3 news now - biker caught at 300k???

[scumdog]

You can apply that argument to anyone that's caught speeding!! or indeed anyone doing anything. Surely you're not advocating punishing people before they commit an offence?

"He looks dodgy, let's arrest him, he's bound to be planning something."

Well the media and to some extent the public appear to want us to do that (see latest North & South mag) and expect Police to have a 100% accurate and reliable crystal ball.

All very well for them with their 20/20 hindsight, makes you wonder how any of them have accidents of any sort themselves?

Re you scenario above, arrest him and you'll never know if he would have done something evil - sort of catch 22 eh?

[scumdog]

yeah just on 1. 330kph on a road bike is bs. unless it was a turbo busa, but i highly doubt that. maybe it was scumdog on his harley

Nah mate, too law abiding these days, NOW a few years ago....

[oldrider]

I believe this is all part of LTSA buildup to make out they are doing something constructive about the road toll and it's cause "speeding". (In their opinion)
They are an inept lot of pricks (IMO).I also think it's old footage reproduced for their benefit at the moment. They (the dickheads) have just had a big meeting on the road toll etc and need to throw a bit more BS around for the unsuspecting public to swallow.
Andy Knackerhead will have another bad haircut and come on telly soon to announce some stupid restriction that they will put on all motorcyclists to combat the dangerous speeding as shown in the clip.
The general public wont be affected so they will clap loudly and say here, here, great idea and vote for these ares-holes again. "PRATTS".
I have just been on a trip to Wellington (Petone) and back. the worst dangerous act I witnessed is failing to keep left. The next worst is drivers pulling out in front of motorcycles (Me) and nearly every one of them was a woman. I was really pissed off with that little carry on. The worst area for that was between Blenheim and Kaikoura, some of them were bloody astounding. They might miss a bike or even a light but a flashing headlight! Not on your Nelly, they are just ignorant bastards.
The rest of the trip was fantastic, loved every moment on my bike. Cheers John.

[El Dopa]

Yeah, well ya shoulda thought about that before ya decided to haul-ass with both hands cowboy!!

F'rkn loser - always SOMEBODY elses fault.

Like I said before George, if you are doing a real 129km/hr and that particular unit pings you, you are walking.

Which is the real worry. I've never driven or riden after drinking. Never have, never will. Going over 100 on the other hand....

Sure, every time I stick the needle over 100, I accept the responsibility that
I am breaking the law and if I am caught, I'll have to take my medicine. This is why I watch the position of the needle with a lot of care at that sort of speed.

HOWEVER, if someone wants to take my licence away, I'd like to know that I was actually doing what I was supposed to be doing - that I am bang to rights. 129 km/h is not exceptionally fast in a LOT of circumstances, and in a lot of circumstances there is no real safety difference - long deserted straights in the middle of nowhere with good visibility for example.

There is a hell of a difference between 33 points and $120, and walking for 28 days, plus screwed insurance.

If I'm going to end up walking, then I'd like to be reasonably sure that:

1) the equipment is reading me accurately.
2) the cop is using it properly.

If I think I'm doing 130, and that's what my acurately calibrated factory speedo is telling me, whipping my licence off me because a dodgy radar/laser said 140 is going to make me pretty pissed off.

I recall a video of ghost rider in which you have an in bike cam showing a speedo at about 298 clicks then comes ghosty flying past in a wheelie prob doing well over 350 ....explain that one to me...

He was on a highly modified 'Busa, NOT stock, and was claiming 499 HP. That is exceptionally high. Most modders will consider 400 HP or thereabouts impressive/noteworthy. An extra 99HP on top of that is getting pretty insane.

Hmm, I thought the tuned 'busas only reached that kind of speed on like, designated airfield strips and things. I just can't imagine someone having the balls to do that on a NZ road.

Also, from what I've read (correct me if I'm wrong) cracking the 300km/h barrier on a bike is a big thing, as it's really difficult.

See post #50

[Skyryder]

A drunk driver MAY have had poor judgement, somebody doing 140kph+ MUST have had SOME awareness of their speed.

