Police target motorcyclists in another safety campaign

**Nzpure** · 20th March 2012, 18:07

Originally Posted by dogsnbikes

To a point,all a Wof say's is that the vehicle was fit for the road at the time of inspection,But there is a small minority that will alter their Vehicles as soon as they have a Wof issued.

Others rely on a Wof as their time to get a service reminder,yet some insist on flogging other peoples wofs or printing there own

I don't mind if I get stopped,but who ever it is better know what they are talking about in terms of motorcycle saftey,

I don't even mind if some don't pay their vechicle licencing fee as a form of protest,as no Rego doesn't make a Vechicle unsafe

But I do get annoyed by others that have an unsafe vechicle's on the road...

Those who flog others or print there own would get picked up via the camera idea, Seeing a car sacked on its arse is a reason to pull it over as the vehicle looks a little suspect or a bike going down the road that sounds like a 747 or the like. Generally people who do things to there car or bike immediately after the inspection do so because the modifications are blaringly obvious. Hence being pulled over isn't unjustified.

**scumdog** · 20th March 2012, 18:19

Originally Posted by Gremlin

meh... it's not the first campaign, won't be the last. I've clocked up 50+k in the last year odd, not been stopped or spoken to once during that time about some campaign.

I'm starting to wonder if they really exist...

Likewise, last got stopped (by the booze-bus guys, for a random breath test) in...oh...about 2008-2009.

Maybe a tassle-bedecked, fingerless-glove wearing Harley-rider is not the target species???

**scumdog** · 20th March 2012, 18:22

Originally Posted by caseye

Now then Maha, this is something that I entirely agree with. If I am riding along minding my own business then Mr Plod HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP ME,

True - they should wait until you get home and then phone you to find out if you:
(a) Stole the bike
(b) Are suspended or disqualified
(c) Have drunk too much booze to be riding.

**mossy1200** · 20th March 2012, 18:28

Maybe ill post a race thread saying i intend to return to the track.

I wont be handing in my licence at each meeting.You can trust I have one.
Im not letting anyone check I have my back brace on.You should trust I have one on.It wouldnt mater anyway if i dont fall off.
I dont accept that my bike needs scrutinized because i can be trusted to keep it up to scratch.Besides if you cant see anything wrong with it while I ride past then its gotta be ok.It shouldnt need checked once its been checked before.
im not even happy to pay race fees as I think thats just revenue earning.

**scumdog** · 20th March 2012, 18:30

Originally Posted by Bald Eagle

More revenue gathering thinly disguised as a 'safety campaign'

Never!?

Wow, I had better start carrying money then - I wonder why they would want to take any off me??

On second thoughts, maybe I'd just better leave it to the usual whinging losers to pay the 'revenue', they seem to be better at it than me so far...

**Nzpure** · 20th March 2012, 18:46

Originally Posted by mossy1200

Maybe ill post a race thread saying i intend to return to the track.

I wont be handing in my licence at each meeting.You can trust I have one.
Im not letting anyone check I have my back brace on.You should trust I have one on.It wouldnt mater anyway if i dont fall off.
I dont accept that my bike needs scrutinized because i can be trusted to keep it up to scratch.Besides if you cant see anything wrong with it while I ride past then its gotta be ok.It shouldnt need checked once its been checked before.
im not even happy to pay race fees as I think thats just revenue earning.

Again jumping off the deep end dude. Going a little bit far to the point where everything you just said was a tad silly. All im saying, No in fact asking. Aren't the cops required to have justifiable cause before stopping you ?
No need to get upset. I imagine the whole if the coppa's put up a check point theres no breach there eg you didn't have to be driving down that road.

Again Mossy as i mentioned before i have no quarrel with the cops,checkpoints or spot checks. I my self have never had a ticket or fine of any kind nor do i intend to change that. All i am saying is that a spot check is a breach of our rights as stated in the bill of rights and methods to avoid it.

**scumdog** · 20th March 2012, 18:52

Originally Posted by Nzpure

Aren't the cops required to have justifiable cause before stopping you ?
.

No

**Nzpure** · 20th March 2012, 18:54

So this part "Liberty of the person
Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained." has been omitted from the bill of rights?

**Crasherfromwayback** · 20th March 2012, 18:59

Originally Posted by Nzpure

So this part "Liberty of the person
Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained." has been omitted from the bill of rights?

I wouldn't consider being held up for a couple of minutes being 'detained'. If so...then red traffic lights are breaking the law.

**Nzpure** · 20th March 2012, 19:03

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

I wouldn't consider being held up for a couple of minutes being 'detained'. If so...then red traffic lights are breaking the law.

No because traffic lights arn't arbitrary.

**Nzpure** · 20th March 2012, 19:04

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

I wouldn't consider being held up for a couple of minutes being 'detained'. If so...then red traffic lights are breaking the law.

detainedpast participle, past tense of de·tain (Verb)
Verb:
Keep (someone) in official custody, typically for questioning about a crime or in politically sensitive situations.
Keep (someone) from proceeding; hold back.