NZ Police public image

[Ixion]

Maybe the suspension should be deferable for 24/48 hours and/or contestable. And maybe it could be taken into consideration at any subsequent court imposed sanction otherwise the offender is being punished twice for the same offence...... and lets not forget, our esteemed leaders are currently considering lowering the 50kph threshold to 40kph!!

BTW doesn't "sustained loss of traction" lead to automatic vehicle impounding?

Personally I think that Mr Giradin is correct (incidentally, this isn't an argument with the police, it's an argument with the government). If the offence is serious enough to warrant instant suspension it's serious enough to warrant arrest. And let a judge impose the suspension at the bail hearing if necessary, after hearing any argument in defence. That's my real objection - if you are charged with an offence in court you do have an opportunity to state your defence to a neutral third party . Said neutral party may not believe you but you have the chance to put your case. With the instant loss of license you have no such chance. The only other person is the cop, who is effectively prosecutor, and judge. And even if a real judge disagrees later it's too late, the damage is done and can't be reversed.

[Funkyfly]

If the offence happened, what difference does it make whether the cop is an arsehole or not? The outcome is the same regardless.

Heh heh, man you are a strange one, only two dozen posts ago old scumdog was relating how he pulled up some speeding bikers, but he didnt ticket them, yet other cops would have.

The outcome is just as often based on the cops attitude as it is the offence.

Personal example - One cop pulled me over for 130kph and let me go with a warning, yet another cop pulled me up for 120 and gave me a ticket. Both were speeding offences but totally different outcomes.

[scumdog]

Personally I think that Mr Giradin is correct (incidentally, this isn't an argument with the police, it's an argument with the government). If the offence is serious enough to warrant instant suspension it's serious enough to warrant arrest. And let a judge impose the suspension at the bail hearing if necessary, after hearing any argument in defence. That's my real objection - if you are charged with an offence in court you do have an opportunity to state your defence to a neutral third party . Said neutral party may not believe you but you have the chance to put your case. With the instant loss of license you have no such chance. The only other person is the cop, who is effectively prosecutor, and judge. And even if a real judge disagrees later it's too late, the damage is done and can't be reversed.

Down here you might have to wait up to three weeks for the next available court day.
Would not change much except 'spose you got your licence back after 21 days instead of 28 IF you got found not guilty.

[scumdog]

[QUOTE=Lou Girardin]

Did the cops act in good faith, believing that the temporay speed zone was a legitimate one or did they act malitiously knowing that the tempoary zone was dodgy? I don't think anyone here can answer that.
/QUOTE]

Did they even check? We always had to ensure the legality of temp zones on the M/way BEFORE we enforced them. But then we were just snakes.

Yup, I ALWAYS do Lou, drive through both ways to check the signs and then note loose gravel and/or workmen there before I go about making "innocent" motorists lives miserable.

[spudchucka]

Heh heh, man you are a strange one, only two dozen posts ago old scumdog was relating how he pulled up some speeding bikers, but he didnt ticket them, yet other cops would have.

The outcome is just as often based on the cops attitude as it is the offence.

Personal example - One cop pulled me over for 130kph and let me go with a warning, yet another cop pulled me up for 120 and gave me a ticket. Both were speeding offences but totally different outcomes.

We're talking about speeds in excess of 150kph at which point you may lose your licence for 28 days. Except in exceptional circumstances I can't see too much discretion being used in these circumstances. If the cop is going to suspend your licence it makes no difference to the outcome how grumpy or nice he is about it.

[spudchucka]

Did they even check?

I don't think anyone here can answer that question either.

[spudchucka]

In case you still miss my point.

If the cop happens to be an arsehole with attitude - you know the sort of cop. "If the offence happened" or not can very conceivably make no difference. That is the point!!!!!

Call that justice??

I don't. Unless you are in Bali. There they stop Tourists and just ask for money. Don't have to have done anything wrong. Yeah it happens all the time. Don't laugh, NZ is not too far behind.....

So you're suggesting that an arsehole cop would just make up a speed reading in order to snatch somebody's licence?

[James Deuce]

Well i can sleep easy knowing my GSXR would kick your yammys butt any day. Arh yes, the serenity of bigotry, fantastic.

