Expensive wheelie

[craigs288]

A mate and I were out and about yesterday up towards Mangawhai tavern and Waipu and Wellsford etc, etc.... and at some point we hit a detour due to a crash.
At the detour was the guy holding the road sign and a policeman in his bright yellow vest. For some unknown reason my friend decided to pull a wheelie as he got moving again. I went a little slower until I was around the next corner.
About 2 hours after I got home my mate text me to say the policeman turned up on his doorstep to impound the bike. He tried to convince the man in blue (and yellow) it just came up as he accelerated away. At which point the policeman says " well you called me a motherf**ker on the way past ".
My mate swears to me that he never said anything. If he had the cop would still need bionic ears to hear someone in a helmet facing the other way and over the noise of two bikes.

[JimO]

they dont like being called m@#*%#$kers:spanking:

[Sniper]

Bugger, guess it taught him not to play silly buggers then didnt it.

[RantyDave]

For some unknown reason my friend decided to pull a wheelie as he got moving again....
Wasn't the smartest thing ever. There was a crackdown on speeding through roadworks too.

About 2 hours after I got home my mate text me to say the policeman turned up on his doorstep to impound the bike. At which point the policeman says " well you called me a motherf**ker on the way past ". My mate swears to me that he never said anything. If he had the cop would still need bionic ears to hear someone in a helmet facing the other way and over the noise of two bikes.
Exactly, and he should land on the cunt like a ton of bricks. Particularly since there is no actual law against calling a cop a motherfucker. It's not a very good idea, but not illegal either.

Sadly I can't remember who it was, but someone on the site had a judge basically call a policeman a liar and throw the case out ... with the police complaints guy in court taking notes. I'd like to know under what law the policeman is impounding your mates bike. If it pulled a wheelie it sure as shit wasn't sustained loss of traction, was it?

Dave

[Filterer]

If it pulled a wheelie it sure as shit wasn't sustained loss of traction, was it?
Dave

Sustained los of traction on the front wheel!
I would have guess it would be under soem form of dangerous driving charge?

[adiddy]

careless driving, wreckless driving, any of those - take your pick mate

[scumdog]

Something is not exactly kosher about all this - somewhere.

You don't impound for wheelies - regardless of how dumb it was.

And claiming 'motherfucker' was said is irrelevant for this instance.

[Transalper]

Wasn't the smartest thing ever. ... under what law the policeman is impounding your mates bike. If it pulled a wheelie it sure as shit wasn't sustained loss of traction, was it?

DaveDefinately not a smart thing to do wheelies in front of cops... the front wheel i suspect did have a sustained loss of traction, or at least some loss of traction. ie. A wheel not touching the road has no traction and i've been lead to believe you can be done for that. But then i wouldn't know for sure.

[Transalper]

You don't impound for wheelies - regardless of how dumb it was.But you don't get of scott free either for them do you?

[Sketchy_Racer]

From the other thread someone said that a wheelie isn't classed as sustained loss of traction. Only a burnout or huge skid etc can be class as that.

To be honest, it was a bit daft of your mate to go doing a wheelie infront of a cop, expesially in those circumstances.

But in saying that, the cop sounds like a right twit, making up stories about what you did and didn't say..... Bah.

Was the cop a young one?

[TLDV8]

About 2 hours after I got home my mate text me to say the policeman turned up on his doorstep to impound the bike.

So his bike was taken away. ?

[craigs288]

I feel he has no comeback because if the front wheel is in the air then it is sustained loss of traction. That's the letter of the law. Regardless of the fact he seems to be able to accelerate and corner while on the back wheel, which means he is in control and therefore isnt necessarily dangerous or reckless. Myself, I didn't feel the urge to do anything silly.
Mostly because there was a policeman right there, eyeballing us like we were perverts, child murderers, home invaders, gang members, P manufacturers, paedophiles, politicians or any other type of real criminal that are out there f**king this country over.

Funny too, how all the people who commit these evil crimes upon this country and the people in it, are entitled to receive legal aid to help them defend themselves. All paid for by us the taxpayer.

[Swoop]

the front wheel i suspect did have a sustained loss of traction, or at least some loss of traction. ie. A wheel not touching the road has no traction and i've been lead to believe you can be done for that.
Ah! But the rear wheel has an increase in traction with the additional weight on it - surely?

