Is it illegal to ZING on your bike?

[froggyfrenchman]

i just got a warning for weaving within my lane while under speed limit! was warming tires for planned "zinging" but was doing nothing wrong as far as i could tell... theyre out to spoil my fun!

[Deano]

So what is the answer ?

Video footage and audio recording of the arseholes attitude.

Little brother can watch too you know.

How many instances can you recall where cops have been caught on tape ?

:spudwave:

[Deano]

i just got a warning for weaving within my lane while under speed limit! was warming tires for planned "zinging" but was doing nothing wrong as far as i could tell... theyre out to spoil my fun!

I've been 'accosted' for that before. Apparently weaving is not necessary to warm up your tyres said the all knowing officer.

I didn't really think it was worth pulling me over for, especially when I wasn't trying to warm up the tyres, I was scrubbing off the fuel/oil I had ridden through at the gas station.

It's a shame that the actions of a few power hungry arseholes spoil the good work that others do.

[Velox]

If you think the cop has done all he / she needs to do with you and you want to leave, just ask, "have you finished because I really want to get on my way"?

If you just bugger off as soon as you want to without being "released" by the officer you may be liable as follows;

[/B]

There may be times where the cop is happy for you to just ride away, in other cases you will find yourself liable as above. My advice is simply to check with the cop before you bugger off into the distance.

Cheers SC! Hits the nail on the head, except it begs the question (sorry if you've already posted it though) - what is section 114(2A)?
However as Deano said - it doesn't seem hugely likely that they'd look down at their toes and quietly admit that actually they are finished and we can go. Unless they're one of the better sorts. But for dealing with one like MD's mate, does this mean that there's nothing we can do except sit there and take it? Argh.

[Pixie]

Some people do need a lecture and part of the job, (in terms of traffic) is to set an example and to educate people. However, if you can be bothered reading the whole thread you will see on several posts I have said that I did not condone this particular lecture and have concurred that this cops actions were unprofessional.

If you are trying to make a point with me please make sure that I haven't already made that point myself. Otherwise I'll assume you are trolling.

Did I make any comment on your opinions?
I can give you a number for a good psychiatrist,one who speciallises in paranoia

[zeRax]

THIS THREAD IS POPULAR
probably because we all get to bash the coppers which is always a good thing, pity we as a nation dont bash them more for being relatively unreliable when we need real police work, doesnt help that theres sweet fuck all "justice" in the courts, revenue it up boysinblue

hehe got my own jab in hooooarrrrr

[number33]

I'm picking it's the same cop I followed in a cage from Pukerua Bay to Wellington. Bloke on a bandit cruises thru from behind - all cages are travelling at 70 - 80k and are all nicely pulling to the left to let the biker past. Biker's flicking his hand and nodding thanks. Gets to the cop car and good ole shithead cop stays waaay to the right and makes no attempt to let the bike thru for the next 10k's. What a wanker.

[Pixie]

pity we as a nation dont bash them more for being relatively unreliable when we need real police work, doesnt help that theres sweet fuck all "justice" in the courts, revenue it up boysinblue

hehe got my own jab in hooooarrrrr

That's not true.
According to Mr Spudchucka it's all a media beat up

[Ixion]

Gentlemen, gentlemen -

EDIT: WTF . What just happened. A minute ago there was a nice little flame war going on here.Now it's disappeared as if it never was!. What's with the censorship?


Now, if we may return generally to the topic .

I would like to observe that this problem (cops with attitude) is not restricted to motorcyclists. And it does have repercussions, indirectly , for the police.

Little story. Chap I know distantly, very respectable, pillar of community fellow, in his 60's, got a taxi into town one evening, with his wife. They were going to go to a show at the Aotea Centre, then dinner. First, he stopped off and bought a present for a friend. A VERY expensive ($100+) bottle of fancy whisky. In a nice box etc, the shop popped it in one of their plastic bags, with "Blogs Liquor" or whatever written al over it.

So off they go , ambling along to Aotea Square, him carrying the bag. Up comes a copper. " Stop. What's in that bag ?". He of course saw no reason not to tell the truth "Oh, it's a bottle of whisky".

"Right", says Mr Plod. "You can't have that here. Either give it to me and I will tip it out or leave the area immediately". "But, but--". Explanations fell on deaf ears,and Mr Plod becomes very nasty indeed, ranting and raving and threatening to arrest etc.

Long and short of it , they went home, missed their show, pleasant evening completely spoiled. In his opinion very bad attitude of the copper, and his unnecessarily truculent behaviour,were completely unwarranted and unjustified. And a chap who once supported the police thick and thin now has a much more caustic opinion of them.

Any way, point of this ramble. A bit later, the Council, and the Police, wanted to introduce a similar ban in our area. He contacted me, and we, with a few others, were successful in having the proposal overthrown.

The Police were very unhappy about that, and complained to me (for my sins I am Chaiman of the local Residents' Assn) about the community not supporting them, and "making their job harder". I had to tell them that we were not confident that the police powers in the proposal would not be abused , as in this story,and other anecdotal reports that we were told.


So bad public relations by the police can have wider ramifications.

And I still haven't seen any good suggestions about what anyone can do in such cases.

[spudchucka]

So my irrigation pond has just become a road? As has my walnut grove? and our horse paddock?

