Ticket culkture / safety culture?

[candor]

The latest Police road safety progress report has a chart that makes me go hmmm and raises my hackles somewhat.

It shows Police highway patrol hours rose from 200 000 in 2003 to over 350 000 this year .... but the total cost to society from injury and deaths on highways dropped ?under 1% from 1.61Billion to 1.6Billion.

Whats the deal with this high saturation level deployment to cruising. Does it keep them from attending burgs and 111 calls like media portrays.

If road safety is benefiting little whats the motive here then?
What value is the tax payer getting from doubled HP hours - or rather what value is the Govt getting? Hmmmm.

Wonder what the vote here is on whether its about road safety or something else - or an unsatisfactory blend of both. Could we be over policed maybe?

[Ixion]

Probably indicative of a fault in the basic model.

Deaths and injuries dropped earlier for reasons unconnected with a concurrent enforcement emphasis on speed/drink/seatbelts. The real causes of the reduction in social cost were safer vehicles (air bags etc), safer roads, and such things as helicopter ambulences.

But the police took the credit and ascribed it to enforcement. And then claimed that they could reduce trauma cost still further by yet more enforcement. But it's not happening (because most of the factors that drove the original drop were one offs). So they (the police) are throwing more and more resource into it, to try to meet the commitments they made.


And the more it doesn't work, the more they try the same thing.

[scumdog]

If Traffic Policing was wiped so would about 1/2 of Police positions as they wouldn't be justified.

So those burgs etc wouldn't be getting attended any quicker.

Can't seem to get that through to people.

[Motu]

Someone still pulled out in front of a train today - clearly even our professional drivers are lacking in some basic life preserving skills.If the Cops are out there nit picking and pulling people over for bad haircuts and dress standards....if the general public are complaining and moaning and living a life in fear of our own Police force,at least they may become aware of what they are actually doing.Driving a car,motorcycle or truck on public roads.....you need to make a success of this part of your life.We need to earn our right to drive.

[scumdog]

I agree Motu - except the third to last word in your post should be 'privelege'.

[candor]

You just need to find a way to ticket burglars.

NZ First got a report done not long ago about seperating road police from the rest. Idea got fobbed.

Now if that happened wouldn't they just have to fund Police direct from income tax and then the onus would surely be on Govt to provide funds on an as required basis - how it used to be. Or is that a Utopian dream.

Big problem really is that the paranoia created by a cop behind every cabbage tree is that it loses respect for the force.

A mate is married to cop - better work stories, when what amt of time is on writing? Once they wanted to follow my work place staff round to document how many minutes we spent on each task. Our union parried that idea.

Be interesting tho to see a breakdown on Police - like time spent ticketing small infringements versus on "real" crime in a day.

[candor]

.....you need to make a success of this part of your life.We need to earn our right to drive.

Yep but then we have Duynhoven making speeches that insistently talk about the "right" to drive.

[scumdog]

Be interesting tho to see a breakdown on Police - like time spent ticketing small infringements versus on "real" crime in a day.

See post #3.

[Grahameeboy]

See post #3.

They forget a crime is a crime whether it Burglary Speeding.

At end of day I guess that the Police need funding...difficult to wait outside a house to catch a burglar, wait in the woods waiting for a murder or rape...but if revenue from road policing helps to catch more burglars, murderers, rapists then I don't have a problem.

I mean we pay ACC levies so that drunk drivers can be covered with too much complaint...

Anyone doing the Bays tomorrow?

[bobsmith]

I agree Motu - except the third to last word in your post should be 'privelege'.

Probably shouldn't be starting a heated discussion on whether driving is a privilege or a right when one cannot spell privilege properly....

[Grahameeboy]

Probably shouldn't be starting a heated discussion on whether driving is a privilege or a right when one cannot spell privilege properly....

Sounds the same...driving ability far more important than spelling ability

[scumdog]

Probably shouldn't be starting a heated discussion on whether driving is a privilege or a right when one cannot spell privilege properly....

Oooh, like THAT'S going to affect the outcome of the debate!!!:nya:



Musta had a bit of a tank-slapper thing going with the keyboard...:doh:

[bobsmith]

Oooh, like THAT'S going to affect the outcome of the debate!!!

Yeah, should have tried the spelling nazi thing the last time there was a debate on this....

[toebug]

The coppers are just revenue collecting! Its got nothing to do with road safety at all...

[scumdog]

The coppers are just revenue collecting! Its got nothing to do with road safety at all...