"No reason why the driver can not proceed safely" - Yeah right! Imagine: "After we caught him doing 155kph we gave him his ticket and we said he could ride off home but he took off at 200kph and hit the mini-bus with 11 9 year olds in it, we're sorry but we never realise he would speed again after we caught him"

Headlines: "Police let crazed speed-maniac ride off and kill three young children on bible-class trip"

What a load of old crock SD. So now you are blaming the media. Well two can play at that game.

Headlines: "Police make's mother and children walk home: All killed by hit and run driver."

Later.

Headlines: "Father sues Police." It was revealed in court today that the police Officer (name supressed) had recently won his appeal aginst the PM's ministerial motorcade conviction.

The PM was asked if she would be contributing to the officers defence fund. The Prime Minister "No comment"

Come on SD we can all play out worst case scenios. The bottomline in this is that Joe Citizen is left stranded on the side of the road. There can be no justification in this where vehicle or driver impairment is not an issue.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

Well, they must be bozos that you know - as far as I'M concerned there are none! - even the average Joe has more sense than to take that seriously.

Not when it comes from the mouth of a serving Police officer. You know as well as I that Police statements carry more additional weight than most. They usually convince TWELVE GOOD MEN AND TRUE and it is not until later that the flaws appear. However I digress.

I would have thought that they would have got there facts right befor issueing this codswallop to the media. But no. This little piece of news was staged managed so as to justify the Police position of the new instant loss of licence speed. Some here have more knowledge of instances of police misinformation than me but will go down as a classic.

Skyryder

[WINJA]

But YOU pay me to do it

THATS THE ATTITUDE THAT MAKES PEOPLE LIKE ME LAUGH AT COPS LIKE YOU WHEN SOMEONE CROWNS YOU WITH A WHEEL RIM, SURELY YOUVE NOTICED THE LACK OF PUBLIC SYMPATHY AND SUPPORT , I HEARD THE PIGS GET THE PUBLIC THEY DESERVE ,HEARD THAT B4 SCUMMY?

[madboy]

Has anyone thought about whether the law allowing instant loss of license is actually technically sound? I would have thought it would be an afront to our justice system, a system that is supposedly based on the premise of innocent until proven guilty in court. Yet some cop who may or may not have a small dick (incl the chicks) decides your fate on the side of the road without legal representation being consulted, without necessarily establishing an evidential basis more sound than their own opinion. Is this not fundamentally wrong?

Surely someone wealth and powerful will get pinged sooner or later and their $600/hr barrister can look into it for them. But since I can't afford a lawyer, I just stay the hell away from the pigs...

[ducatilover]

Has anyone thought about whether the law allowing instant loss of license is actually technically sound? I would have thought it would be an afront to our justice system, a system that is supposedly based on the premise of innocent until proven guilty in court. Yet some cop who may or may not have a small dick (incl the chicks) decides your fate on the side of the road without legal representation being consulted, without necessarily establishing an evidential basis more sound than their own opinion. Is this not fundamentally wrong?

Surely someone wealth and powerful will get pinged sooner or later and their $600/hr barrister can look into it for them. But since I can't afford a lawyer, I just stay the hell away from the pigs...

are you sayong this cos of my old man loosing his license today?

[Skyryder]

Has anyone thought about whether the law allowing instant loss of license is actually technically sound? I would have thought it would be an afront to our justice system, a system that is supposedly based on the premise of innocent until proven guilty in court. Yet some cop who may or may not have a small dick (incl the chicks) decides your fate on the side of the road without legal representation being consulted, without necessarily establishing an evidential basis more sound than their own opinion. Is this not fundamentally wrong?

Surely someone wealth and powerful will get pinged sooner or later and their $600/hr barrister can look into it for them. But since I can't afford a lawyer, I just stay the hell away from the pigs...

That's what I thought too. But MARTY posted some piece of legilstion somewhere about the serving of offence notices and that if you refuse to take it is deemed served by the officer telling you of the offence and the consquences of ignoring the offence notice. Something to that effect. Search his posts.

