PDA

View Full Version : Speeding Tickets



Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:17
Anyone got any tips on getting out of a speeding ticket? Or at least minimising the damage...

I had an unmarked pull me last night, he even had his fog lights a'blazing! He followed me up and beyond 120k's before pulling me.

Stupid enough getting caught, but why not pull me at 120, why let me get faster...quite a bit faster?

There is some history as to why I sped away from him, but I'll use that in my defense if I think I can (as a result of any advise on this thread). Had he not had his foggies on I wouldn't have done so, but I was sure a police car wouldn't have it's foggies on in perfectly clear weather...

He also didn't wear his hat, which I'm told he should have.

Lastly, I'm a learner, and though I am certain my L plate was on my bike when I set off on my journey, he fined me $400 for not having one. I have had problems getting one to stay on my bike in a visiable place simply due to the dynamics of my CBR250RR - there isn't anywhere decent to put one, so the small surface area I AM able attach one simply doesn't hold it for long.

Any advise would be much appreciated!

Radar will be the next investment, make no mistake about that!

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 09:23
offer him some sexual favours.

worked for me.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:26
Hahahahaha. Personally I'd much rather pay the fine, and some!

MSTRS
17th November 2006, 09:27
$$$$$$:bye: :bye: :bye:

ManDownUnder
17th November 2006, 09:29
Small point but he was in pursuit up to what speed before flicking the lights and sirens on?

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:34
Thanks ManDownUnder

He didn't use lights until over 140.

He was very close to me, only about 50 feet behind me infact, even at 140k's! As a rersult of him being right behind me I was keeping a close eye on him which he no doubt noticed, so he didn't use (need to use) his siren.

Squeak the Rat
17th November 2006, 09:34
The hat thing is probably a red herring. If your history had something to do with previously being hit from behind in a road rage incident then maaaaybe you could argue it, but if I was a judge I'd ask why you didn't just pull over....


Is there any reason that you might think:
a) you weren't actually doing the speed you got busted for
or
b) there are reasonable grounds to dispute the accuracy of the method at which you were clocked.

If so you may have a defense. Doesn't sound like it though.....

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:49
Thanks Squeak the Rat.

How about feeling intimidated by the driver’s actions? To be honest I would rather try and get to a police station than pull over and get potentially bashed or shunted by some idiot - if I get shunted I'm imobile for starters. I'm on a bike; I can probably outrun someone, why would I pull over? That may not be total logic in the eyes of a judge, but it may be realistic when faced with a situation in life. And that has to be taken into account - it could actually be a safer option to speed away than to pull over depending on the situation at hand.

I know when I got onto the highway I was clear of any traffic behind me, so to see this car suddenly right behind me, very close, was intimidating. And his fog lights were distracting me. When I slowed down, do did he, when I sped up, so did he... Why not just go past me rather than sit very close behind me? What would most people think? If it makes you think at-all, it's a distraction and is potentially dangerous.

Of course I should have thought about it when I realised he had come up behind me from nowhere, but if at the time I had thought it was a police car I wouldn't have done what I done. At the same time, I wasn't expecting a car to try and stay with me so closely when I accelerated away - it was intimidating. I was consciously thinking 'you idiot, I'm going pretty fast and you're sat on my rear tyre!'. I'm all game for going fast, but let's be sensible about it.

In my opinion he intimidated me into my actions, I'm certain of it.

At the same time I hold my hands up and accept the responsibility of my actions.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:51
If he hadn't of been there, it wouldn't have happened - that is the bottom line... The fact that when he came up behind me initially I wasn't speeding suggests I was riding safely...

crazybigal
17th November 2006, 09:55
this is an old trick, they sit up your ass to make you speed up then bust you.
i had one in an unmarked outside of hawkes bay, ride my ass for a few km's, i knew he was a cop so i slowed to 90, and he gave up, then moved onto the van in front of me and tailgated him! fucker!
Id say your splitting hairs over the hat thing, judge will just see it as you tryn to get out of it.
But at 140 he should of had his lights on and prob called the chase in, one would think anyway. ask one of our resident cops.
good luck bro

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:57
Thanks Crazybigal!!! Any idea where I can find a resident cop?

crazybigal
17th November 2006, 09:58
wire up a switch to your brake lights, flick it on when some dumb cager is tailgating you and watch them lockup behind you!