And so helped by those so willing to donate...

[toebug]

And so helped by those so willing to donate...

So very true!

[Goblin]

The coppers are just revenue collecting! Its got nothing to do with road safety at all...Some coppers are just simply revenue collecting. Mate of mine was pulled up the other night for doing 113 kph on the open road. It was 11.36pm(no traffic about) and the cop went back to his car, wrote out the ticket and handed it to my my mate. If he was serious about "safety" then why didn't he check over the bike or breath test my mate, or even ask him to take his helmet off to positively ID him?? That particular cop was only interested in revenue.

[civil]

They forget a crime is a crime whether it Burglary Speeding.


Correction. One of these has a victim, one of these do not. So there is a difference, can anyone spot it?

[Swoop]

...why didn't he check over the bike or breath test my mate, or even ask him to take his helmet off to positively ID him?? That particular cop was only interested in revenue.
But taking off the helmet and identifying the driver would be counter productive to those members of society who "might"* have two licences...

So, extrapolating this... the coppers could possibly get another ticket out of the same person at a later time on the "other" licence.

More revenue for looney labour's "dollars for votes" scheme!

*not that anyone would have two licences of course. That would be naughty. But exceedingly handy...

[Usarka]

They forget a crime is a crime whether it Burglary [or] Speeding.


is speeding a crime?

[Goblin]

Correction. One of these has a victim, one of these do not. So there is a difference, can anyone spot it?Bit like possession of cannabis. :doobey: Better lock the fuckers up...they're a danger to themselves!

Got a letter in the mail today from LTNZ to tell me I have a few demerit points, with a sad story of a student nurse who was killed by a speeding car driver. One of the tickets was for doing 90 in a 70 zone when in fact I was doing 80. Still speeding I know but the cop was hell bent on achieving his quota....sorry performance target! Then there was the Xmas day present where I could have easily killed or maimed some poor innocent road user with my horrendous speeding at 114kph down a long straight hill with no traffic(apart from the cop) to be seen for miles. Yes it's definitely ALL about safety!

[candor]

Life shouldn't be checking the speedo obsessively for speed creep every other minute lest taxman takes food off your families table for a tiny speed creep. Or nicks the next few weeks gas money, depending on ya budget.

Around schools the the risk level is such the eyes are too plastered to the speedo - putting kids and cars at risk. This is not a winge; but I just noted this counterproductive response in myself today.

They had Kelson staked out this a.m. = hidden round the first bend to catch market shoppers with what looked like a Polaroid - went out seeking bargain veg but I guess some got extorted. This happens too often - no one died here since maybe 1970 if ever.

For the first time I feel its got so big brother, Police state. What can you do - civil disobedience - a ticket free day. At least in poor countries Police contact is only occasioned if you're seen breaking religious rules - then its just a quick whack with the willow stick, and no added insult of wallet attack.
Financial stress causes domestic violence - todays ticket could trigger tomorrows murder ne?

:Oi:Its not a matter of willing donors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Every one creeps up without trying now and then. And I wouldn't be surprised if LTNZ speed ads have subliminals encouraging this! They're mighty dodgy that lot.

Talking something up can make it worse - those anti smoking ads just caused me to relapse when I'd quit for a couple of years. They just kept suggesting the subject, so I gave in. Getting OTT a tad so will cease ravings.

[candor]

[QUOTE=Goblin;1476146]Got a letter in the mail today from LTNZ to tell me I have a few demerit points, with a sad story of a student nurse who was killed by a speeding car driver. QUOTE]

Aaaaaargh - send them back the statistic that 80% of road deaths are caused by people travelling under the limit. Thats more sad.

[Goblin]

Life shouldn't be checking the speedo obsessively for speed creep every other minute lest taxman takes food off your families table for a tiny speed creep. Or nicks the next few weeks gas money, depending on ya budget.

Financial stress causes domestic violence - todays ticket could trigger tomorrows murder ne?
Too true! It is far more dangerous constantly checking your speedo than simply riding to the conditions. But not one cop I've ever tried to explain that to has agreed.

But think of the poor coppers who have to achieve these targets?? The stress they must be under! It's a tough job eh.:Police:

[Ixion]

is speeding a crime?

No. It is no part of the Crimes Act. It is a traffic offence.