This bullshit would never happen in the States. We allow this to happen because ultimaty we trust the system to act in our interests. This trust is rapidly dissapearing with me.

Skyryder

[madboy]

Well if your old man can afford the lawyer... It's certainly the first thing I'll be talking to my lawyer about if I ever get busted for this. NZ is supposedly a society where laws are enforced by a judiciary following due process. There is no due process in some tax collector deciding you're not riding for 28 days with no more evidence required at that point than their word. It is up to you and your expensive lawyer to prove that they didn't do their job properly. This is against the fundamentals of innocent until proven guilty.

If you are fined, you can challenge that and it is not until the challenge has been dealt with in court that the punishments (if any) become enforceable. You don't have to cough up folding stuff on the side of the road (but you might as well swipe your card through their crack).

Working in insurance, I have had occasion to be involved in litigated cases. The evidential information required to prove fraud is HUGE. The burden of proof lies heavily on the prosecuting party (usually the insurer). Just knowing that someone did something doesn't mean a thing... you have to dot your i's, cross your t's, prove that you did everything right and they were wrong. A cop doesn't need to whip out the goods on the side of the road to prove that you've been a naughty boy. Just their word is sufficient. Cops don't even need to spell to take your license off you for 28 days. And if it gets overturned later in court, you can't give someone 28 days extra license can you?

Not sure if I personally would follow it through with the associated cost and that. I mean, it's not like I'm gonna stop driving/riding or anything. But it would be damn inconvenient if I happened to be travelling for work within that period. It's one thing to drive/ride your own car/bike when you're disq, but I'd be reluctant to lie to a rental company or something.

[scumdog]

THATS THE ATTITUDE THAT MAKES PEOPLE LIKE ME LAUGH AT COPS LIKE YOU WHEN SOMEONE CROWNS YOU WITH A WHEEL RIM, SURELY YOUVE NOTICED THE LACK OF PUBLIC SYMPATHY AND SUPPORT , I HEARD THE PIGS GET THE PUBLIC THEY DESERVE ,HEARD THAT B4 SCUMMY?

I only take notice of people that count...and I didn't take on the job for 'public sympathy' either matey..

[scumdog]

What a load of old crock SD. So now you are blaming the media. Well two can play at that game.

Headlines: "Police make's mother and children walk home: All killed by hit and run driver."

Later.

Headlines: "Father sues Police." [/U]

Skyryder

Yeah, the media wins either way sunshine - they play whatever shite sells their rag and/or TV time, sometimes they include facts and truth..:spudwhat:

And the dozey mother should have been watching her speed anyway!

[handy_dog]

[Q[LIST=1][*]UOTE=madboy]

Working in insurance, I have had occasion to be involved in litigated cases. The evidential information required to prove fraud is HUGE. The burden of proof lies heavily on the prosecuting party (usually the insurer). Just knowing that someone did something doesn't mean a thing... you have to dot your i's, cross your t's, prove that you did everything right and they were wrong. A cop doesn't need to whip out the goods on the side of the road to prove that you've been a naughty boy. Just their word is sufficient. Cops don't even need to spell to take your license off you for 28 days. And if it gets overturned later in court, you can't give someone 28 days extra license can you?



don't be a wanker. Seems to me you are all tared with the same brush.
Speed cops / insurance Compamies = Profesional Toss Potts

[Beemer]

The first (up-country) edition of the Saturday 20 January DominionPost carries a feature article by David McLoughlin that quotes a South Canterbury Policeman as saying the fastest recorded speed he was aware of was for a motorcycle travelling at 350kmh. This statement is incorrect and has been corrected for subsequent editions of the paper as 250kmh.

However I suspect there will be a few up-country readers who will be misinformed by this.

Yep, saw that and thought "bullshit!" We weren't sure if it was an editing mistake (and we wouldn't cast asparagus on those poor subs!) or the cops had decided to tell even bigger porkies. Shame us country cousins get the first draft of the paper, eh!