[erik]

That sucks.

Admittedly doing a wheelie past a cop is kind of asking for it, but it sounds like the cop is being an arsehole about the punishment (unless he was endangering other people by doing it).

[craigs288]

Im trying to get hold of him today to get the details of what if anything he was charged with and if they actually took his bike away.
I can't imagine him opening up his garage and saying 'there you go, take it away'. Then again he might just have to ride some of his other bikes till he can get the zx10r back.

[adiddy]

mmmm , yeah update us thatd be good craig!
cops sounds like a mutha fucka lol

[Bussaman]

I'd like to know under what law the policeman is impounding your mates bike. If it pulled a wheelie it sure as shit wasn't sustained loss of traction, was it?

Dave



Section 96 LTA 1998

Unnecessary exhibition of speed probably.

[scumdog]

Section 96 LTA 1998

Unnecessary exhibition of speed probably.

Unlikely.
Certain parameters to be followed which do not appear to have been in this incident.

[scumdog]

I feel he has no comeback because if the front wheel is in the air then it is sustained loss of traction. That's the letter of the law.
Funny too, how all the people who commit these evil crimes upon this country and the people in it, are entitled to receive legal aid to help them defend themselves. All paid for by us the taxpayer.

Where is this 'letter of the law'??? Quote please.

And your mate would be quite likely able to obtain legal aid if he's a broken-arse too.:wait:

[Fishy]

Back in 1997 a mate of mine got arrested, taken away and charged with careless or dangerous use can't remember which one it was, for pulling a wheelestand over the Grafton Bridge in Auckland central.

They didn't impound his bike though, they left it on the side of the road and he picked it up later.

[Bussaman]

Unlikely.
Certain parameters to be followed which do not appear to have been in this incident.



The only thing that was missing possibly was an audience, but the legislation gets applied relatively loosely up here.

[KLOWN]

mikey havock called a cop a wanker and was taken to court for it, and since everyone has a wank mikey was telling the truth and got off the charge. I'm not sure of the charge though.

Edit: I thought you were referring to this dave but after re reading your post I don't think this is the court case you were thinking of.

[Bussaman]

Back in 1997 a mate of mine got arrested, taken away and charged with careless or dangerous use can't remember which one it was, for pulling a wheelestand over the Grafton Bridge in Auckland central.

They didn't impound his bike though, they left it on the side of the road and he picked it up later.



In 2005 new legislation was introduced that particularly targeted this kind of behaviour, which allows Police to impound vehicles and suspend licences on the spot. In 1997 this was not available.

[Fishy]

In 2005 new legislation was introduced that particularly targeted this kind of behaviour, which allows Police to impound vehicles and suspend licences on the spot. In 1997 this was not available.

Yeah I thought that was recent, thats why they would have just left his bike.

[sAsLEX]

I think New Zealand is the only country in the world where people would accelerate and do a wheelie in front of a cop car at a detour/accident and cry blue murder when they got done for it...

but kill two kids and go free!

I dont see the harm in a little wheelie considering the amount of other shit going on in our country

[scumdog]

whose killed two kids and gone free??

I do think its pretty stupid and unrealistic to think you can accelerate and do a wheelie past a cop on points at a detour/accident and him not come after you. Common sense applies...

One would have to ask WHY????

Was it one of those mental free-turn moments when the brain says "this is probably the dumbest time ever to do a wheelie - DO IT!!"?

[Skyryder]

I'd plead that your bike got an 'uncontrolable' erection. Judge might just let you off on account of a novel defence. :2thumbsup

Skyryder

[marty]

more than likely uneccesary display of acceleration. from 22A:



``(1)A person must not operate a motor vehicle in a race, or in an unnecessary exhibition of speed or acceleration, on a road unless the operation of the vehicle in that manner is authorised by law.

[Ixion]

I commented in another thread on the folly of sticking one's head into the lion's mouth.

Personally I regard Mr Plod as one of the major hazards of riding.To be avoided if at all possible.

If a cop is following you, nip down a side street and let him go past.