[twotyred]

Whats the deal with this high saturation level deployment to cruising. Does it keep them from attending burgs and 111 calls like media portrays.


of course,I have a close friend whose wife was showing a french exchange student the views from Mt. Vic at night only to be met by a group of drunken youths throwing empties at cars coming up the hill and eventually they threw one through the windscreen of a car in the carpark...dialled 111 and were told that there was no available cops for 45 mins and that they should stay and observe the scene...screw that she said,two women alone in a car with a group of drunken young men carrying on outside???... on the way back to the Hutt they passed TWO seperate radar traps on the motorway......

[scumdog]

of course,I have a close friend whose wife was showing a french exchange student the views from Mt. Vic at night only to be met by a group of drunken youths throwing empties at cars coming up the hill and eventually they threw one through the windscreen of a car in the carpark...dialled 111 and were told that there was no available cops for 45 mins and that they should stay and observe the scene...screw that she said,two women alone in a car with a group of drunken young men carrying on outside???... on the way back to the Hutt they passed TWO seperate radar traps on the motorway......


Yup, just like the old days - traffic cops did traffic and police did police.

Nowadays they wear the same uniform but very likely don't do the same job.

[scumdog]

Too true! It is far more dangerous constantly checking your speedo than simply riding to the conditions.

Now ain't thata load of codswallop, I can ride for 15-20 minutes without glancing at my speedo - and when I do my speed is between 95 - 105 kph.

I thought you women could multi-task, what's the problem with flicking your eyes at the speedo while flossing your teeth/txting/adjusting your silk scarf??

[Grahameeboy]

Correction. One of these has a victim, one of these do not. So there is a difference, can anyone spot it?

Yep I spot the closed lid...

A crime does not always have to have a victim although with speeding the victim is the offencer...whoe is me etc...with speeding the whole point is to stop there being victims...

[SixPackBack]

Now ain't thata load of codswallop, I can ride for 15-20 minutes without glancing at my speedo - and when I do my speed is between 95 - 105 kph.

I thought you women could multi-task, what's the problem with flicking your eyes at the speedo while flossing your teeth/txting/adjusting your silk scarf??

I challenge you to try the same on a modern 600-1000. Neither the motorcycle nor the rider can accomplish this without spending an excess on their concentration window. Far easier and safer to let the riding flow.

[Grahameeboy]

is speeding a crime?

Yes you plonker (said in the nicest possible way of course)...crime = breaking the law...

[Goblin]

Now ain't thata load of codswallop, I can ride for 15-20 minutes without glancing at my speedo - and when I do my speed is between 95 - 105 kph.

I thought you women could multi-task, what's the problem with flicking your eyes at the speedo while flossing your teeth/txting/adjusting your silk scarf??Yeah but you ride a Harley.

For me it's different in the car. I can stick to 100 easily, until I get held up by slow BMW/Pajero/Libero...or whatever drivers. I dont do the texting while driving. Hell I dont even tune my radio for fear of drifting over the road. Ive only ever had speeding tickets on my bike and its always less than 20ks over and never a risk to other road users.

Funny, I took my boys to Taupo in the car a couple of weeks ago and my 10 year old told me he feels safer on the back of my bike than in the car. I feel the same.

[davereid]

Talking something up can make it worse - those anti smoking ads just caused me to relapse when I'd quit for a couple of years. They just kept suggesting the subject, so I gave in.

I laughed when I read that - Mrs R. and I notice that whenever they put an anti drink advert on the telly we are reminded to top up our drinks !

And those damn signs that tell you how fast you are going - don't you feel like a failure if they aren't flashing "slow down" ? Nothing worse than realising you have been driving to the conditions, not the speed limit and may have slipped down to 95 ! Time to check that speedo and gas it !

[Ixion]

I challenge you to try the same on a modern 600-1000. Neither the motorcycle nor the rider can accomplish this without spending an excess on their concentration window. Far easier and safer to let the riding flow.

Or on a BMW. With the screen up, there is no perceptable difference between , say, 80kph and 130kph. There is a slight difference in the noise of the tyres on the road at higher speeds (which is the only noise that is noticeable), but it is MUCH less than the difference caused by different seal surfaces, so offers no indication of speed. Which is one reason why I usually ride with the screen down, so increasing wind noise gives a speed indication.

[Usarka]

Yes you plonker (said in the nicest possible way of course)...crime = breaking the law...

Sorry delboy, my understanding of the definition of crime in this country is any indictable offence.

An often used way of defining (but technically incorrect) also includes summary offences, which basically means any offence which gets brought before a court.

10kph over will not get you before a court unless you are also driving dangerously but then that will be a separate charge, though i believe (could be wrong) that is still a summary offence and uber-technically still not a crime.

