Check your licence

[jim.cox]

a freind of mine just got pulled over for 110kmh - only $80 so no big issue

But her licence had expired in the middle of December - and that is $400

Now the speeding MIGHT have been dangerous - but four hundred dollars for out of date paperwork is just plain ridiculous

Something needs to be done about the bureaucracy in this country - its gone way beyond a joke.

With heavy handed regulation like this its little wonder the Constubulary are finding a lack of support in the general population...

[jrandom]

Using a motor vehicle on the roads is a privilege, not a right.

A requirement to keep the necessary paperwork up to date and a fine for being lazy about it that's equivalent to the fine for breaching a condition of a restricted licence seem reasonable enough to me.

[cold comfort]

a freind of mine just got pulled over for 110kmh - only $80 so no big issue

But her licence had expired in the middle of December - and that is $400

Now the speeding MIGHT have been dangerous - but four hundred dollars for out of date paperwork is just plain ridiculous

Thanks for the warning. All this talk of lifetime licences (which my PPL is)lulls you into a false sense of security

[sunhuntin]

i had an older woman come in just shy of xmas... totally unprovoked, she sidled up to me and said that her license has been expired since the xmas BEFORE and she hadnt got around to renewing it. why she told me, a lowly gas jockey, ill never bloody know. strange person...

[The Pastor]

Using a motor vehicle on the roads is a privilege, not a right.

A requirement to keep the necessary paperwork up to date and a fine for being lazy about it that's equivalent to the fine for breaching a condition of a restricted licence seem reasonable enough to me.
actually jrandom its more of a right than a privilege.

Once you pass your test (i.e., demostrated you can operate the machine safely) it is your right to drive it on the road.

If it were a true privilege then the goverment/cops/person in power could susspend your licence for no reason at all.

For you to have your licence susspended (in NZ) you must first break the law. Which indicates that driving on the road is not a privilege but more of a right, although i'd go futher to say it is neither a right or a privilege.

[jrandom]

actually jrandom its more of a right than a privilege.

We, the taxpayers, grant individual members of our society who pass appropriate tests permission to use vehicles on the publicly-funded road network.

We pay civil servants and cops to administer a licencing system and to take folks' licences off them when they show themselves to be unworthy.

In other words, permission to use a vehicle on the road is something that NZ, as a whole, is only prepared to give to people who display a particular level of competence and good judgement.

Unlike, for instance, the welfare system - we won't stop paying people benefits just because they squander the money and/or fuck up their lives. (Whether or not that's a good idea is a matter for another thread!)

Or, for that matter, the right to an open trial, the right to freedom of speech... current law grants those as rights, which will not be removed as a result of a person's behaviour, no matter how execrable it may be.

And that is the difference between a right and a privilege.

[bobsmith]

Gotta agree with RM on this jrandom. The roads are built and maintained with the tax WE pay. To say that we can not freely use what we've paid for is utter socialistic arrogance. Sure we have legislations to ensure that everyone is kept relatively safe on the road but at the end of the day the use of our road is our right that must be protected.

Like cold comfort pointed out the fact that our aviations licences are lifetime but our driver's licence having to be renewed every 10 years or so... That sucks. Especially since most people that are disadvantaged for this are experienced drivers who's been driving without losing their licence for 10 years. (Hey I suppose at least those who keep losing their licence and reapplying don't have to worry about this problem... :gob:)

[99TLS]

a freind of mine just got pulled over for 110kmh - only $80 so no big issue
But her licence had expired in the middle of December - and that is $400
..

no sympathy from me really tis her own fault for being a DUMBASS !!!

[Fatjim]

Dispite all the fuckwits below/above, thank you for this timely reminder.

[jrandom]

Sure we have legislations to ensure that everyone is kept relatively safe on the road but at the end of the day the use of our road is our right that must be protected.

Right, privilege, I suppose it's just a matter of semantics. Driver licences are what they are.

The real question here appears to be whether there should be a mandatory renewal process.

To be honest, I can't get enthusiastic about either side of that argument. Popping by the AA once every ten years to fill out a form and pay $30 (or whatever) just isn't enough of an annoyance to bother me.