If you have to pass one (avoid it if you can) then do so very very cautiously. Regard them as what they are, a dangerous and unpredictable savage beast , which may turn nasty and take a bite out of you. If you can't avoid passing one, do so on metaphorical tip toe. Keep 5kph under the speed limit, keep the noise down etc.

But, best to avoid them. Do not go where they are known to be.

And do not rely on what i have seen suggested, that if you stick to the speed limit you have nothing to fear.

Remember, you ride a motorbike. Your word in court is worthless against anyone else's let alone a cop. If he says you were doing 120kph that is what will be believed, despite your protestations that it was only 100kph and legal. We are easy targets, it only needs a cop who is down on quota and needs a few quick pings to get his numbers up.

And even if you are legal, who is to say every biker is. Cunstable Cunt hears of or sees a bike doing some excessive speed. Later, he spots you. It was a motorbike that was reported doing bad shit. You're riding a motorbike. near enough, you're nabbed. Guess who the court is going to believe when Cunstable Cunt identifies you ?

Pulling a wheelie in sight of a cop, or going along on a ride the cops are known to be staking out is simply asking for trouble, for no return. Silly.

[sAsLEX]

more than likely uneccesary display of acceleration. from 22A:



``(1)A person must not operate a motor vehicle in a race, or in an unnecessary exhibition of speed or acceleration, on a road unless the operation of the vehicle in that manner is authorised by law.

Does the cop have any indication of his speed?

Or is this another completely subjective law giving cops too much power?

As a wheelie can be done from a standstill and maintained whilst below the speed limit which is what my defence would be.

[marty]

completely subjective.

blame the boy racers

[98tls]

But you don't get of scott free either for them do you? nope.........you get done for dangerous driving which if your lucky you can get reduced to careless use which is alot better.............thanks for the advice SD...........

[WINJA]

Its acceleration not speed. And it is the boy racers that have caused this.
HOW DO YOU MEASURE ACELERATION? WANKERS

[Skyryder]

Good solid advice Ix. Proceed with caution. Stop if possible.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

HOW DO YOU MEASURE ACELERATION? WANKERS

They don't have to Winj. It all becomes subjective and the judge is not going to be....... objective.

Skyryder

[marty]

the wankers are the pollies that pushed this bad legislation through. cops just doing his job - someone doing a wheelie in front of a cop at a crash site is a complete tosser/loser/wanker, and should expect to be pinged.

[jase]

police do what they please, at the end of the day, your the one with no bike, and probably a fine. wankers

[Grahameeboy]

Simple....never give the Police the opportunity. Pulling a wheelie in front of the Police is a crazy stunt and sorry to say that your friend only has himself to blame for his troubles and whether or not the Policeman is making up the 'shouting' issue is really irrelvant because if he had not pulled the wheelie in the first place Mr Plod would not have knocked on his door.

Ixion, I do not agree that Mr Plod is our greatest hazard......but respect your view.

[marty]

i don't get it. if wheelie loser had have just ridden off, instead of trying to prove how large his penis wasn't, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. how is it the cops fault?

[Grahameeboy]

police do what they please, at the end of the day, your the one with no bike, and probably a fine. wankers

and bikers don't do what they please??

[sAsLEX]

completely subjective.

blame the boy racers

I do.

Its a shame really as I have seen and experienced these subjective, no evidence required laws being abused by some.

[Grahameeboy]

HOW DO YOU MEASURE ACELERATION? WANKERS

More like how do you spell acceleration??:banana:

[sAsLEX]

HOW DO YOU MEASURE ACELERATION? WANKERS

Kinematic equations from measured speed and elapsed time or distance covered.
<img src=http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/Class/1DKin/U1L6a1.gif>
But do they do that no just guess.

And Marty this place would get boring without threads like this.

[Scouse]

More like how do you spell acceleration??:banana:And how do you spell pedantic

[Grahameeboy]

And how do you spell pedantic

I dunno...give up.......:baby:

[Grahameeboy]

Kinematic equations from measured speed and elapsed time or distance covered.
<img src=http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/Class/1DKin/U1L6a1.gif>
But do they do that no just guess.

And Marty this place would get boring without threads like this.

Excellent SirAlex...................