Snapper
17th November 2006, 09:59
Cracking idea! 'when' I get my license back I'll be doing that!!!

crazybigal
17th November 2006, 10:00
ask dover!


Thanks Crazybigal!!! Any idea where I can find a resident cop?

Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)
17th November 2006, 10:03
I like that idea.


wire up a switch to your brake lights, flick it on when some dumb cager is tailgating you and watch them lockup behind you!

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:03
ask dover!

Is Dover a cop?

ManDownUnder
17th November 2006, 10:04
Thanks ManDownUnder

He didn't use lights until over 140.

He was very close to me, only about 50 feet behind me infact, even at 140k's! As a rersult of him being right behind me I was keeping a close eye on him which he no doubt noticed, so he didn't use (need to use) his siren.

If he was using his vehicle in a dangerous manner the PCA should hear about it.

If he was speeding withouty lights and sirens I understand that's against the rules too although I'm not sure if it would contitue a defence. Again, the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) should hear abot it.

If a car being right up your date made you nervous and you accelerated to put a safety margin between you and him - then I would raise that too.

ManDownUnder
17th November 2006, 10:04
Is Dover a cop?

No - but I expect he knows a few of the rules he's broken over time...

crazybigal
17th November 2006, 10:05
hahah NO!
hes the anti-christ!
he knows everyone so he can help you find one


Is Dover a cop?

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:05
Thanks for those 2 ManDownUnder.

I'll try the PCA. I can honestly say it wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for the policemens driving. I'll see where I get with them and get back to this thread with some details.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:06
hahah NO!
hes the anti-christ!
he knows everyone so he can help you find one

Hahahaha! I see! I'll try Dover then! Cheers!

crazybigal
17th November 2006, 10:08
problem is they will say you should have pulled over.
but try doing him for tailgating you at 140 with no lights!


Thanks for those 2 ManDownUnder.

I'll try the PCA. I can honestly say it wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for the policemens driving. I'll see where I get with them and get back to this thread with some details.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:08
I'll see how I go! THANKS!!!

Keystone19
17th November 2006, 10:13
If it's of any use to you, I was riding home last night and had a car do exactly the same thing to me. I had a guy pull up very close behind me with his fog lights on and sit there through some tight twisties and onto a 70kph straight. It was very intimidating and if I hadn't had a pillion would have increased my speed to keep a bigger gap between us. I actually pulled over and let him go past. He then got stuck behind some slow moving vehicles so I had a little chuckle as I went past him and the slower cars (all within legal speeds of course).

However, I can understand the intimidation thing. My thought was 'he's got fog lights on, won't be a cop car'. Especially after a friend of mine got pulled over and warned for driving in the daytime with his fog lights on - the cop told him there had been 7 fatalities as a result of cars using fog lights inappropriately (yeah, whatever...).

Racey Rider
17th November 2006, 10:15
Is Dover a cop?
Only on 'Village People' night down the 'Y'! :yes:

Ixion
17th November 2006, 10:15
Hat's an ancient red herring. If he had red and blues , or a uniform that's all he needs.

He's under no obligation to pull you as soon as you go over the limit , he may quite legitimately remain behind you to see how fast you're prepared to go.

(I had an unmarked follow me in the Alfatoy one night for 30km. He admitted he was waiting to see what he could get, pissed him off no end that eventually he had to settle for booking me for "only" 115kph. Cunt)

If he was following that close you might, maybe, perhaps, possibly, conceivably, if you were incredibly lucky, be able to spin a story about tailgaters, and being afraid of road rage, and intimidated etc etc. Can't see a judge believeing it though , but just maybe perhaps if someone was feeling really generous you might be able to get the charges reduced a bit. Or not. Would work better if you were a chicky, wodda ya look like in drag?