So even in the broader accepted defintion, speeding is not a crime.

And therefore one could if so inclined argue that police resources are often allocated to non-criminal offences above criminal ones...... :whistle:

[FJRider]

Correction. One of these has a victim, one of these do not. So there is a difference, can anyone spot it?

Did you not think the cop got to you, before you got to the victim???

[FJRider]

And so helped by those so willing to donate...

AND OFTEN !!!!!

[Banesto John]

And therefore one could if so inclined argue that police resources are often allocated to non-criminal offences above criminal ones...... :whistle:[/QUOTE]

Yes, the police do non-criminal stuff. Like teaching kids not to smoke. It's called the DARE programme.

It's non criminal, so now tell me we shouldn't have cops in schools telling kids how to live their lives.

[Usarka]

Yes, the police do non-criminal stuff. Like teaching kids not to smoke. It's called the DARE programme.

It's non criminal, so now tell me we shouldn't have cops in schools telling kids how to live their lives.


A lot of the dare program is about criminal stuff like drugs :girlfight:

[FJRider]

Sorry delboy, my understanding of the definition of crime in this country is any indictable offence.

An often used way of defining (but technically incorrect) also includes summary offences, which basically means any offence which gets brought before a court.

10kph over will not get you before a court unless you are also driving dangerously but then that will be a separate charge, though i believe (could be wrong) that is still a summary offence and uber-technically still not a crime.

So even in the broader accepted defintion, speeding is not a crime.

And therefore one could if so inclined argue that police resources are often allocated to non-criminal offences above criminal ones...... :whistle:

Speeding is a "Traffic Infringement". Criminal is when you dont pay the fine.

10 km over WILL get you before the court, if you wish to argue the case.

Highway Patrol staff are usually allocated to traffic duties with general duties staff "helping" when silly people are seen doing silly things. Or in the less populated areas. That is MY understanding, I may be corrected on this.

AND Broadly accepted, doesn't make it fact

[Usarka]

Speeding is a "Traffic Infringement". Criminal is when you dont pay the fine.

10 km over WILL get you before the court, if you wish to argue the case.

Highway Patrol staff are usually allocated to traffic duties with general duties staff "helping" when silly people are seen doing silly things. Or in the less populated areas. That is MY understanding, I may be corrected on this.

AND Broadly accepted, doesn't make it fact

lol fuck the fish are biting tonight. You get a :girlfight: too....

ok, ignore the broadly accepted part and lets talk in legal definitions. Speeding is NOT a criminal offence. fact.

[Coyote]

If Traffic Policing was wiped so would about 1/2 of Police positions as they wouldn't be justified.

So those burgs etc wouldn't be getting attended any quicker.

Can't seem to get that through to people.
So people speeding means more policeman, which means more on the job seeing to burglary's and other such crimes?

See? Speeding ain't so bad. I'm doing it for the children.

[spudchucka]

Nowadays they wear the same uniform

Apparently all the cars are going to be the same colours too. No more oranges and lemons!:weep:

[Swoop]

And those damn signs that tell you how fast you are going - don't you feel like a failure if they aren't flashing "slow down"?
Do they actually have a setting that reads anything else but "SLOW!"?

Never seen that happen.

Non (P/T).

[Grahameeboy]

Sorry delboy, my understanding of the definition of crime in this country is any indictable offence.

An often used way of defining (but technically incorrect) also includes summary offences, which basically means any offence which gets brought before a court.

10kph over will not get you before a court unless you are also driving dangerously but then that will be a separate charge, though i believe (could be wrong) that is still a summary offence and uber-technically still not a crime.

So even in the broader accepted defintion, speeding is not a crime.

And therefore one could if so inclined argue that police resources are often allocated to non-criminal offences above criminal ones...... :whistle:

You were saying...

Crime is the breach of a rule or law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law) for which a punishment may ultimately be prescribed by some governing authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government) or force. The word crime originates from the Latin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin) crimen (genitive criminis), from the Latin root (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_%28linguistics%29) cernō and Greek κρινω = "I judge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge)". Originally it meant "charge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge) (in law), guilt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt), accusation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusation)."

[scumdog]

You were saying...

Crime is the breach of a rule or law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law) for which a punishment may ultimately be prescribed by some governing authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government) or force. The word crime originates from the Latin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin) crimen (genitive criminis), from the Latin root (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_%28linguistics%29) cernō and Greek κρινω = "I judge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge)". Originally it meant "charge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge) (in law), guilt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt), accusation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusation)."