[WINJA]

the wankers are the pollies that pushed this bad legislation through. cops just doing his job - someone doing a wheelie in front of a cop at a crash site is a complete tosser/loser/wanker, and should expect to be pinged.

+1 , TIME AND PLACE ETC ETC. BUT THAT ACELERATION LAW IS STUPID AND IF A COP ENFORCES IT HES A STUPID CUNT

[SARGE]

pulling a mono past a cop and being surprised when they show up at your house??? :gob:


priceless :cool:

[sAsLEX]

pulling a mono past a cop and being surprised when they show up at your house??? :gob:


priceless :cool:

They must of failed sprot bike 101:

How to cover ones plate.

[SARGE]

They must of failed sprot bike 101:

How to cover ones plate.


lesson #1 a truer biker will ensure his number plate is securely affixed ....









to his workbench

[imdying]

lol at this thread, the cop did the right thing. The OPs friend is a retard that got what he deserved. The cops are not the issue here... I can't count the number of times of gotten off the stupidest of shite in my youth, and +1 for my mates... the issue is that how did someone retarded enough to do wheelies in front of cops that he knew were there get a license?

[The Pastor]

Ah! But the rear wheel has an increase in traction with the additional weight on it - surely?

Weight is indipendent of friction.

[WINJA]

Weight is indipendent of friction.

AND OCASIONALLY INDEPENDENT

[SARGE]

Weight is indipendent of friction.

oh fuck... why do i bother


HITCHER!!!!!!!!


back in the box douchebag

[The Pastor]

tru bro stick a rota init G

[marty]

AND OCASIONALLY INDEPENDENT

And occasionally, I'm sure you meant

[Dafe]

Try this equation......

Loss of Traction = Offence under the Boy Racer act = Valid Vehicle impoundment.

This is one of labours recently introduced policies, It was exercised about a year ago with a rather wealthy Tauranga buisnessman flooring his latest model mercedes out of an intersection when the lights went green.
The screeching tyres were claimed to be a loss of traction and hence his vehicle was impounded for 28 days and the driver was fined under the boy racer act.

The driver tried to claim that the traction control had been accidently knocked and switched off, therefore his usual amount of traction wasn't available, and hence the screetching! The driver still lost badly in court.

[Jamezo]

Weight is indipendent of friction.
Nope. For a static (which is what a tyre surface basically is in relation to the road) frictional force (or potential opposition force, as it really is), this force is directly proportional to the downwards weight force.

So, it could be argued, the total friction from both wheels is conserved during a wheelie, because of the weight re-distribution! No loss of traction here Ossifer!

[AllanB]

I'd tell the judge he was on P at the time as from what I see on TV and the papers they then reduce your sentence due to being out of your mind. Arse-wipes would get a longer term from me for taking the shit in the first place.

[iwilde]

Nothing against wheelies, but doing it in front of a cop and expecting to get away with it? Plain stupid for leaving his # plate on! I don't know the true legalities of the law, but wouldn't being on one wheel count as loss of control as you cant steer or brake as efficiently as if you've got both wheels on the ground?

[avgas]

that sucks
how did he know he f****d mums?

[k14]

This is one of labours recently introduced policies, It was exercised about a year ago with a rather wealthy Tauranga buisnessman flooring his latest model mercedes out of an intersection when the lights went green.
The screeching tyres were claimed to be a loss of traction and hence his vehicle was impounded for 28 days and the driver was fined under the boy racer act.
Twas actually a New Plymouth businessman/council member. He got shat on, he was talking a whole load of bs and got what he deserved. How weak a defence is "I accidentally switched the traction control off". He's also an experienced tranz am racer etc so would quite have well known it wasn't switched on.

[scumdog]

Try this equation......


The screeching tyres were claimed to be a loss of traction and hence his vehicle was impounded for 28 days and the driver was fined under the boy racer act.

And the screeching occured as the tyres left ferkn' long black marks on the road too, don't forget the long black mark bit eh?

[WINJA]

Its pretty obvious when someone is fanging a car hard.