Problem is, he'll deny it. You're a young hooligan on one of those dangerous irresponsible motorcycle things (unlike me, y'see, I'm an old hooligan). He's a fine upstanding law enforcement officer. Who's the judge going to believe ?

Did he book you for speed dangerous, or just exceeding 140kph? If the latter you might be best advised to pay up and shut up, arguing might just make things worse, ask mr Speedie about that.

scumdog
17th November 2006, 10:28
.

If a car being right up your date made you nervous and you accelerated to put a safety margin between you and him - then I would raise that too.

Mwahahahah! Like THAT old chestnut is going to work!!

As the other guy said, if in doubt - pull over.

ManDownUnder
17th November 2006, 10:31
Mwahahahah! Like THAT old chestnut is going to work!!

As the other guy said, if in doubt - pull over.

Oh I agree entirely, but in the hands of an L plate rider I'd expect some naive decisions to be made. How the court treats them is over to the court (or whoever is examining it) but I know I don;t like it when someone's right up my date - cop or no.

And without lights and sirens? It's presenting more of an immediate threat than a request to pull over isn't it?

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:32
If it's of any use to you, I was riding home last night and had a car do exactly the same thing to me. I had a guy pull up very close behind me with his fog lights on and sit there through some tight twisties and onto a 70kph straight. It was very intimidating and if I hadn't had a pillion would have increased my speed to keep a bigger gap between us. I actually pulled over and let him go past. He then got stuck behind some slow moving vehicles so I had a little chuckle as I went past him and the slower cars (all within legal speeds of course).

However, I can understand the intimidation thing. My thought was 'he's got fog lights on, won't be a cop car'. Especially after a friend of mine got pulled over and warned for driving in the daytime with his fog lights on - the cop told him there had been 7 fatalities as a result of cars using fog lights inappropriately (yeah, whatever...).

Thanks for this Keystone19!

scumdog
17th November 2006, 10:33
He also didn't wear his hat, which I'm told he should have.

Radar will be the next investment, make no mistake about that!

First off the 'hat; thing went out the window in 1992 when MOT disappeared so where did you hear THAT unrban myth?

Second up: Radar (I think you meant detector) won't save your sorry arse if the cop is following you.

Glad to be of help.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:36
Oh I agree entirely, but in the hands of an L plate rider I'd expect some naive decisions to be made. How the court treats them is over to the court (or whoever is examining it) but I know I don;t like it when someone's right up my date - cop or no.

And without lights and sirens? It's presenting more of an immediate threat than a request to pull over isn't it?

I have to say, pulling over didn't enter my mind. And I wasn't speeding up to do anything but get some distance and to get away from a car and driver I found a distraction and intimidating. Bottom line for me personally is that he even admitted when he came up the highway behind me (I presume to follow me) he said I was fine doing 120. So could one not assume if he hadn't come up behind me at-all I would have continued at 120. I can assure you I would have. So would the offense have occured if he hadn't have been up my arse? No I don't believe it would!

Annoying situation. I REALLY appreciate everyone's comments - thanks!!!

dnos
17th November 2006, 10:43
What?
If your on your learners then even at 120 your 50 ks over your speed limit.
Don't think you've got much chance of getting out of this one, but by all means go to the PCA and make a stink about the situation.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 10:46
What?
If your on your learners then even at 120 your 50 ks over your speed limit.
Don't think you've got much chance of getting out of this one, but by all means go to the PCA and make a stink about the situation.

Good point. I still think he's driving contributed to the overall offense, guess there's no harm in trying. Especially the fine for no L plate!

MrMelon
17th November 2006, 10:51
Ah man that sux. Didn't you just get your license back?

Some cops are ok, but the ones who do stuff like that are wankers.

McJim
17th November 2006, 10:51
Rear facing camera with Flash gun - thumb control for camera...cop or no - someone up your arse at night is farken dangerous - take photo then gap it - no-ones gonna follow you when they're blind! :rofl: (P/T - don't actually do this at home kids or you could be facing charges for manslaughter.)

McJim
17th November 2006, 11:40
What?
If your on your learners then even at 120 your 50 ks over your speed limit.
Don't think you've got much chance of getting out of this one, but by all means go to the PCA and make a stink about the situation.