If you can drive a motor vehicle on your shit pond then it must be a road, just let me know well in advance when you plan to do it so I can come along with a video camera.

[Jantar]

(d) A place to which the public have access, whether of right or not..

Sorry SC, but there is no mention that it must be possible to drive a vehicle for it to be a road, just that the public have access.

[Ixion]

If you can drive a motor vehicle on your shit pond then it must be a road, just let me know well in advance when you plan to do it so I can come along with a video camera.

No problem. He justs needs either one of these cars, or to borrow Ms Fish's renowned Spragthorpe Wheezehound Continental.

[spudchucka]

Cheers SC! Hits the nail on the head, except it begs the question (sorry if you've already posted it though) - what is section 114(2A)?
However as Deano said - it doesn't seem hugely likely that they'd look down at their toes and quietly admit that actually they are finished and we can go. Unless they're one of the better sorts. But for dealing with one like MD's mate, does this mean that there's nothing we can do except sit there and take it? Argh.

Contrary to popular opinion and the assumption of so many in this thread, cops don't generaly pull people over simply to screw with them and muck them around. There may be some that do but I'm confident in saying that the majority don't. Therefore if you think they have finished doing whatever it was they were doing and you want to get on your way, just politely ask if there is any other reason that they may require you to remain stopped, if not, you are free to go.

Section 52 sets out the offence for not complying with the requirements under section 114.

52.Contravening notices, requirements, etc, given or imposed by enforcement officers—

(1)A person commits an offence if the person—

[(aa)is the driver of a vehicle that is stopped and fails to remain stopped in accordance with section 114(2A); or]

It refers to section 114(2A) because as highligted below it states the driver must remained stopped while the officer completes the exercise of any powers or duties prescribed by the Act. In other words, not simply to supply name, address, drivers licence details but also to carry out inspection of the vehicle etc etc. For example see section 113 also posted below.

(2A)Subject to subsections (4) and (5), the driver of a vehicle that is stopped by an enforcement officer under this Act must remain stopped for as long as is reasonably necessary for the enforcement officer to complete the exercise of any powers conferred, or duties imposed, on an enforcement officer by this Act.]

113.Enforcement officers may enforce transport legislation—

(1)An enforcement officer in uniform or in possession of a warrant or other evidence of his or her authority as an enforcement officer may enforce the provisions of—

(a)The Transport Act 1962, the Local Government Act 1974, [the Local Government Act 2002,] the Road User Charges Act 1977, the Transport (Vehicle and Driver Registration and Licensing) Act 1986, the Transport Services Licensing Act 1989, the Transit New Zealand Act 1989, the [Railways Act 2005], [the Land Transport Management Act 2003,] and this Act:

(b)Regulations and rules and bylaws in force under any Acts mentioned in paragraph (a).

(2)Without limiting any other powers conferred on an enforcement officer, an enforcement officer, in enforcing any provisions referred to in subsection (1), may at any time—

(a)Direct a person on a road (whether or not in charge of a vehicle) to give the person's name and address and date of birth, or such of those particulars as the enforcement officer may specify, and give any other particulars required as to the person's identity, and (unless the person is for the time being detained or under arrest under any enactment) give such information as is within the person's knowledge and as may lead to the identification of the driver or person in charge of a vehicle:

(b)Inspect, test, and examine—

(i)The brakes or any other part of a vehicle on a road or any associated equipment; or

(ii)A land transport document, or a document resembling a land transport document, displayed or carried on the vehicle:

(c)If the enforcement officer believes on reasonable grounds that a vehicle on a road causes an obstruction in the road or to a vehicle entrance to any property or that the removal of the vehicle is desirable in the interests of road safety or for the convenience or in the interests of the public,—

(i)Enter, or authorise another person to enter, the vehicle for the purpose of moving it or preparing it for movement; and

(ii)Move, or authorise another person to move, the vehicle to a place where it does not constitute a traffic hazard:

(d)Direct the driver or person in charge of a vehicle on a road to remove the vehicle from the road or a specified part of a road, if the officer believes on reasonable grounds that it causes an obstruction in the road or to a vehicle entrance to any property or its removal is desirable in the interests of road safety or for the convenience or in the interests of the public:

(e)Forbid an unlicensed driver to drive a motor vehicle.

[(f)]

(3)An enforcement officer in uniform or wearing a distinctive cap, hat, or helmet, with a badge of authority affixed to it, who is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic on a road, may—

(a)Direct a person using a vehicle or riding or driving an animal on the road to stop the vehicle or animal, as the case may be, or to cause it to proceed in or keep to a particular line of traffic or direction:

(b)Direct a pedestrian not to proceed across the road in contravention of a direction to stop given by the enforcement officer (whether given to pedestrians or to pedestrians and other traffic).

(4)In paragraphs (c) and (d) of subsection (2), ``road'' includes any land vested in or under the control of the Crown or any local authority.

[spudchucka]

That's not true.
According to Mr Spudchucka it's all a media beat up

You're the master of the missquote. I haven't mentioned the media once!

You're either talking shit again or replying to the wrong thread.

[spudchucka]

Sorry SC, but there is no mention that it must be possible to drive a vehicle for it to be a road, just that the public have access.

In the context of the Land Transport Act 1998 I think it is reasonable to assume that the term road would in some way involve the use of motor vehicles.