...

scumdog

30th July 2006, 21:21

Nah, I warn the goodies, the shitheads get whats comming. They are never going to pay, but the fines don't go away either... they build up and then they will do 20 hours community work for $1,000,000 worth of fines, but at least its 20 hours of "work" for a change...

And the demerits.

Don't forget the demerits.