It's actually 2 seperate offences. Riding at 100kph in a 100kph zone on a learners licence is not actually speeding. It is a breach of your licence conditions (25 points and $400.00) so he committed this offence anyway. On top of that he has the offence of exceeding the speed limit by 40kph whatever the charge for that is (I will never know as my bike doesn't go that fast!) D50 usually pops his head in with all the technical aspects when he comes online...don't let him near your toilet though...

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 11:53
Second up: Radar (I think you meant detector) won't save your sorry arse if the cop is following you.

Glad to be of help.

yes it will.

my radar doesn't have a rear facing antenna like the V1 but it still smells the bacon up my arse.

Biff
17th November 2006, 12:07
My advice:
1. Take the rap. You were caught.
2. Programme this number into your mobile: 0800 503 728. This gets you through to the police complaints dept. Use it if you're pulled by a cop who you 'genuinly' feel threatened by - In front of him/her.

TLDV8
17th November 2006, 12:34
I have to say, pulling over didn't enter my mind. And I wasn't speeding up to do anything but get some distance and to get away from a car and driver I found a distraction and intimidating. Bottom line for me personally is that he even admitted when he came up the highway behind me (I presume to follow me) he said I was fine doing 120. So could one not assume if he hadn't come up behind me at-all I would have continued at 120. I can assure you I would have. So would the offense have occured if he hadn't have been up my arse? No I don't believe it would!

Annoying situation. I REALLY appreciate everyone's comments - thanks!!!

Good luck :niceone: but feel it will be to late after the fact...Not having a full license will be a minus given the 120 kmh for starters.

All that crap is a learning curve,one being any car catching up in the mirror then trailing you is more likely going to be a cop and not a motorcycle serial killer.

Why did you not ask the dude what he was up to on the spot.?

One thing i have noticed lately.A good number of the HP are GB import's with sly tactic's.Of course how does it go..... Don't hate the player.....

Ixion
17th November 2006, 12:49
yes it will.

my radar doesn't have a rear facing antenna like the V1 but it still smells the bacon up my arse.


Not if the cop's a sneaky sneaker like Mr Scumdog, who doesn't turn it on!.They don't have to radar you y'know, if he's following you. Just look at his speedo. And maybe a flick at the last minute when he's ready to pull you, by which time the detector is too late

Fatjim
17th November 2006, 12:52
Your screwed mate. Life sucks.

Take it court and the cops will lie.

PCA, what a joke.

The only way you are going to get anywhere is this.

Wait for the reminder.

Deny the charge.

When they follow it up tell your story and say you have 5 witnesses (they were following you in a car) prepared to back you up. (make sure you do, unless you're comfortable with bluffing).

With our justice system, you win when the judge believes your lies. Works for both sides.

I'd put it through the PCA at the same time for more credability, but you won't get any joy there in terms of justice.

BTW, most cops who are straight have a hard time believing any aren't.

McJim
17th November 2006, 13:05
Not if the cop's a sneaky sneaker like Mr Scumdog, who doesn't turn it on!.They don't have to radar you y'know, if he's following you. Just look at his speedo. And maybe a flick at the last minute when he's ready to pull you, by which time the detector is too late

Interesting - how accurate do Holden certify their speedometers to be? Most manufacturers it's +/- 10% I think. Could reduce the chargeable speed to 126kph if contested by a decent lawyer.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 13:34
All very good advise. The whole leaners 70k thing is a joke surely, I mean how safe would it be on ANY NZ road to do 70? As much as cops and judges might not like it, most of is do more, slightly more, than 100k's...

Mr Melon - no, I didn't get served with a demerit ban, so this has reduced a 4 month (1 month for breach of license and 3 months for demorit total) ban. Maybe I should just 'wear' it after all.

I just feel this one time, I wasn't intending to speed, I had no reason too. Not that I need a reason....

I'm off to the UK soon, I'll lay low, and bide my time and options before I make any moves.

I had it coming.

Deano
17th November 2006, 13:42
The whole leaners 70k thing is a joke surely, I mean how safe would it be on ANY NZ road to do 70?