Hmm, you might struggle to get any NZ court to accept THAT explanation...

[Grahameeboy]

Hmm, you might struggle to get any NZ court to accept THAT explanation...

A bit too much for the Judge d'yreckon then...

[scumdog]

A bit too much for the Judge d'yreckon then...

Check out legislation - it doesn't follow your dictionary definition of 'crime'.

[Grahameeboy]

Check out legislation - it doesn't follow your dictionary definition of 'crime'.

What does legislation know eh...

Breaking the law is a crime to me....although having said that someone else owning a 1098 is a crime too:crybaby:

[spudchucka]

Check out legislation - it doesn't follow your dictionary definition of 'crime'.

It seems that the same old shite gets thrashed out at least on an annual basis.

From the Crimes Act 1961, interpretation section:

Crime means an offence for which the offender may be proceeded against by indictment

Summary Proceedings Act 1957, Interpretation section:

Indictable offence means any offence for which the defendant may be proceeded against by indictment

Provided that an offence shall not be deemed to be an indictable offence solely because under section 66 of this Act the defendant could elect to be tried by a jury:

From the Crimes Act 1961, interpretation section:

Offence means any act or omission for which any one can be punished under this Act or under any other enactment, whether on conviction on indictment or on summary conviction

Summary Proceedings Act 1957, Interpretation section:

Summary offence means any offence for which the defendant may not, except pursuant to an election made under section 66 of this Act, be proceeded against by indictment; and, where the enactment creating an offence expressly provides that it may be dealt with either summarily or on indictment, includes such an offence that is dealt with summarily


Also from the Crimes Act 1961, interpretation section, just in case anyone out there wasn't sure:

penis includes a surgically constructed or reconstructed organ analogous to a naturally occurring penis (whether the person concerned is male. female, or of indeterminate sex)
penis: this definition was inserted, as from 20 May 2005, by section 3(1) Crimes Amendment Act 2005 (2005 No 41). See sections 12 and 13 of that Act for the transitional provisions.

Happy St Paddy's day.

[Goblin]

Also from the Crimes Act 1961, interpretation section, just in case anyone out there wasn't sure:
penis includes a surgically constructed or reconstructed organ analogous to a naturally occurring penis (whether the person concerned is male. female, or of indeterminate sex)
penis: this definition was inserted, as from 20 May 2005, by section 3(1) Crimes Amendment Act 2005 (2005 No 41). See sections 12 and 13 of that Act for the transitional provisions.

Happy St Paddy's day.WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??

[Ixion]

Also from the Crimes Act 1961, interpretation section, just in case anyone out there wasn't sure:
Quote:
penis includes a surgically constructed or reconstructed organ analogous to a naturally occurring penis (whether the person concerned is male. female, or of indeterminate sex)
penis: this definition was inserted, as from 20 May 2005, by section 3(1) Crimes Amendment Act 2005 (2005 No 41). See sections 12 and 13 of that Act for the transitional provisions.


I misssed something. Where was that penis inserted ? And into who ?

As to crimes. If you are charged with something under the Crimes Act (duh) it's a crime. Otherwise an offence, which covers all other naughty stuff, from speeding to parking on the footpath to moving pigs without a permit.

[Swoop]

WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??
Do the guilty have to do hard labour?

[Goblin]

Do the guilty have to do hard labour?
I hope so! :whistle:

[Swoop]

I hope so! :whistle:
"Must spread rep..." yada, yada, yada...

[Skyryder]

WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??

Only if you sit down. :beer:


Skyryder

[Goblin]

I misssed something. Where was that penis inserted ? And into who ?Or what??


....moving pigs without a permit. Moving pigs without a permit?? I musta missed it too.:confused:


Only if you sit down. :beer:


SkyryderTo pee??

[Banesto John]

Or what??

Moving pigs without a permit?? I musta missed it too.:confused:

To pee??

Moving pigs without a permit is an infringement. Any enforcement of it is clearly revenue collecting.:2guns:

[Aa7]

If Traffic Policing was wiped so would about 1/2 of Police positions as they wouldn't be justified.

So those burgs etc wouldn't be getting attended any quicker.

Can't seem to get that through to people.

so why did the Police force and the Traffic force merge originally then? if half the jobs are taken by cops that are doing traffic duty then surely it would make more sense to still have a dedicated Police Force and a dedicated Traffic Force.

