Law change - Daytime headlights and ban on handheld devices

**saltydog** · 15th August 2009, 11:57

Hey, I want the right to choose if I have my lights on or not.
I normally have them on all the time (even though the R1 is not hard wired) But sometimes I dont want them on.
I recently got snapped (28 days)on a windy hilly piece of road because my lights were visible the cop got a good visual and thus a radar reading. (deserted bit of road with NO traffic).
Around town I reckon lights on the bike are bit of a waste anyway....for me its all about letting the driver in your path know you are there. (I still hand signal when turning, I wave and qesture if I can see a car wanting to cut me off, etc)
Heres one for you...my bike has mirrored headlight protectors (powerbronze AUST) and unless they are taken off the beam from the lights is pretty minimal (although more visible if they were off), whats the copper going to say about those? How can he tell if my lights were on.
If I get pulled over, my light switch will be turned on as he's turning is car around and then its his word against mine?! WTF?
Wankers.

**peasea** · 15th August 2009, 12:05

Originally Posted by saltydog

Hey, I want the right to choose if I have my lights on or not.
I normally have them on all the time (even though the R1 is not hard wired) But sometimes I dont want them on.
I recently got snapped (28 days)on a windy hilly piece of road because my lights were visible the cop got a good visual and thus a radar reading. (deserted bit of road with NO traffic).
Around town I reckon lights on the bike are bit of a waste anyway....for me its all about letting the driver in your path know you are there. (I still hand signal when turning, I wave and qesture if I can see a car wanting to cut me off, etc)
Heres one for you...my bike has mirrored headlight protectors (powerbronze AUST) and unless they are teken off the beam from the lights is pretty minimal (although more visible if they were off), whats the copper going to say about those? How can he tell if my lights were on.
If I get pulled over, my light switch will be turned on as he's turning is car around and then its his word against mine?! WTF?
Wankers.

I don't want to wear a helmet all the time but Nanny State says I must, even on my bicycle, to prevent head injuries. Funny how rugby players don't have to wear one yet they don't pay any ACC levies.

**MSTRS:Me** · 15th August 2009, 12:10

Originally Posted by peasea

We can soon look forward to heavier/longer trucks on our roads too. Heavier loads means more Road User taxes = more cash in the coffers. Longer trucks means more speed required to overtake them safely = more tickets = more cash in the coffers.

OT - but also means more chopped-up roads = more bikes coming to grief.
Of course, 'they' will be able to say "If you'd had your headlight on, you'd have been ok...here's your ticket for Careless Causing Injury"
The roading authorities don't care about the ACC cost. They are only interested in ensuring that they get plenty of funding. Since ACC sucks away so much of the available govt funding, NZTA, MOT etc will keep doing whatever they can to ensure a steady cashflow inwards.
It's all connected.

**saltydog** · 15th August 2009, 12:14

Originally Posted by peasea

I don't want to wear a helmet all the time

Yeah but thats just silly no? Move to California

**MSTRS:Me** · 15th August 2009, 12:16

And another thought...
What about insurance cos? Will they use this headlight law to weasel out of paying up for bent/broken bikes?

**peasea** · 15th August 2009, 12:18

Originally Posted by MSTRS

OT - but also means more chopped-up roads = more bikes coming to grief.
Of course, 'they' will be able to say "If you'd had your headlight on, you'd have been ok...here's your ticket for Careless Causing Injury"

But, but, but.....they tell us the roads will be able to handle the extra loads. Bullshit. The roads can't handle what's being thrown at them now. The Heavy Transport Industry boffins are arguing that bigger loads will lead to fewer trucks on the road. Watch this space. The same HTI boffins claim that larger loads will help get our economy moving; hang on, if they say larger loads means less trucks doesn't that indicate that total cartage will remain roughly the same? Where's the growth? It's all spin to get the heavier loadings approved and truck numbers will continue to increase, there will be growth alright mark my words, and yes you're right, the roads will suffer further.

**peasea** · 15th August 2009, 12:21

Originally Posted by saltydog

Yeah but thats just silly no? Move to California

Don't have to; I ride without a lid sometimes, it feels great. I did it just last w/e, not far though and I wouldn't push my luck in a built-up area. Tell you what; you hear every tinkle in your engine!

There's no demerit points so who cares?

**p.dath** · 15th August 2009, 12:24

Originally Posted by peasea

But, but, but.....they tell us the roads will be able to handle the extra loads. Bullshit. The roads can't handle what's being thrown at them now. The Heavy Transport Industry boffins are arguing that bigger loads will lead to fewer trucks on the road. Watch this space. The same HTI boffins claim that larger loads will help get our economy moving; hang on, if they say larger loads means less trucks doesn't that indicate that total cartage will remain roughly the same? Where's the growth? It's all spin to get the heavier loadings approved and truck numbers will continue to increase, there will be growth alright mark my words, and yes you're right, the roads will suffer further.

I wish we could invest money into rail rather than roads for heavier trucks. Rail was specially designed for moving these heavy loads.

And there is coastal shipping as well.

By investing so heavily in a narrow field you run the risk of damaging industries like rail and coasting shipping - and at the same time making things worse for everyone else.

**SixPackBack** · 15th August 2009, 12:25

Originally Posted by peasea

Don't have to; I ride without a lid sometimes, it feels great. I did it just last w/e, not far though and I wouldn't push my luck in a built-up area. Tell you what; you hear every tinkle in your engine!

There's no demerit points so who cares?

Really?.......fuck I'd do it all the time just to fuck the coppers off

**peasea** · 15th August 2009, 12:29

Originally Posted by SixPackBack

Really?.......fuck I'd do it all the time just to fuck the coppers off

Last time I checked it was $150 cash up front.

OT: I wonder why, when you have very little chance of getting tickets thrown out, the cops don't have EFT-POS capability in their cars? Get it over and done with right there and then.

I can recall getting a ticket for the murderous speed of 117kph around National Park a few years ago and the cop looked confused when I handed over my Visa card. It's what they're really after at the end of the day, isn't it?

**scumdog** · 15th August 2009, 12:32

Originally Posted by SixPackBack

Really?.......fuck I'd do it all the time just to fuck the coppers off

Nice troll but just in case any KB numpty gives any credence to what you have posted:

As peasea rides off into the distance the cop mutters "I gave that dude $150 ticket for not wearing his helmet but man I ever fucked off 'cos I can't give him any demerits"

Pfft, like THAT'S ever going to happen, as if any cop even cares......he's handed out his ticket, no credit for dishing out demerit tickets.

**scumdog** · 15th August 2009, 12:33

Originally Posted by peasea

I handed over my Visa card. It's what they're really after at the end of the day, isn't it?

NOT if it's in tatters financially-wise like mine

**saltydog** · 15th August 2009, 12:38

[QUOTE=peasea;1129355634]Don't have to; I ride without a lid sometimes, it feels great. I did it just last w/e. [QUOTE]

Wouldn't even contemplate it here.
Rode accross Bali, Lombok and Sumbawa plenty of times so i know the feeling, but over there (indonesia) it's SWEET AS to bribe your way out of a ticket.
Many a time I have asked the the Indonesian copper "how much is my problem?"