Any road in a 50kph area would be safe.

If your restricted to 70kph, and it's too dangerous to venture onto the motorway/highway, surely you stay in 50kph areas ?

Perhaps this is what govt intended when they introduced that rule ?

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 13:45
you'd be a bit fucked if you lived on the North Shore and worked in the city if that's the case.

but the government are good at fucking people!

Deano
17th November 2006, 13:51
you'd be a bit fucked if you lived on the North Shore and worked in the city if that's the case.

but the government are good at fucking people!

How did 'they' get to work before getting a licence ?

There are alternatives - a full licence and ability to do 100kph limit is a privilige, not a right.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 13:53
Government good at fucking people? Surely not! Hahahahaha!

I think I'll ride my 3 months, well not ride it, if you know what I mean.

I thought the cops were supposed to stop chasing you if you went over 150........

It's not about serving the public any more, it's about 'policing' the public.

It's not a free world we live in is it, lets face it. I wasn't doing anything 'wrong' when I was followed, I was riding my bike well enough for him to not do anything until I felt I needed to 'get away'. If I hadn't have done over 120, leaner or not, I'd be sweet as today!

What does that say!

McJim
17th November 2006, 13:55
Beachlands to Auckland ain't too funny at 70kph either but then this subject has been done to death.

I still say we should organise 300 bikes to all wear Learner plates and clog up the motorway at 70kph for a day - it won't work coz current govt think being stupid and bloody minded is the same as being resolute in your pursuit of policy.

I used to ride 110kph regularly with the L plate in full sight and the cops never stopped me on the Southern Motorway.

Now that I think about it you're lucky they didn't do you for breach of licence twice - once for no L plate and once for exceeding 70kph.....this didn't happen after 10pm did it?

Snapper
17th November 2006, 13:57
Beachlands to Auckland ain't too funny at 70kph either but then this subject has been done to death.

I still say we organise should 300 bikes to all wear Learner plates and clog up the motorway at 70kph for a day - it won't work coz current govt think being stupid and bloody minded is the same as being resolute in your pursuit of policy.

I used to ride 110kph regularly with the L plate in full sight and the cops never stopped me on the Southern Motorway.

Now that I think about it you're lucky they didn't do you for breach of licence twice - once for no L plate and once for exceeding 70kph.....this didn't happen after 10pm did it?

Thankfully no it was at about 8pm.

I'd be keen as to do the Leaner plate ride! It's more dangerous riding at 70 on a motorway than it is at 100, no doubt about that!

Draconian laws.......!!!!

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 14:00
How did 'they' get to work before getting a licence ?

There are alternatives - a full licence and ability to do 100kph limit is a privilige, not a right.

They probably used Auckland's fantastic public transport system or drove their car at 100km/h on their learner licence on Auckland's fantastically uncongested and well maintained road network.

NZ doesn't have the alternatives to keep off the motorway in some places unfortunately.

I'm not debating the privilege of a full licence, I did it the long way, just the ridiculous restrictions placed on learner motorcyclists, that are difficult and dangerous to adhere to.

Snapper
17th November 2006, 14:02
How did 'they' get to work before getting a licence ?

There are alternatives - a full licence and ability to do 100kph limit is a privilige, not a right.

A privilege—etymologically "private law" or law relating to a specific individual—is an honour, or permissive activity granted by another person or a government. A privilege is not a right and in some cases can be revoked. For example, in some countries driving on publicly maintained roads is a privilege; in others it is a right. If one violates certain rules, driving privileges can be revoked, and if one causes harm to another while exercising the right to travel just compensation may be sought and awarded.

I have been driving cars for 12 years, and being from England, I've driven faster than 100k's a lot. I used to drive over 50,000 miles a year, more than most UK taxi drivers - experienced you could say.

Riding at 100k's being called a privilege is perhaps not how we should treat the roads. Driving at 100k in a car at 15, and being 30 with YEARS and HUNDREDS of thousands of miles behind you is not comparable.

I am a very safe rider/driver. I am not wanting to die or end up in a wheelchair, I am very confident that my actions in ALL walks of life reflect that, not just my driving/riding.