ACTUALLY YOUR WRONG , I CAN JUST SLIGHTLY OPEN MY THROTTLE AND MY BIKE WILL TEAR ARSE AWAY EFORTLESSLY , YET PEANUTS NSR250 WILL LOOK AND SOUND LIKE ITS BEING THRASHED BUT COMPARED TO MY ACCELERATION ITS STILL SLOW , AN EYE IS NOT AN ACCURATE INSTRUMENT ESPECIALLY WHEN ITS SOMEONE LIKE SPUD OR NODS EYES , THE PIGS ARE A PACK OF CUNTS ENFORCING THIS LAW

[pritch]

How weak a defence is "I accidentally switched the traction control off".

That was weak alright, and I don't doubt that he knew what he was doing.
I'm told, however, that his car develops over 700 horses so lighting 'em up wouldn't be hard.

[Ixion]

I am rather surprised that no lawyer has yet picked up on a critical word in the law . "Exhibition". There must be an exhibition of unnecessary etc. Which makes sense since the law was INTENDED to deal with boy racers, who always have an audience when they do these things. The other uses to which the law is being put are a perversion of the law. I argue that if there is no exhibition (ie there is no intent to "show off" your speed, acceleration etc) then the law does not apply.

I would be interested to see that argued in court. Any volunteers?

The section on loss of traction is being similarly abused. "Sustained" should mean more than a few seconds

[marty]

THE PIGS ARE A PACK OF CUNTS ENFORCING THIS LAW


as opposed to some people who are cunts all the time, so i guess that's +1 for the cops....

[Grahameeboy]

as opposed to some people who are cunts all the time, so i guess that's +1 for the cops....


:2thumbsup :2thumbsup :2thumbsup :2thumbsup

[Ixion]

Does the cop have any indication of his speed?

Or is this another completely subjective law giving cops too much power?

As a wheelie can be done from a standstill and maintained whilst below the speed limit which is what my defence would be.

As far as Sect 22a of the LTA is concerned (the "boy racer laws") you have a valid defence if the speed limit is not exceeded (even a ssuming you are in fact "exhibiting" your speed or acceleration unnecessarily).
Land Transport Act 1998 S22A


(4)In this section and in section 96(9), the operation of a motor vehicle in a particular manner is authorised by law if,—
(a)in the case of a race or an exhibition of speed or acceleration,—
(i)the speed of the vehicle is within the applicable speed limit or speed limits; and


I think it is a cop out to cry "blame the boy racers" for abuse of the law. Parliament passed a law to deal with an agreed problem. Boy racers. The way that law is sometimes being abused is the fault of the police. They are the ones abusing it not the boy racers.

[scumdog]

I think it is a cop out to cry "blame the boy racers" for abuse of the law. Parliament passed a law to deal with an agreed problem. Boy racers. The way that law is sometimes being abused is the fault of the police. They are the ones abusing it not the boy racers.

This is a troll right??
So going by above: Mr Bignob in his Mercedes can hammer it, do a skid or whatever and the law shouldn't apply to him but if Snotty Bigears lets rip in his louder-than-fast Corolla FXGT he should be nailed?

Like is there a special licence one must sit to be an accomplished boy racer?

[Ixion]

Nothing to do with social status or vehicle type. Law is "unneccesary exhibition".

Meaning there must be INTENT to skid etc. An exhibition. Someone accidentally skidding is not "exhibiting". Nor is someone accelerating hard to (for instance) get up to speed to join a traffic stream.

Similarly with the traction bit. Someone squealing their tyres in a front wheel drive vehicle because they are starting off on a steep hill is not what S22A was intended for.

As far as I am aware there is in fact no law forbidding "hammering it" unless it is part of an "exhibition" of acceleration (eg a drag race - see where the legislators were coming from ?)

S22A was overtly advertised as being to deal with the problems of boy racers. Large crowds congregating to watch EXHIBITIONS of do-nuts, drags etc. Its extension beyond that is abuse of the law. IMHO.

[SARGE]

Nothing to do with social status or vehicle type. Law is "unneccesary exhibition".

Meaning there must be INTENT to skid etc. An exhibition. Someone accidentally skidding is not "exhibiting". Nor is someone accelerating hard to (for instance) get up to speed to join a traffic stream.

Similarly with the traction bit. Someone squealing their tyres in a front wheel drive vehicle because they are starting off on a steep hill is not what S22A was intended for.