If somehow anyone can explain logically why it was needed to have both forces combined in the first place then maybe more people would understand why there is a need to have a singular Police force? i surely would like to know why? if so much effort is being put into making our roads safer by the police why is there no reduction in road toll and such yet there is a doubling of hours spent doing traffic enforcement? I'm sure there are cops that hate doing traffic duty and would rather be doing criminal justice work as much as there are cops that hate dealing with criminal and domestic violence and would rather be trying to make our roads safer. If there was a traffic force still rather than a combined Police force maybe people woul dwant to join the cops as a job and there wouldn't be so many drives pushing for new cops. rant over… :girlfight:

[candor]

If somehow anyone can explain logically why it was needed to have both forces combined in the first place then maybe more people would understand why there is a need to have a singular Police force? i surely would like to know why? if so much effort is being put into making our roads safer by the police why is there no reduction in road toll and such yet there is a doubling of hours spent doing traffic enforcement?

The use of the word "justified" is interesting - does that speak (financially) of half the force or the entire force then. It seems all the new cops touted as crimefighters are really being employed as defacto IRD staff who are more than covering costs, making enough to subsidise the general duty staffs existence.

"Effective and Efficient Road Policing in NZ discussion document 2005" obtained from Trentham library says "the model grants opportunities to disrupt criminal activities because a large proportion of criminals drive car" - which suggests it aint about road safety.

It goes on to say "any linkage between issue of offence notices as productivity measures and reduced road trauma are merely suggested".

Adequate law enforcement is obtainable if there is an Officer per 5000 vehicles, as an Officers salary is subsumed by 5-10 freelance tickets daily.

:spanking: On quick calc I hink we have a road cop per 2,500 and that they are issuing 4 tickets and hour (as per quota benchmarks for 2005 mentioned in the discussion document) not 5-10 a day.

It's a get rich quick scheme the like of which has been seen in no other country. Who wants to be a millionaire - whilst sustaining a relatively high toll?

The latest proposal to extend this regime is ticketing anyone with a kid in the front seat. Don't reduce the crash events - just the bruises, or is it kill adults not kids as our kid stats are the worst? And line the pockets while a it. Chills

[Daffyd]

WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??

It soon will be if Uncle Helen & Sue Bradley & their cronies get in again!

[Ixion]

WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??

It always has been as far as CYPS and the Family Court are concerned.

[Goblin]

It soon will be if Uncle Helen & Sue Bradley & their cronies get in again!


It always has been as far as CYPS and the Family Court are concerned.Gawd I hear ya's! :(

[spudchucka]

so why did the Police force and the Traffic force merge originally then?

Because back in the early 90's John Banks got elected on the promise that he would provide the country with 1500 new police officers.

Once elected he merged the MOT and the Police, which is where his 1500 new cops came from, (the MOT). The B&W traffic cops were gone and you now had a bunch of snakes that didn't want to be cops and a bunch of cops that didn't want to be snakes all trying to exist under the one banner.

What you have today is the net result of John Bank's false promises.

[Skyryder]

Because back in the early 90's John Banks got elected on the promise that he would provide the country with 1500 new police officers.

Once elected he merged the MOT and the Police, which is where his 1500 new cops came from, (the MOT). The B&W traffic cops were gone and you now had a bunch of snakes that didn't want to be cops and a bunch of cops that didn't want to be snakes all trying to exist under the one banner.

What you have today is the net result of John Bank's false promises.


And the dipsticks elected him Mayor. (shakes head in disbelief)


Skyryder

[SPman]

... and you now had a bunch of snakes that didn't want to be cops and a bunch of cops that didn't want to be snakes all trying to exist under the one banner.

Just like now......

[scumdog]

Just like now......

Only back then you could tell them apart, different cars, different uniforms etc etc.

Once again a smart lying politician fooled the people....

[Skyryder]

It soon will be if Uncle Helen & Sue Bradley & their cronies get in again!

There are some who believe they are in drag and incognito..

Funny but when ever I see their two names together 'dopleganger' springs to mind. If ya don't know what the word means look it up failing that just keep an eye on the thread someone will.

Skyryder

[FJRider]

WTF??? You trying to tell us it's a now crime to have a penis??

in some circle's YES.

[FJRider]

Hmm, you might struggle to get any NZ court to accept THAT explanation...

Its gotta be better than "I was pissed your honour"

[FJRider]

Do the guilty have to do hard labour?

We get WOMEN to do the labour for us. But we're nice enough to give them 9 months to do it.