Police killing us again!

[Katman]

I do agree without question...but I would EXPECT a professional rider/driver not to do a U-turn in such an inappropriate place when there was a safer option within 150m of the incident.

Edit...I have been to the site

And I entirely agree with you as well Chris.

Still doesn't change the fact that no-one should assume that unseen road ahead of them is going to be clear.

[Parlane]

I imagine a police motorcyclist would exercise a greater degree of care when negotiating a blind crest.

Do police motorcyclists exercise better risk analysis than police car drivers? I would hope so, I have seen many a cop car assume that everyone has seem them when they come racing through a red light at an intersection.

I can't say I have seen many police bikers though.

[Gearup]

say it aint so scummy . Here I was thinking you were a cop, please don't tell me your actually a PIG



Just like a police driver would exercise a greater degree of care when pulling a u-turn... oh wait

.

You saved me the effort of posting this Scuba. Good on ya!!

[Gearup]

Do police motorcyclists exercise better risk analysis than police car drivers? I would hope so, I have seen many a cop car assume that everyone has seem them when they come racing through a red light at an intersection.

I can't say I have seen many police bikers though.

I think they hang around in the places where there's better pickings mate. More targets in them there bigger cities.

[Katman]

Just like a police driver would exercise a greater degree of care when pulling a u-turn... oh wait

I have no faith in the driving skills of the average police officer but I'm confident that police motorcyclist's risk awareness and analysis skills are far greater than their 4 wheeled counterparts.

(Particularly on duty. There's proof enough on here of questionable after hours riding).

[scumdog]

say it aint so scummy . Here I was thinking you were a cop, please don't tell me your actually a PIG

You mean he posts those comments DESPITE being well informed???

[Gearup]

I imagine a police motorcyclist would exercise a greater degree of care when negotiating a blind crest.

You are totally missing the jolly point dear chap. Most unspiffing really!!

I'm with MarkH on the subject of Katman.

[Katman]

You are totally missing the jolly point dear chap. Most unspiffing really!!

I'm with MarkH on the subject of Katman.

No, you're missing the point.

[Gearup]

No, you're missing the point.

I said it first.

[Scuba_Steve]

You mean he posts those comments DESPITE being well informed???

I'm not sure about his posts?, you just got me worried with him mentioning "there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol" and you responding with "Looks really bad for me then...."

[MSTRS:Me]

Double yellow lines says: Do not cross here, do not pass here, do not turn here.

Here we go again...
A yellow line on YOUR side of the centre line says you may not cross it in order to overtake another vehicle. A double yellow simply means the same applies in either direction.
You are permitted to cross the yellow in order to turn into a driveway (for instance). Nothing is said about the legality of crossing in order to u-turn (for instance). Obviously, extreme caution applies and I believe the recommended process is to avoid the practice.

[Scuba_Steve]

Here we go again...
A yellow line on YOUR side of the centre line says you may not cross it in order to overtake another vehicle. A double yellow simply means the same applies in either direction.
You are permitted to cross the yellow in order to turn into a driveway (for instance). Nothing is said about the legality of crossing in order to u-turn (for instance). Obviously, extreme caution applies and I believe the recommended process is to avoid the practice.

the law does say "A driver, when driving, must not use a lane to the driver’s right of a no-passing line" the turning to a driveway is an exception to the governing rule so if no exception is made to a U'y then by default it is illegal.

It is arguable under the exception of
"A driver may also drive wholly or partly in a lane that is unavailable to the driver under subclause (1) or clause 4.6(2) to (4) if the driver drives in the lane to cross it to make a turn and drives in the lane for the minimum length necessary to complete the manoeuvre and for no more than a maximum length of 50 m; and gives way to vehicles entitled to use the lane."
but it's a hard sell if you ask me (or at least would be for anyone not part NZ's biggest gang )

[Gearup]

I'm not sure about his posts?, you just got me worried with him mentioning "there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol" and you responding with "Looks really bad for me then...."

Don't forget, his signature line actually states he is into "Winding up...."

[Jack Miller]

the law does say "A driver, when driving, must not use a lane to the driver’s right of a no-passing line" the turning to a driveway is an exception to the governing rule so if no exception is made to a U'y then by default it is illegal.

It is arguable under the exception of
"A driver may also drive wholly or partly in a lane that is unavailable to the driver under subclause (1) or clause 4.6(2) to (4) if the driver drives in the lane to cross it to make a turn and drives in the lane for the minimum length necessary to complete the manoeuvre and for no more than a maximum length of 50 m; and gives way to vehicles entitled to use the lane."
but it's a hard sell if you ask me (or at least would be for anyone not part NZ's biggest gang )

A difficult sell for a U turn, an even more difficult sell for a 3-point turn.

[_Shrek_]

I'm not sure about his posts?, you just got me worried with him mentioning "there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol" and you responding with "Looks really bad for me then...."

SS scummy is the least of your worries