McJim
17th November 2006, 14:03
Thankfully no it was at about 8pm.

I'd be keen as to do the Leaner plate ride! It's more dangerous riding at 70 on a motorway than it is at 100, no doubt about that!

Draconian laws.......!!!!

The point is that the cops up here think it's a loony law too so they won't pull you up for exceeding 70kph to go with the flow - unfortunately they won't tell you that either coz they're not encouraged to criticise the legislation they're meant to uphold.

I think you basically got screwed by a nasty piece of work with a badge - if you got the officer's name maybe you should get some investigation going on him - maybe try to entrap him on video for prosecution and get yer own back. Y'never know he could have a nasty drug habit or be a rent boy after hours.

And I fully sympathise with you (being from the UK with a mere 20 years open road experience and not even being allowed to prove I can handle a bike over 250cc for another 3 months!)

Snapper
17th November 2006, 14:06
Hahahahaha!!!

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 14:10
or be a rent boy after hours.


nah, this dude is from wellywood and dynamytus is in auckland

Ixion
17th November 2006, 15:33
There are alternatives - a full licence and ability to do 100kph limit is a privilige, not a right.


No it's not. Why do people keep pompously trotting out that sanctimonious canard without the slightest shread of evidence or logic to back it up.

A driver's licence is a right, not a privilege. It is a right that has a qualification, and which can be suspended as a punishment.

But if I meet the qualification (age, pass test etc) it is my RIGHT to be issued with a licence. Noone can say "No, don't like the look of you, sorry, no licence for you". Meet the qualifications, and you have to right to drive.And noone, not police not government not even courts can deprive you of that right, unless you break the law.

Breach the law and that right may be suspended - just as my right to walk down the street may be suspended by putting me in prison , if I am naughty enough. I hope no-one is going to claim that the right to walk about is a privilege not a right. But so long as I remain qualified, and commit no offence against the law, and no-one, not even the Gov Gen can deprive me of that right.

A privilege is something allowed by grace and favour- which may be arbitrarily withdrawn or withheld. The right to operate a vehicle on the Queens highway is not such.

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 15:41
yer a smart ole bastard ixion.

sorry about your lunch.

Fatjim
17th November 2006, 15:46
Na, NZ roads are so awesome it's a privilege to use them.

Fatjim
17th November 2006, 15:49
Actually, dictionary.coms (ok it's 'merkin) one of many definitions of privilige is:

any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government:

hellnback
17th November 2006, 16:05
.... but it still smells the bacon up my arse.

What! you put bacon up your arse!! :rofl:

The_Dover
17th November 2006, 16:05
gotta feed the gerbils something.

Lemmiwinks gets a bit pissed when he's hungry

it also helps ward of Al Qaeda. I'm not paranoid though.

Ixion
17th November 2006, 17:47
Actually, dictionary.coms (ok it's 'merkin) one of many definitions of privilige is:

any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government:

Well in that case the original statement is circular , since it resolves to "it's not a right it's a right (common to all citizens)"

Grahameeboy
17th November 2006, 18:12
Mwahahahah! Like THAT old chestnut is going to work!!

As the other guy said, if in doubt - pull over.

True but still seems wrong when cops do this sort of thing to entice crime...........must admit I would have slowed and if this did not work sped up....what if it was a joker, you pull over and he rams you........but agree the lack of licence is not a good one although still worth pleading guilty to this and defending the other...you have nothing to lose I guess other than a few xtra $$....and Ixion do not think of riding on a 3 monther...just not worth it cause if caught you get 6 months...get a limited if you can..it is easy and no lawyers needed....

scumdog
17th November 2006, 20:56
I thought the cops were supposed to stop chasing you if you went over 150........

Mwahahahah...ANOTHER urban myth, where do you keep getting this stuff from???

Wherever it is I'd stop going there, 'advice' like that can drop you in it big-time.

Ixion
17th November 2006, 21:06
No no no, it's true. I know it is, cos a mate heard it directly from a guy who cleans the office of the mistress of a very senior cop, and she told him, so it must be true.

All you have to do if they chase you is get up to 160kph and their comms centre will make them give up the chase. It's true I tells you.

And also, they're not allowed to stop you or start following you unless you've done something wrong. So if they do, and you haven't done anything wrong , you can just tell them to piss off.

(Gotta go now, have to talk to my accountant about my popcorn franchise)

spudchucka
17th November 2006, 21:21
He also didn't wear his hat, which I'm told he should have.

Cracks me up every time I hear it.

Speeding away from fog lights? Why didn't you just pull over and let the fog lights go past?

Mamba
17th November 2006, 21:43
Does he actualy take ur picture when he tags u?

Could u possibly sugest that u were doing less than 140, and thathe is trying to get his % for the fine?

Ixion
17th November 2006, 21:47
No, no, no, see he was a mufti cop, so he has to wear a hat.And what's more it has to be a DISTINCTIVE hat, none of your boring old ones. And it has to have a badge, too

It's in the rules, see
Land Transport Act 1998
Part 9 Enforcement of responsibilities (s 113 to s 132)
114Power to require driver to stop and give name and address, etc

(1)An enforcement officer who is wearing a distinctive cap, hat, or helmet, with a badge of authority affixed to it, may signal or request the driver of a vehicle to stop the vehicle as soon as is practicable.

So I reckon that all the resident Plods should have to post up pictures of their distinctive hats. So we can laugh at them.

It also occurs to me that although bikie cops wear helmets, they're not DISTINCTIVE helmets, and the dont have badges on them So I reckon a bikie cop can never give anyone a ticket, right.

Trust me on this, no judge could argue with it, it's their above in balck and white.

NighthawkNZ
17th November 2006, 22:05
If your restricted to 70kph, and it's too dangerous to venture onto the motorway/highway, surely you stay in 50kph areas ?

Perhaps this is what govt intended when they introduced that rule ?

When that law was introduced the open road speed limit was only 80kmph.

Shadows
17th November 2006, 22:13
It also occurs to me that although bikie cops wear helmets, they're not DISTINCTIVE helmets, and the dont have badges on them So I reckon a bikie cop can never give anyone a ticket, right.


Are you sure the helmets haven't got stickers with the Police insignia on them? I thought that they did... but I think the last time I was pulled over by somebody on a bike it was in the days of the MOT so I could be completely wrong.

Ixion
17th November 2006, 22:31
When that law was introduced the open road speed limit was only 80kmph.

No it wasn't.Thisis often stated, but I have checked and I do not think it is correct.

The first Graduated Driver License Scheme was introduced in 1987. The speed limit was increased to 100kph in 1985. It was 55mph (90kph) on "ordinary" roads and 100kph on motorways until 1974, when it was dropped to 50mph (80kph) because of the oil crisis (same year also brought in compulsary helmets and blurdy metrowodjadinkies instead of proper miles - bad year all round 1974) .

But, as noted , it was put back up to 100kph 2 years BEFORE the first GDLS.

Note also, that until 1999 the GDLS did not apply to those over 25. They could sit for a full license straight away. so a lot of the restrictions were probably put in with an implicit assumption that those affecte dwould only be young people.

Ixion
17th November 2006, 22:32
Are you sure the helmets haven't got stickers with the Police insignia on them? I thought that they did... but I think the last time I was pulled over by somebody on a bike it was in the days of the MOT so I could be completely wrong.

I'm not sure. But I'm not about to let the facts get in the way of a good theory.

idb
17th November 2006, 22:49
So I reckon that all the resident Plods should have to post up pictures of their distinctive hats.

They could make their own hats at play-time from old egg cartons and glued-on pipe cleaners.
They could get a certificate from the commissioner and their mums could stick them on the fridge.

idb
17th November 2006, 22:54
Interesting - how accurate do Holden certify their speedometers to be? Most manufacturers it's +/- 10% I think. Could reduce the chargeable speed to 126kph if contested by a decent lawyer.

Well.........in Balclutha they're still using Kingswoods so Scumdog would have to mentally convert from mph to kmh which must introduce a margin of error of 20% for a start..............

scumdog
18th November 2006, 07:17
Well.........in Balclutha they're still using Kingswoods so Scumdog would have to mentally convert from mph to kmh which must introduce a margin of error of 20% for a start..............

Belmonts sunshine, Belmonts, - you tax-payers don't dub up enough dosh for us to be cruising around in Kingswoods!!!

scumdog
18th November 2006, 07:26
Interesting - how accurate do Holden certify their speedometers to be? Most manufacturers it's +/- 10% I think. Could reduce the chargeable speed to 126kph if contested by a decent lawyer.

Surprisingly enough I've had an 'engineer' (well he told me he was one) have a go at me on that point when I pinged him at 126kph
"I'm an engineer and I KNOW these things aren't that accurate, you're wasting my time because I am going to have to defend this, how do I know I wasn't actually only doing 125kph?"

Was well-heeled looking driving a near-new Mercedes SoftUrbanVehicle of some sort.

Never heard any more about it after he stormed off in a cloud of roadside dust'n'gravel.

Grahameeboy
18th November 2006, 07:29
Surprisingly enough I've had an 'engineer' (well he told me he was one) have a go at me on that point when I pinged him at 126kph
"I'm an engineer and I KNOW these things aren't that accurate, you're wasting my time because I am going to have to defend this, how do I know I wasn't actually only doing 125kph?"

Was well-heeled looking driving a near-new Mercedes SoftUrbanVehicle of some sort.

Never heard any more about it after he stormed off in a cloud of roadside dust'n'gravel.

and you didn't follow him and ping him for excessive acceleration Scummy....

scumdog
18th November 2006, 07:35
and you didn't follow him and ping him for excessive acceleration Scummy....

Nah, he was screwed anyway and I didn't want to give him any thoughts he had 'got to me', although he may have seen me laughing if he'd bothered to look in his mirror.

Besides, my latte was awaiting at work and cooling fast......

Priorities man, priorities.

Grahameeboy
18th November 2006, 07:39
Nah, he was screwed anyway and I didn't want to give him any thoughts he had 'got to me', although he may have seen me laughing if he'd bothered to look in his mirror.

Besides, my latte was awaiting at work and cooling fast......

Priorities man, priorities.

I thought you only had normal coffee down there

scumdog
18th November 2006, 07:42
I thought you only had normal coffee down there


Ahhh, welll, actually you're right - but we don't want the Jaffa dudes to think we don't have latte's

Besides, it sounded better to say a latte' was waiting than just a mere 'coffee'.

Hawkeye
18th November 2006, 08:06
And I fully sympathise with you (being from the UK with a mere 20 years open road experience and not even being allowed to prove I can handle a bike over 250cc for another 3 months!)



Same here McJim, 33 years behind the wheel (22 UK, 11 here) with no accidents. Yet, like you, I have to wait another 3 months before I then have to prove to someone , who was probably still in nappies when I first started driving, that I can recognise hazards on the side of the road. In the mean time, I cannot ride bigger than 250 and i'm not allowed out after 10pm.

Deano
18th November 2006, 12:27
No it's not. Why do people keep pompously trotting out that sanctimonious canard without the slightest shread of evidence or logic to back it up.

A driver's licence is a right, not a privilege. It is a right that has a qualification, and which can be suspended as a punishment.

But if I meet the qualification (age, pass test etc) it is my RIGHT to be issued with a licence. Noone can say "No, don't like the look of you, sorry, no licence for you". Meet the qualifications, and you have to right to drive.And noone, not police not government not even courts can deprive you of that right, unless you break the law.

Breach the law and that right may be suspended - just as my right to walk down the street may be suspended by putting me in prison , if I am naughty enough. I hope no-one is going to claim that the right to walk about is a privilege not a right. But so long as I remain qualified, and commit no offence against the law, and no-one, not even the Gov Gen can deprive me of that right.

A privilege is something allowed by grace and favour- which may be arbitrarily withdrawn or withheld. The right to operate a vehicle on the Queens highway is not such.

Well our interpretations are obviously different, but I don't think I sound like the pompous one.