Speeding facts vs fiction

**Scuba_Steve** · 22nd June 2014, 22:12

Originally Posted by FJRider

I looked ...

Any particular heading I should be looking at ... ???

... The Sale of Liquor Act 2012 maybe ... ???

Well that could be a good one if that was you're interest but The 'bill of rights' is a good start as it's supposed to be our basic fundamental rights as NZers (tho largely ignored & Govt's trying to eliminate), then there's 'Human rights', 'crimes act' etc that should get you started

Originally Posted by rastuscat

An infringement offence notice or ION is an authorised officers allegation of wrong doing. The person on the receiving end is entirely in control of the situation.

If they pay the fine they are legally pleading guilty. If they don't, it is in essence a not guilty plea, and becomes a matter to be sorted by the courts.

Of course, if you don't agree with the ticket it's better to request a hearing up front and save a bunch of administration costs being added.

Ultimately it's better to not get the ticket in the first place. Don't give the Popo's the right to issue the ION by not breaking the rules. Seems obvious really.

Just sayin'

Donuts

Completely ignoring the right to be innocent until proven guilty, which apparently is reserved only for criminal cases & in total disregard to a law setup specifically to stop this type of extortion which simply reads "That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegall and void." - course when has legislation ever stopped criminals

Just sayin
Vodka

**FJRider** · 22nd June 2014, 22:31

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

Completely ignoring the right to be innocent until proven guilty ...

He DID say the Infringement notices were an "Allegation" of your breach of the Land Transport act. ... and you have the right to fight any such allegation in a court of law.

Paying the stated fine being an admission of the traffic infringement/offense ...

The courts are by no means ... Always totally in support of the police. In a majority of the cases that come before the courts ... they ARE .... (because they're as guilty as fuck)

But not always.

**Dave-** · 22nd June 2014, 22:51

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

Completely ignoring the right to be innocent until proven guilty...

**caspernz** · 22nd June 2014, 22:59

Meh, all this talk of speeding facts vs fiction is a bit like the fat chick in the hotel pool...

Click image for larger version.

Name: 192whale.jpg
Views: 15
Size: 19.6 KB
ID: 298146

**unstuck** · 23rd June 2014, 07:09

Speed kills.

**James Deuce** · 23rd June 2014, 12:14

The "cause" of accidents is people and people are dicks. Until people stop being dicks, accidents will keep happening.

Don't be a dick.

**swbarnett** · 23rd June 2014, 13:39

Originally Posted by James Deuce

Don't be a dick.

Exactly.

This is, of course, not the same as saying "don't break the law". Contrary to popular belief staying within the law is no guarantee that a driver is not still being a dick.

**rastuscat** · 23rd June 2014, 19:17

Originally Posted by swbarnett

Contrary to popular belief staying within the law is no guarantee that a driver is not still being a dick.

Inversely, it also means that being outside the law doesn't necessarily mean you're not a dick.

Or something. Um, what was I trying to say?

**rastuscat** · 23rd June 2014, 19:18

Originally Posted by FJRider

He DID say the Infringement notices were an "Allegation" of your breach of the Land Transport act. ... and you have the right to fight any such allegation in a court of law.

Paying the stated fine being an admission of the traffic infringement/offense ...

The courts are by no means ... Always totally in support of the police. In a majority of the cases that come before the courts ... they ARE .... (because they're as guilty as fuck)

But not always.

It's just Skoober being Skoober. You're right, but that won't matter to him.

**swbarnett** · 23rd June 2014, 20:12

Originally Posted by rastuscat

Inversely, it also means that being outside the law doesn't necessarily mean you're not a dick.

Or something. Um, what was I trying to say?

I know what you're trying to say and I totally agree. The law is often a very poor yard stick.

**Scuba_Steve** · 23rd June 2014, 22:35

Originally Posted by rastuscat

It's just Skoober being Skoober. You're right, but that won't matter to him.

he aint right & you should know better.

**R650R** · 24th June 2014, 16:00

Originally Posted by James Deuce

The "cause" of accidents is people and people are dicks. Until people stop being dicks, accidents will keep happening.

Don't be a dick.

That deserves a Patches O'Houlihan quote but no ones made a meme of the bar scene yet... and I've just remembered its Team America I'm thinking of...
Everyones been drawn off into a wrong tangent here as speed does kill.
What we're really trying to argue is our divine right to choose our own excessive extra risk levels. As we've become accustomed to carrying out other dangerous skull cracking activities without govt intervention.
Eg: one can enter forest park without suitable food, footwear, clothing or means of signalling rescue. One can go kayaking in extreme off shore winds with no PLB or Radio... etc....
Yet being slightly stupid in/on a motor vehicle we have all these rules to pretend its safe otherwise no one would go near them.