Criminal nuisance conviction for roading contractor after crash

[magnum]

good job,fukn homos

[NordieBoy]

Ummmm, this is true?? Like some one clocked the Dr at this speed and there was road works up the road?

Umm.
No.

Just trying to illistrate the point that anything you do or don't do is a factor.
An extra fart and stretch in the morning could mean the difference between being an onlooker and a participant.

It's all to to with the trouser-legs of time

[Mongoose]

Umm.
No.

Just trying to illistrate the point that anything you do or don't do is a factor.
An extra fart and stretch in the morning could mean the difference between being an onlooker and a participant.

It's all to to with the trouser-legs of time

Well, I'll be , now it is all starting to make sense :confused2

[mangell6]

Would really like to hear your comments on this Motu and JIM.

While I am not Jim or Motu I will reply to post No 246

I look forward to the day that the chain link fences prevent the children, cyclists and pedestrians from coming onto the dangerous urban 50km streets so that I cannot run them over (have an accident) while I am driving my car or riding my bike, and that a defence of "Yes there was gravel on the side of the road" and even if I did see it, I wasn't "informed" so the person who put it there is responsible for me having an accident being legitimate. This is the kind of society that the reporters comments are leaning towards, where all individuals 'expect' to be fully informed and protected from themselves. At least I won't have to make a decision, someone else can do it for me.

I see that the Waikato Hospital board has 'dictated' that staff are not allowed to wear rings when preparing food because once they have identified a hazard or a danger OSH requires them to deal to it. Preventing staff from wearing rings is a definite 'knee-jerk' reaction to a "perceived' problem where there are other, more common sense solutions.

Re the 'decisions that you make' refer to Jims note about the decisions that he made that lead to him being in the wrong place. I have had two instances where I made decisions and one that resulted in me NOT KILLING a guy who was riding a bike. One can call it Karma or 6th sense but what comes around goes around. For a definition on religion refer to item number four at dictionary dot com.

As for a Taranaki accident, know the bridge, know that particular piece of road and SLOW down when I cross it. Have experienced aquaplaning and what a thrill it is, really gets the adreniline and heart pumping, the ultimate relief is when one has control back again.

The current societal notion that others are responsibile for you and your actions is a falicy and will cause only grief.

Funkfly - How much longer can we all keep this thread going?

Mike

[Funkyfly]

It was a discussion about what Councils might do in defence not that they would do for sure.

"Might do"? man i remember reading some "guarantees".

might pay to check.

[Funkyfly]

While I am not Jim or Motu I will reply to post No 246

I look forward to the day that the chain link fences prevent the children, cyclists and pedestrians from coming onto the dangerous urban 50km streets so that I cannot run them over (have an accident) while I am driving my car or riding my bike, and that a defence of "Yes there was gravel on the side of the road" and even if I did see it, I wasn't "informed" so the person who put it there is responsible for me having an accident being legitimate. This is the kind of society that the reporters comments are leaning towards, where all individuals 'expect' to be fully informed and protected from themselves. At least I won't have to make a decision, someone else can do it for me.

I see that the Waikato Hospital board has 'dictated' that staff are not allowed to wear rings when preparing food because once they have identified a hazard or a danger OSH requires them to deal to it. Preventing staff from wearing rings is a definite 'knee-jerk' reaction to a "perceived' problem where there are other, more common sense solutions.

Re the 'decisions that you make' refer to Jims note about the decisions that he made that lead to him being in the wrong place. I have had two instances where I made decisions and one that resulted in me NOT KILLING a guy who was riding a bike. One can call it Karma or 6th sense but what comes around goes around. For a definition on religion refer to item number four at dictionary dot com.

As for a Taranaki accident, know the bridge, know that particular piece of road and SLOW down when I cross it. Have experienced aquaplaning and what a thrill it is, really gets the adreniline and heart pumping, the ultimate relief is when one has control back again.

The current societal notion that others are responsibile for you and your actions is a falicy and will cause only grief.

Funkfly - How much longer can we all keep this thread going?

Mike

For the LAST time, i i do mean LAST time! My comments do not in any way praise chris's case, I DO agree more cases like his could force the coincils to tighten up laws regarding road users.

Got that? Please tell me you understand that?

My comments relate to trying to STOP further court action! and helping fellow riders!

How?

You could go back and read my other 100 odd posts but i will make it easy for.

By encouraging councils to encourage contractors to erect signs like they are obogated to.

With signs in place then people like Chris cant make a case!

Its VERY simple.

However people on here are arguing that by encouraging councils to talk to their contractors it will result in bikes being banned on our roads.

[Posh Tourer :P]

For the LAST time, i i do mean LAST time! My comments do not in any way praise chris's case, I DO agree more cases like his could force the coincils to tighten up laws regarding road users.

Ok. So you dont condone his case, but you think it might be useful to force councils to tighten up operating procedures. Kind of a wake up call to ensure it doesnt happen again.

Got that? Please tell me you understand that?.

Did I understand that correctly? I think I did

My comments relate to trying to STOP further court action! and helping fellow riders!
How?
You could go back and read my other 100 odd posts but i will make it easy for.
By encouraging councils to encourage contractors to erect signs like they are obogated to.
With signs in place then people like Chris cant make a case!
Its VERY simple.
However people on here are arguing that by encouraging councils to talk to their contractors it will result in bikes being banned on our roads.

Ok. So you have stopped further court action that might happen when contractors dont erect signs. The councils are now aware of this situation. Now apply this precedent to a wider situation. There are many areas in which this type of case could be a precedent. I go down a waterslide without using one of those foam mats, and break a finger because there was a ledge between two peices of plastic that I hit. I sue the swimming pool place, and point out a precedent/make my decision to sue based on the fact that this case succeeded.
My point is that while you may have won the battle, you havent won the war.
If this case succeeds, not only does the council have to tighten up in this area, but also other areas in which a precedent might have been set. People make a decision to sue based on the success of similar cases. There are some things that just have to be left at personal responsibility. Its all a matter of where you draw the line.

[merv]

"Might do"? man i remember reading some "guarantees".

might pay to check.

You won't find any comment like that in any of my posts.

[merv]

However people on here are arguing that by encouraging councils to talk to their contractors it will result in bikes being banned on our roads.

My only argument has been that if bikers take court action, Councils may get defensive. I am pleased to see you have now acknowledged that this point is a possibility.

For the LAST time, i i do mean LAST time! My comments do not in any way praise chris's case, I DO agree more cases like his could force the coincils to tighten up laws regarding road users.

... and we aren't going to catch up to the religious thread if you quit now.

[Funkyfly]

My only argument has been that if bikers take court action, Councils may get defensive. I am pleased to see you have now acknowledged that this point is a possibility.



... and we aren't going to catch up to the religious thread if you quit now.

i never dismissed the notion that councils might get defensive dude.

im not going to quit, im just not going to repeat the same stuff over and over becasue people dont read the other posts, takes up way to much time (i brought motoGP3)

[Funkyfly]

Ok. So you dont condone his case, but you think it might be useful to force councils to tighten up operating procedures. Kind of a wake up call to ensure it doesnt happen again.

ARGH! As riders cant cant "force" anything. Not sure how many times i used the word "encourage" in my posts but it was a few, maybe people here dont understand what it means?

Ok. So you have stopped further court action that might happen when contractors dont erect signs.

No No No! The idea is to encourage contractors TO erect signs, if they do this then the chances someone can blame "lack of signs" for their crash will be reduced!

There is no way i can see that you can "stop further court action that might happen when contractors dont erect signs" because if contractors arent doing their job then people CAN take them to court, as Chris did.

[Funkyfly]

You won't find any comment like that in any of my posts.

My apologies Merv, i must admit i do tend to lump you guys together.

Someone promoting the "council WILL ban bikes" side made a number of guarantees.

[James Deuce]

My apologies Merv, i must admit i do tend to lump you guys together.

Someone promoting the "council WILL ban bikes" side made a number of guarantees.

You do enjoy misquoting don't you? It's good form to attribute the quote to a person and include the text. I've been around long enough to see what a sustained government campaign to sway public opinion will do. I didn't say councils will ban bikes, I said the central government would, given enough ammunition of this type.

[Mongoose]

You do enjoy misquoting don't you? It's good form to attribute the quote to a person and include the text. I've been around long enough to see what a sustained government campaign to sway public opinion will do. I didn't say councils will ban bikes, I said the central government would, given enough ammunition of this type.

Also good to see the man admit when he got it wrong Jim2? So should the others involved in this court case, the contractor and/or council should have admitted a mistake and not have it go as far as a court hearing. Would have saved a lot of hassle had they made a simular offer as what the judge ruled and i suspect this Chris fella would have melted away and no one would have been the wiser.

[Hitcher]

You do enjoy misquoting don't you? It's good form to attribute the quote to a person and include the text. I've been around long enough to see what a sustained government campaign to sway public opinion will do. I didn't say councils will ban bikes, I said the central government would, given enough ammunition of this type.

Reminds me of a conversation we had during the South Africa v Pacific Islands test match on Saturday evening (WARNING: abstruse ramble starting) where I expressed displeasure at folk who refer to the PI team as "the polynesians", when in fact this team comprises people of polynesian and melanesian descent. A short conversation then followed regarding the geographic proximates required to be poly, micro or melanesian -- which led to a personal confession of being an amnesian...