As far as I am aware there is in fact no law forbidding "hammering it" unless it is part of an "exhibition" of acceleration (eg a drag race - see where the legislators were coming from ?)

S22A was overtly advertised as being to deal with the problems of boy racers. Large crowds congregating to watch EXHIBITIONS of do-nuts, drags etc. Its extension beyond that is abuse of the law. IMHO.



oh come on Ixion.. you cant tell me that SOMEWHERE in the traffic regs there isnt something pertaining to wheel stands in front of a cop...


acceleration aside.. most stunters can get on the back wheel with a FLICK of the throttle ..i didnt read that he was in the middle of a rolling burnout when his wheel came up.. he was being a cocky shit and decided that 'the cop's too busy to do anything .."

lets call it Vehicular Darwinism

[Lou Girardin]

I feel he has no comeback because if the front wheel is in the air then it is sustained loss of traction. That's the letter of the law.

Not the law of NZ. Where's the loss of traction?
If anything it indicates excess traction.

He should be disqualified for life though. Anyone that stupid shouldn't be allowed to walk and chew gum at the same time let alone ride a bike.

[onearmedbandit]

What could you be charged with if you had a car that (a), had enough traction, and (b), enough power, that could lift it's front wheels from a standstill? Not ever exceeding the limit, nor excessive acceleration (if you put the wheels down within say 5m and took your foot of the clutch). Dangerous driving? That's what I believed was the charge you could face for a intended wheelie. Dangerous driving due to the wheel(s) being off the ground, therefore less control of the vehicle. The fact it was intended makes it dangerous rather than just careless.

[imdying]

oh come on Ixion.. you cant tell me that SOMEWHERE in the traffic regs there isnt something pertaining to wheel stands in front of a cop...Come on man, let him grasp at straws.

Depending on the situation, I'd either give dangerous or careless. Probably dangerous so the fishes lawyer can earn his grand by plea bargain me down to careless and a guilty plea.

[Ixion]

oh come on Ixion.. you cant tell me that SOMEWHERE in the traffic regs there isnt something pertaining to wheel stands in front of a cop...


,,


Driving in a dangerous manner. That's the usual one. No front whell on the road means the vehicle is not properly under control. What would happen if you ahd to change direction suddenly? (I grant that most stunters are sensible enough to do their stunts i n places where there is little danger of this)

The traffic regs are pretty well based on cars.

[sAsLEX]

Driving in a dangerous manner. That's the usual one. No front whell on the road means the vehicle is not properly under control. What would happen if you ahd to change direction suddenly? (I grant that most stunters are sensible enough to do their stunts i n places where there is little danger of this)

The traffic regs are pretty well based on cars.

Are unicycles allowed on the road?

[Ixion]

Try and register one and see how far you get

[SARGE]

Driving in a dangerous manner. That's the usual one. No front whell on the road means the vehicle is not properly under control. What would happen if you ahd to change direction suddenly? (I grant that most stunters are sensible enough to do their stunts i n places where there is little danger of this)

The traffic regs are pretty well based on cars.

doing anything hoonish in view of a cop usually ends up with unwanted plod attention ..

i dont personally have a problem with lofting the front wheel or taking liberties with the posted speed limit at times.. lord knows ive been guilty of a small amount of anti-social road behavior in the past..


but doing it in front of a cop is just asking for it ..



for everything there is a season ..


turn turn turn...

[Lou Girardin]

Traditionally, wheelies have worn a charge of careless. Dangerous is stretching it.
Although, I have seen some that would qualify in spades.

[DEATH_INC.]

Driving in a dangerous manner. That's the usual one. No front whell on the road means the vehicle is not properly under control. What would happen if you ahd to change direction suddenly? (I grant that most stunters are sensible enough to do their stunts i n places where there is little danger of this)

The traffic regs are pretty well based on cars.
Yep, everyone I know that's been done is either careless or dangerous, because you're considered not to be in full control of the vehicle. And don't quote the stunters thing, most still fall off from time to time practicing.
NOTHING to do with loss of traction or boy racer laws.
And for the record I think the boy racer laws suck too, there were already plenty of laws covering it, no need for some twat to make up some more.:mad: