Bike cop learns me of bus lane law...

[swbarnett]

A traffic cop that doesn't know the road rules - I would assume that the cop in the original thread doesn't actually "know" the rules and is just guessing.

Indeed, the law has become an ass. I heard once about the US situation - some time in the 1800s the federal statutes took up only a couple of feet of shelf space; now they take up whole libraries. NZ is probably the same.

Even if you restrict yourself to just traffic law there's no way every cop will know all the rules and all their nuances. They have to make an educated guess and sometimes they'll get it wrong. It's up to the courts to sort it out when this happens.

I have a lot of admiration for a cop that's willing to accept that they might be wrong and call for clarification.

[Patrick]

Just a further to SWBarnetts...

The legislation is being changed all the time. One simply can not keep up. What is OK one day or is worth $$ this week, may be illegal or worth more next... and that is just the Land Transport Act or Regulations and the other statutes used just for Traffic alone, let alone all the others we need to know, like the Crimes Act, Arms Act, Summary Offences Act, Misuse of Drugs Act, Children and Young Persons Act, Family protection Act(??), Summary Porcedings Act, shit... the list goes on and on...... There are literally hundreds...

[Sanx]

I had a good chat with a motorbike cop in Cyclespot a few months ago. Seemed like a nice enough chap (note to self, must increase drug dosage). He also told me that Transit didn't intend on allowing motorbikes on buslanes, but the local cops had been told not to ticket bikers as the signs weren't correct.

He also, when I later picked his brain about various things, showed me his little book full of offences. Well, when I say little, it was full of lots of scary-looking codes, figures and descriptions. Half the offences I couldn't even undersand, let alone categorise.

So, yes, I can well believe that cops find it difficult to keep up with changes in legislation.

[Jantar]

I had a good chat with a motorbike cop in Cyclespot a few months ago. Seemed like a nice enough chap (note to self, must increase drug dosage). He also told me that Transit didn't intend on allowing motorbikes on buslanes, but the local cops had been told not to ticket bikers as the signs weren't correct..

This is similar to what I have heard from a different source. Too many motorcyclists were defending their tickets on the grounds that there are no signs specifically excluding motorcycles, so the cops have been told to lay off until or unless such signs are posted.

Now I hear this from the other end of the country, so how come there are still some cops in Auckland who haven't got the message?

[sAsLEX]

I have a lot of admiration for a cop that's willing to accept that they might be wrong and call for clarification.

Just a further to SWBarnetts...

The legislation is being changed all the time. One simply can not keep up. What is OK one day or is worth $$ this week, may be illegal or worth more next... and that is just the Land Transport Act or Regulations and the other statutes used just for Traffic alone, let alone all the others we need to know, like the Crimes Act, Arms Act, Summary Offences Act, Misuse of Drugs Act, Children and Young Persons Act, Family protection Act(??), Summary Porcedings Act, shit... the list goes on and on...... There are literally hundreds...

Both good points and understood fully.

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

[swbarnett]

Both good points and understood fully.

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Indeed. I was referring to just randomly stopping you for whatever you were doing at the time.

Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

This would be the prudent course of a confident officer. We must remember though, that a lot of the cops will be as nervous as the average public during an official meeting (they're human to). In the event that the cop digs their heels in it's the court's role to provide the definitive interpretation of the law.

But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

Nothing really wrong with this in principle but it would save a lot of time and hassle for us and the courts if they did seek a second opinion from someone that could refer to the statutes.

[Patrick]

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

1. Agreed... makes one look stupid, but going by the latest media cop bashing exercise, standards have dropped...

2. Not quite as easy... Legal section are based in Wellington. Ticket and check later is often the easiest way. If wrong, it is easy to cancel the officers copy and advise the poor ticketed KBer... oops... motorist!!

[The Stranger:Me]

Whilst I concur with Jabez 100%, there is a little matter of the NZ Road Code 2006 which does clarify the intent of the Bus Only signage (see about half way down page)

Now we are often told that the Road Code is not law, more of a guide to the law. However I wonder if there is something (law, regulation etc) elsewhere that we are unaware of which the Road Code is drawing from on this point.

[Jantar]

2. Not quite as easy... Legal section are based in Wellington. Ticket and check later is often the easiest way. If wrong, it is easy to cancel the officers copy and advise the poor ticketed KBer... oops... motorist!!

I would partially agree with you Patrick. It is easier for the police to do it this way, but not easier for the KBer. (you were right before you corrected yourself ) The police officer who issues the ticket is paid his salary whether the ticket is uphelpd or cancelled, so it is easier for him.

The rider has just had his day spoiled by being stopped, and for the next part of his ride he only has his mind half on the task of riding, while he is also thinking he may be confused on his knowledge of the road rules. He is therefore in a more dangerous state to be on the road.

Once safely home he has to research, and find the appropriate piece of legislation, then write in to ask for the ticket to be cancelled. All this takes time and does have a small financial cost. The rider does not get paid for his time, nor is he compensated for the use of paper, printer, ink, postage etc.

Then he has the anxious wait to find out if the police agree with him or not. If the rider is not experienced at researching legislation, or cannot express himself clearly, then the police legal section may claim that "the fine is still payable". (I have had one or two of these).

The next stage is to defend the ticket in court. Again, the police get paid to attend. The KBer doesn't. When the motorcyclist is found not guilty, (my result the last time I defended a ticket), he has still had to take time off work (at his own expense) and may even have to pay for a lawyer.

So in my opinion, the best way is for the police officer to note time, place, the bikes registration, etc. and not even stop the rider. The police officer can then carry out his own research later, and then post a ticket out if deemed neccessary.

[avgas]

Who cares if it's legal or not... you seen the amount of shit in those bus lanes? You may avoid the traffic, but factor in spending extra cash on all the punctures you'll pick up.

Yep, or the unsuspecting motorist that plows into the side of you so they can turn down a side street.
BUS LANE BAD - I HAVE METAL TO PROVE IT

[swbarnett]

Hmmm, you sure?

I don't imagine cops are any different to the rest of us. Particularly raw recruits still finding their feet.

[Patrick]

I would partially agree with you Patrick. It is easier for the police to do it this way, but not easier for the KBer. (you were right before you corrected yourself

Te hee... haven't ticketed a KBer yet )

The rider has just had his day spoiled by being stopped, and for the next part of his ride he only has his mind half on the task of riding, while he is also thinking he may be confused on his knowledge of the road rules. He is therefore in a more dangerous state to be on the road.

You're joking, right? Easily fixed. I"ll take the keys of em and send em packing, since they are in no state to drive...

Once safely home he has to research, and find the appropriate piece of legislation, then write in to ask for the ticket to be cancelled.

Not quite... officers notes on the rear, I check if in doubt myself, (which isn't often... if in doubt, I don't stop...) and if wrong, cancel it myself and post a letter. No action needed whatsoever on the aggrieved motorist...

The next stage is to defend the ticket in court. Again, the police get paid to attend. The KBer doesn't. When the motorcyclist is found not guilty,

yet to have this happen to me... what is it like? Oops, I stand corrected... it has happened, twice in 22 years... as you were...

So in my opinion, the best way is for the police officer to note time, place, the bikes registration, etc. and not even stop the rider. The police officer can then carry out his own research later, and then post a ticket out if deemed neccessary.

And the bike turns out to be stolen, or the rider (not necessarily the owner even) is disqualified or pissed... or I then have to send a letter to the owner requesting driver details, then track down the driver... sheesh... ticket now, sort later is MUCH MUCH easier... I prefer to keep it simple....

[Patrick]

I don't imagine cops are any different to the rest of us. Particularly raw recruits still finding their feet.

So they can count to 20????

[swbarnett]

ticket now, sort later is MUCH MUCH easier... I prefer to keep it simple....

I can certainly see your point. It does seem more logical to check out the "offender" while you have them in "custody". What would be nice, however, is the awarding of costs when the ticketed KBer is aquitted.

[Max Preload]

And the bike turns out to be stolen, or the rider (not necessarily the owner even) is disqualified or pissed...

Just out of interest, how many pissed motorcyclists do you encounter? I always seem to get waved through at checkpoints without being checked.