[Quasievil]

Well I think the cop was being a bit of a prick, he could have offered diversion on presentation of a valid license within 7 days, hey that just aint the Kiwi way is it....................common

[jrandom]

Well I think the cop was being a bit of a prick, he could have offered diversion on presentation of a valid license within 7 days...

We don't know for sure that he didn't. Wouldn't surprise me if that little detail got lost in all the Chinese whispers going "waa, I got a ticket", "waa, he got a ticket", etc.

[jim.cox]

Well I think the cop was being a bit of a prick, he could have offered diversion on presentation of a valid license within 7 days, hey that just aint the Kiwi way is it....................common

Yeah, thats what I think too

And yet they whinge when they dont get the "community support" they think they deserve.

Go figure

[McDuck]

It is not a right. Everybody has the right to apply for a licence but aceptance is not garenteyed.

[Ixion]

It is not a right. Everybody has the right to apply for a licence but aceptance is not garenteyed.

It is a right. And acceptance is guaranteed. Provided you pass the various tests, no-one can deny you your licence. If it were a privilege, then even passing the tests you might not get a licence.

Most rights have some sort of franchise or qualification which must be met. In the case of the right to vote, you must first register, and meet certain criteria.

Immigration, on the other hand is a privilege , not a right (I think- I am no expert) . Someone who wishes to immigrate to NZ must meet certain criteria. But, even if they meet all the requirements, they may still be , quite arbitrarily, turned down.



Right, privilege, I suppose it's just a matter of semantics


Likewise, the difference between murder and self defence is just a matter of semantics. But if you should find yourself charged with the former, and your defence resting on the latter, you will probably think those 'semantics' of no small importance.

[yungatart]

I agree with Ixion.
It is a right, and along with every right goes responsibility. In this case one of the responsibilities is ensuring your licence is current.
It would be nice if they sent reminders out in the post much like they do for your WOF or rego though.

[jrandom]

... the difference between murder and self defence is just a matter of semantics.

Eh?

Actions and intentions which differ vastly enough to become 'murder' instead of 'self defence' (or vice versa) are not a matter of semantics.

:confused:

Whether a driver's licence is a 'right' or a 'privilege', as a vague and general principle, could obviously affect the thinking of rulemakers as they set down the details of the licencing system, but arguments relating to that topic are (in my humble opinion) more constructively addressed in concrete terms, one issue at a time.

For instance, the question of whether a ten-year licence renewal is appropriate or necessary.

The truth of the matter is that a driver's licence is not a 'right' in the order of habeas corpus and freedom of speech, but neither is it a 'privilege' in the order of an award in the Honours List.

When discussing the principles at hand, we must acknowledge the existence of a pragmatic grey zone.

[RnB Fan]

My wife got pulled over last year for speeding and the cop gave her the ticket for that but then very kindly pointed out that she wasn't insured currently as her licence had expired - a better way of going about things in my humble opinion!

[Ixion]

Eh?

Actions and intentions which differ vastly enough to become 'murder' instead of 'self defence' (or vice versa) are not a matter of semantics.

:confused:

Whether a driver's licence is a 'right' or a 'privilege', as a vague and general principle, could obviously affect the thinking of rulemakers as they set down the details of the licencing system, but arguments relating to that topic are (in my humble opinion) more constructively addressed in concrete terms, one issue at a time.

For instance, the question of whether a ten-year licence renewal is appropriate or necessary.

The truth of the matter is that a driver's licence is not a 'right' in the order of habeas corpus and freedom of speech, but neither is it a 'privilege' in the order of an award in the Honours List.

When discussing the principles at hand, we must acknowledge the existence of a pragmatic grey zone.


The actions and intentions may be exactly the same. I bash you over the head with an axe. Same action. My intention is to smash in your head. Same intention (it being no defence in law to murder to say that I intended 'only' to smash in your head, not to kill you) . If you die, the distinction between murder and self defence will depend on whether I acted from malice (murder being 'slaying with malice prepense" as the law used to say); or from fear ("Being in justified fear of my life, and having no other means of escape"). The greater part of the barrister's art consists of semantics. In this case the meaning of 'malice' and 'fear' (and 'reasonable' I guess).

But, although definately a right, that has no bearing on the question of having to renew the licence every so often. That is just an example of a continuing qualification. In like manner, the right to vote depends on keeping your address up to date.

And even the most inarguable of rights, that to a fair trial when accused of a crime , is subject to a qualification. You must be competant to plead.

The issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus, BTW is not a right. It is a prerogative writ, which may be granted or refused by the judge at his discretion.

[Mully]

I see this as two issues. Not having a valid licence (and no insurance which goes along) and the cop being a prick.

With reard to the licence, I have no sympathy. Isn't there an eye test at each 10 year renewal? I vaguely recall that being one of the reasons for introducing the damn things.

In which case, the licence renewal is also verification that your eyesight is up to scratch to pilot a cage or bike. I'm more than happy that everyone has to pay ~$30 every 10 years to ensure their eyesight is up to it (although they still don't see bikes)

As for the cop not cutting your friend a break, my deepest sympathies.

[jrandom]

The actions and intentions may be exactly the same.

Semantics is the definition of words.

Nobody feels it necessary to define 'aggression', 'malice' or 'fear'. The discussion in a court over which one of the above actually motivated you to hit me in the head with an axe has nothing to do with semantics.

If I argue with someone over whether an object is red or blue, we are not arguing over the definition of 'red' and 'blue'; we are arguing a matter of fact. Likewise, if we argue over whether someone was motivated by malice or fear, we are once again arguing a matter of fact, even if it is one that is less easily and less objectively determinable.

The argument over whether driver licencing is a 'right' or a 'privilege', however, revolves around the definition of 'right' and 'privilege', and is therefore a matter of semantics.


That is just an example of a continuing qualification. In like manner, the right to vote depends on keeping your address up to date.

And even the most inarguable of rights, that to a fair trial when accused of a crime , is subject to a qualification. You must be competant to plead.

In other words, almost every 'right' that society grants to its members is subject to qualification, and exists in a grey zone of ifs and buts. Driver licencing is, of course, no exception.


The issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus, BTW is not a right. It is a prerogative writ, which may be granted or refused by the judge at his discretion.

Now you play with semantics.

:laugh:

I was talking about the right to petition an impartial authority for justification of detention. Don't split hairs.

[Ixion]

Semantics is the definition of words.

Nobody feels it necessary to define 'aggression', 'malice' or 'fear'.

Not so. many murder trials have indeed revolved around the definition of 'malice'. So much so that there is a considerable body of case law on the subject , and the definitioon is now fairly well established (which is why it is now less often necessary to argue about it. But in the Middle Ages, not so ) .

Indeed, I think it would be hard for you to post a definition of malice that I could not argue with (or with one of your defining terms). Admittedly, I am more argumentative than most.

[Morcs]

When I get all my tax money back for roads, acc etc... when they suspend my license, only then ill consider it a privaledge.

Until then I have paid to be on the road, and have every right to do so.

Only the Queen can tell me otherwise.

[jrandom]

Not so. many murder trials have indeed revolved around the definition of 'malice'.

I would be tempted to assert that the vast majority of arguments presented in such cases throughout history would have been disingenuous.


Indeed, I think it would be hard for you to post a definition of malice that I could not argue with (or with one of your defining terms).

It would be kinda fun to have a crack at it from first principles, wouldn't it?

[Ixion]

Only the Queen can tell me otherwise


There's quite a lot of queens hang around here , will they do ?

[Morcs]

Oh and Jrandom and Ixion - you guys get a room :laugh:

Or speak Proppa english.

[SPman]

Semantics is the definition of words.

Nobody feels it necessary to define 'aggression', 'malice' or 'fear'. The discussion in a court over which one of the above actually motivated you to hit me in the head with an axe has nothing to do with semantics.

On the contrary,there are times it is very necessary to define these words
In any law or statute, one of the first sections, is a list of definitions of most of the critical words. Cock up the definitions and the lawyers can have a field day


If I argue with someone over whether an object is red or blue, we are not arguing over the definition of 'red' and 'blue'; we are arguing a matter of fact.
What if you are colour blind. You are only arguing over a matter of fact, if you are arguing over the wavelengths that produce these clours in the general population. Otherwise, you are arguing over perceptions of what is visible.

[karlosnz]

I class owning a firearm as a right yet society class it as a privilage,i have to sit test, have people interviewed as to my mental state etc, and have to have everythin in place as per current regulations. oOn top of that i have to get a permit to hunt crown land which as a taxpayer i pay to keep.Please dont bring up the weapon thing as motor vehicles kill more people per year than firearms.
My point here is the rules are the rule you all know them its your resposability to keep everything in order,
We all know what to expect if we break the rules so get over it,:motu:

[Ixion]

I would be tempted to assert that the vast majority of arguments presented in such cases throughout history would have been disingenuous.


Not so. To give an example of our own time and place (not murder, but the principle of malice is the same).

The chef dude who stuck a knife into the scroat who had been abusing and threatening him. Did he do so because he was believed himself under threat from the scroat. Or because he just wanted to hurt the scroat.That is, was the action malicious or not.

A prosecutor wold argue that the chef must have felt some anger and resentment toward Mr Scroat . Malicious, says he. No indeed says the defense. Certainly Mr Chef felt aggrieved, only natural. But that's not malice.

Of course nowdays such arguments are usually quickly resolved by the judge, they have all been argued before. But a few hundred years ago, arguments about what malice and aforethought meant waxed great.

[jrandom]

Very good, gentlemen, I concede that matters of semantics are often crucial in determining the outcome of court cases.

I maintain that the argument over whether driver licencing is a right or a privilege is also a matter of semantics, and that nothing hangs upon the outcome thereof.

Better, then, to ignore that question and focus instead on the concrete details of the system.

[Beemer]

Using a motor vehicle on the roads is a privilege, not a right.

A requirement to keep the necessary paperwork up to date and a fine for being lazy about it that's equivalent to the fine for breaching a condition of a restricted licence seem reasonable enough to me.

I agree, but LTNZ need a boot up the arse regarding information sharing or even just having the common sense to use the white pages or electoral roll to find people. When we moved five years ago I advised everyone of my new address. I let them know for car/bike registrations and for the past five years all the renewal notices have been arriving without any problems.

Last year I knew my licence would be due for renewal (as I turned 45) and assumed it would be either August (the month I got my full car licence) or December (the month I got my full bike licence). One day in April I checked to see when it expired and discovered it had expired a few weeks before. Thankfully I was given a temporary licence until the renewed one was ready, but if I hadn't noticed, I could have been ticketed.

What annoys me the most is that when they checked, they said they had sent two or three reminder notices out but they had been returned. Funny that, considering the address they had been sending them to was one I had last lived at in 2000. When I said they had my new address as they had been sending out registration reminders to it, I was told that was dealt with on another floor. How pathetic is that? If they had even done a perfunctory search under my name on the internet they would have come up with my webpage (that includes my postal address) or my entry in the white pages. But no, they'd rather keep sending out reminders to a place I hadn't lived at for seven years.

[jahrasti]

Well I think the cop was being a bit of a prick, he could have offered diversion on presentation of a valid license within 7 days, hey that just aint the Kiwi way is it....................common

Why is the cop a prick? He could of been, but what if the guy he is dealing with was also being a prick? The attitude test goes a long way.

What if for arguements sake he knew it was expired and couldn't be bothered to renew it? He would rather sit on KB or something?
Has he not intentionally broken the law? Is the offence any different to a learner driver that deliberatly drives with out a qualified overseer? They are both breaking the law which LTNZ set.

Possibly a Traffic Offence Notice could have been written forbidding the driver to drive untill a current apporiate drivers licence is obtained. But then please refer to my first sentence.

[90s]

Gotta agree with RM on this jrandom. The roads are built and maintained with the tax WE pay. To say that we can not freely use what we've paid for is utter socialistic arrogance.

Man I totally agree with you. I rocked up to the airforce base and demanded to fly one of those there fancy gee-et fighters. My taxes paid for those pretty planes and I said "I'll be da**ed sir if you commies can prevent me exercising my fiscally derived preorgative".

They did not see it that way. Have I missed something here?

[90s]

Admittedly, I am more argumentative than most.

QED




(10 chars ... )

[Grahameeboy]

Well I think the cop was being a bit of a prick, he could have offered diversion on presentation of a valid license within 7 days, hey that just aint the Kiwi way is it....................common

It was probably the Kiwi way that made her think there was no rush.

No valid licence....what if her eyesight was not upto scratch and she had to get sorted first....nuff said.

[Grahameeboy]

My wife got pulled over last year for speeding and the cop gave her the ticket for that but then very kindly pointed out that she wasn't insured currently as her licence had expired - a better way of going about things in my humble opinion!

Not quite correct..............if she was not prevented from obtaining a licence etc I think is the Policy wording.........she would just have to apply and show Insurer and all would be okay.

[Grahameeboy]

When I get all my tax money back for roads, acc etc... when they suspend my license, only then ill consider it a privaledge.

Until then I have paid to be on the road, and have every right to do so.

Only the Queen can tell me otherwise.

No you have paid for roads to be built and maintained. You pay for a licence for the privalege of using the road....I mean if you did not have a licence etc are you saying that because you paid for the roads to be built that you have the right to use the road...........

[Finn]

My paper one is a lifetime licence. I'll just use that.

[Grahameeboy]

My paper one is a lifetime licence. I'll just use that.

How do you figure that one?

[Finn]

How do you figure that one?

I'll assume that our "lifetime" licences where before your time.

[Morcs]

No you have paid for roads to be built and maintained. You pay for a licence for the privalege of using the road....I mean if you did not have a licence etc are you saying that because you paid for the roads to be built that you have the right to use the road...........

Yes thats exactly what im saying. I dont know any Judge/police officer has the right to tell me I cant use a road. Im British for fucks sake.

:bleh:

[Grahameeboy]

I'll assume that our "lifetime" licences where before your time.

Nop, same in UK.....just that I accept things change plus they were never lifetime licences due to older age requirements ie medicals etc and I guess it makes commonsense to ensure that licence holders have to satisfy that they should still have a licence as they get older etc, rather than wait until they reach 80...........

[Grahameeboy]

Yes thats exactly what im saying. I dont know any Judge/police officer has the right to tell me I cant use a road. Im British for fucks sake.

:bleh:

So lets get this right, you pay for roads so this means you can drive/ ride on that road even if you don't have a licence.

The Law, Police, Judge ect do have the legal right to say you cannot use a road if you knowingly break the law.

Whinging POM's

[Steam]

Well, if your riding is on a pushbike, and your driving is a team of horses, no worries! No license needed!

[Grahameeboy]

Well, if your riding is on a pushbike, and your driving is a team of horses, no worries! No license needed!

True, however, pushbikes are not really a major hazard or difficult to ride and how many horse and carts do you see around these days.........

[Mom]

How do you figure that one?

Because when they took away our little blue books that we had to go and buy a sticker for every year (or whatever) they sold the change as a "lifetime" deal. Then they changed their minds. :bash:

[Grahameeboy]

Because when they took away our little blue books that we had to go and buy a sticker for every year (or whatever) they sold the change as a "lifetime" deal. Then they changed their minds. :bash:

I remember Green Shield stamps..real shame when they stopped doing them............

[Clockwork]

I remember Green Shield stamps..real shame when they stopped doing them............

I believe they're called Fly Buy's these days.

[Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)]

I agree with Ixion.
It is a right, and along with every right goes responsibility. In this case one of the responsibilities is ensuring your licence is current.
It would be nice if they sent reminders out in the post much like they do for your WOF or rego though.


They do send reminders out - I got mine in December - otherwise if it weren't for the reminder god knows when I would have checked. I guess I am old enough to remember we did have lifetime licences. Cost me $44 - fn expensive mug shot lol

[ynot slow]

They do send reminders out - I got mine in December - otherwise if it weren't for the reminder god knows when I would have checked. I guess I am old enough to remember we did have lifetime licences. Cost me $44 - fn expensive mug shot lol

But if you change address they go to old one not new address even though your cars rego might be at new address.My license was due in Sept,as I had class 2 I got my medical certificate prior,so that when reminder notice came I was able to renew asap.

As the expiry date came closer and no forms had arrived I rang the ltsa and the lady said my renewal forms were sent about 4 weeks before,they were returned as I hadn't advised my new address.I said to the lady who was great,that as I had a couple of speeding invoices and the cop had my license and car rego checks done I assumed my license address was changed as well with my cars rego when it was renewed,and any change of address noted.
Seems with all the technology about the ltsa and rego computers are not linked.

It is no excuse to forget the expiry date as surely over the 10 yrs each person has their license you would encounter a roadside checkpoint,at which time you should know the date of expiry.

If you change address check with ltsa they have updated details,granted $400 is a huge amount but as people have said same as no license fine,which is essentially what your doing as it has expired.

[PrincessBandit]

... All this talk of lifetime licences (which my PPL is)lulls you into a false sense of security

Funny you should mention lifetime licences 'cos in my big end-of-school-holidays cleaning up frenzy I found an old temporary licence which was issued to me in 1989 (or was it '99 - can't remember) - must have been about the time they were changing the style of licence because a motorbike was class A and a car was class B. Anyway, the expiry date on that was 2034!!!! OMG thought I, I'll probably be dead by then; which I guess would have been the idea of a lifetime licence.......:doh:

[homer]

no sympathy from me really tis her own fault for being a DUMBASS !!!

totally agree if its a passport your going no where
if its your licence you should know when it expires

[homer]

Gotta agree with RM on this jrandom. The roads are built and maintained with the tax WE pay. To say that we can not freely use what we've paid for is utter socialistic arrogance. Sure we have legislations to ensure that everyone is kept relatively safe on the road but at the end of the day the use of our road is our right that must be protected.

Like cold comfort pointed out the fact that our aviations licences are lifetime but our driver's licence having to be renewed every 10 years or so... That sucks. Especially since most people that are disadvantaged for this are experienced drivers who's been driving without losing their licence for 10 years. (Hey I suppose at least those who keep losing their licence and reapplying don't have to worry about this problem... :gob:)

I agree that its a right
i dont get the choice of being born
i dont get the choice of having to goto work
i dont get the choice of paying tax
there for its my damn right to drive what ever i want on our roads
"Yes an approiate licence will be required " and thats not a problem ,but when peoples start saying that its a privilege
i say fuck off

next you ll be saying its a privilege to go to our beaches ,forest ,or river
i guess you can see where this point is going .

[jrandom]

next you ll be saying its a privilege to go to our beaches ,forest ,or river

Going to our beaches, forests or rivers does not involve handing you control of a deadly weapon in public.

QED.

[homer]

Going to our beaches, forests or rivers does not involve handing you control of a deadly weapon in public.

QED.

how you gonna get there
i suppose you want the tax payer of nz to supply a free bus

infact maybe you shouldnt be riding if there such a deadly weapon

If i had the money id have a tank to drive to work
something that sucks the most fuel ever and anything in the way can fuck off out the way

[ynot slow]

If i had the money id have a tank to drive to work
something that sucks the most fuel ever and anything in the way can fuck off out the way

That would cure the friggin road rage aim BOOM car gone.:niceone:

[Mully]

True, however, pushbikes are not really a major hazard

Your profile says you are in Auckland, but this disagrees.



i dont get the choice of having to goto work


Yes, you do. You can choose not to work, especially in this country.

[YellowDog]

It seems a bit harsh to have to pay $400 because you forget to renew your licence. How are you supposed to remember? Do you not get a reminder in the post?

[Grahameeboy]

It seems a bit harsh to have to pay $400 because you forget to renew your licence. How are you supposed to remember? Do you not get a reminder in the post?

Its called a memory jog.........you know like remembering to wake up for work etc............Calender perhaps

[Grahameeboy]

Your profile says you are in Auckland, but this disagrees.

.

Is there a problem in Auckland that I am not aware of then?

[homer]

That would cure the friggin road rage aim BOOM car gone.:niceone:

hell yeah


at leats the slow drivers will get out the way

[YellowDog]

Its called a memory jog.........you know like remembering to wake up for work etc............Calender perhaps
I must be getting old Grahame.

1 or 2 years - No problem.
5-10 years - No way.

So long as I keep my address updated on my licence, I should be fine.

[spudchucka]

actually jrandom its more of a right than a privilege.

No its not. It is most definitely a privilege. A driver licence is just a document that confirms you have proven to be competent enough to operate a vehicle on a road and that the authorities that administer the roads have given you their permission to use them.

[spudchucka]

My paper one is a lifetime licence. I'll just use that.

They are real handy for driving overseas too.

[Mully]

Is there a problem in Auckland that I am not aware of then?

Just that you claim cyclists (of the "push" variety) are not a hazard. Driving in Auckland, I beg to differ.

[The Pastor]

No its not. It is most definitely a privilege. A driver licence is just a document that confirms you have proven to be competent enough to operate a vehicle on a road and that the authorities that administer the roads have given you their permission to use them.
sorry piggy, but go to uni and learn some facts before you spout your bullshit ;) (p/t btw)

did you read the entire thread?

[Renegade]

what pisses me off is that about 3 years ago i renewed my cage licence, no big deal, 2 years ago i got my learners, then a year after that my restricted then 6 months after that my full, each of those times i had an eye test and a photo.

you would think that if the 10 year renewl was to test eyes and update the photo that when i got my bike full that the expiry date of the licence would be from that date i was last tested for my eyes and photo, BUT NO!! it was still back dated to when i renewed my cage licence 3 years ago, scandalous bastards!!!

and i didnt get a dam reminder notice either the lying sods.

the system is flawed, DOWN with the system!!!!! :headbang:

[Grahameeboy]

I must be getting old Grahame.

1 or 2 years - No problem.
5-10 years - No way.

So long as I keep my address updated on my licence, I should be fine.

In that case sounds like a good thing in case you forget how to drive??

[Grahameeboy]

Just that you claim cyclists (of the "push" variety) are not a hazard. Driving in Auckland, I beg to differ.

Well that could be because drivers hate cyclist anyway so don't think "Cyclist"........ironic when as bikers say that cage drivers should be aware of us but we don't have the same phylosophy when it comes to push bikes.

[jim.cox]

the system is flawed, DOWN with the system!!!!! :headbang:


Down with the scumbag politicians and faceless bureaucrats that inflict such systems upon us

[Mully]

Well that could be because drivers hate cyclist anyway so don't think "Cyclist"........ironic when as bikers say that cage drivers should be aware of us but we don't have the same phylosophy when it comes to push bikes.

Could be. I disliked (some) cyclists when I was a pedestrian too, though.

[Grahameeboy]

Could be. I disliked (some) cyclists when I was a pedestrian too, though.

Mind you pedestrians are pretty bad. The number of them I see crossing a busy road only metres from a pedestrian crossing or crossing on the corner of an intersection (aften with kids)with cars turning or just crossing slowly expecting you to stop.

I guess the road evolution starts with Pedestrianitus, Cyclops, Cagerplatimus and the top of the scale Bikersspeedomitus

[sAsLEX]

Using a motor vehicle on the roads is a privilege, not a right.

A requirement to keep the necessary paperwork up to date and a fine for being lazy about it that's equivalent to the fine for breaching a condition of a restricted licence seem reasonable enough to me.

And thats why I am required to get a new license in 18 months time?

[sAsLEX]

Mind you pedestrians are pretty bad. The number of them I see crossing a busy road only metres from a pedestrian crossing or crossing on the corner of an intersection (aften with kids)with cars turning or just crossing slowly expecting you to stop.

I guess the road evolution starts with Pedestrianitus, Cyclops, Cagerplatimus and the top of the scale Bikersspeedomitus

So what about Bikespeedomiscylists ?


I cycle to work, saves petrol money for the real bike, see you coming down lake road every afternoon!


oh I am probably saving some planet or something as well?

[Sir_hoppalot]

I thought the point brought to attention was more the fact that something like an expired licence, has a more severe fine than exceeding the speed limit, which just seems ludacrus.

[Grahameeboy]

So what about Bikespeedomiscylists ?


I cycle to work, saves petrol money for the real bike, see you coming down lake road every afternoon!


oh I am probably saving some planet or something as well?

I will give ya a wave next time...............

[spudchucka]

I thought the point brought to attention was more the fact that something like an expired licence, has a more severe fine than exceeding the speed limit, which just seems ludacrus.

That is due to change soon. Licence offences will come down from $400 to $150 but the demerits are going to increase from 25 to 35.

[sAsLEX]

I will give ya a wave next time...............

Well I will l swerve unpredictably from my 600k cycle lane to get your attention!