I'm pretty sure penis extensions are available through the Public Health system for those poor unfortunates that find it difficult to interface with a reality that doesn't necessarily contain the urgent desire to spend one's life "kicking butt".

[denill]

So you're suggesting that an arsehole cop would just make up a speed reading in order to snatch somebody's licence?

Uh huh. Now we are getting there.....

Yes - I am suggesting that the illconcived law allows for that very thing to happen. And I strongly suspect that it has happened. I have been pulled up for an alleged speed that was bullshit, so what's the diff??
And for you to say that it would never happen is stupid and illogical.
But at least it would be consistent with the 'cop input' into this thread where logic is not applied. Where - 'thems is the rools' prevails.

I say again. It is dangerous to give a cop the power of a judge and jury......

[Clockwork]

Why does this thread keep degenerating into personal attacks?

No one in this debate is going to make ANY worthwhile point about other peoples "bad" attitudes without first addressing their own.

(and yes, I do know I took a cheap shot in reference to indoo earlier, which I almost immediately regretted)

[James Deuce]

Why does this thread keep degenerating into personal attacks?

No one in this debate is going to make ANY worthwhile point about other peoples "bad" attitudes without first addressing their own.

(and yes, I do know I took a cheap shot in reference to indoo earlier, which I almost immediately regretted)

It is pointless trying to discuss attitudes toward the Police on an Internet forum. There is a degree of separation introduced by an electronic format, and people feel safe to say outrageous stuff that they would never say in a face to face confrontation. There are a couple of characters who have decided to read a lot more into one individual's frustration with a bunch of "Internet Tough Guys", often labelling any Police person who sticks their head up as the worst kind of power abuser, merely because they are immune from the smack in the face they would probably get from ANYONE who was spoken to like that.

There are a vast range of options open to people who feel abused or misrepresented by individual Police persons, just as there are a vast range of options available for people to voice their displeasure with government policy in regard to Policing.

A special interest community is not the place for accusations and insults. However don't dish it out if you don't want it back. If people who are unhappy with the way Policing is going in NZ spent as much energy baiting their local MP as they did baiting guys who could be used as a helpful, anonymous resource to provide FACTS for your arguments, then that would be constructive! That's what communities are for.

Lou is the only person I see out of all the people who have an argument against the Police, who debates to a certain extent, but also pushes his views into the public arena. A lot of the stuff Lou writes to newspapers is much better reasoned than the stuff that makes it in here.

Being an arse in front of people who you actually have more in common with, isn't usually a diplomatic strategy of any merit.

[Lou Girardin]

So you're suggesting that an arsehole cop would just make up a speed reading in order to snatch somebody's licence?

It happened in ChCh, although it was not a suspension offence, whether it was deliberate or the cop didn't care to much about correct radar operation is debatable. The guy got off because he, luckily, had a reading of his speed from GPS.

[RDJ]

There is a degree of separation introduced by an electronic format, and people feel safe to say outrageous stuff that they would never say in a face to face confrontation.

Well put. I assume that in the absence of a moderator and despite the fact that the rider community in NZ is relatively small, some (few) people on the forum think that personal abuse is "safe" because of this apparent anonymity.

There is of course no real anonymity even on the net, and I'd ask the people who delight in personal attacks (you know who you are) to consider what effect this thread could have if introduced as an example of Kiwi riders' "attitudes" at, say, a Select Committee hearing on spending money on less slippery road markings, or lower ACC levies, or sharing bus lanes, or... we would not look good would we?

Not that self interest is the only reason not to bash police who after all are trying to do a difficult job well, just like most of the rest of us.

It would be good if we could debate the issues in a collegial fashion, but since that goal appears out of reach, perhaps we better not debate these issues at all.

[idb]

The outcome is just as often based on the cops attitude as it is the offence.

Personal example - One cop pulled me over for 130kph and let me go with a warning, yet another cop pulled me up for 120 and gave me a ticket. Both were speeding offences but totally different outcomes.

But that could be a good thing FF.
Aren't we all for cops using discretion?
Maybe 130 was OK in the circumstances and 120 wasn't in that situation?
One of the biggest complaints on this forum is being ticketed for exceeding the speed limit when (in the complainers opinion) there were no hazards at all.

[SPman]

A question for the policemen on here.
Do you guys ever get on job auditing? As in, a training officer type, follows you around, or goes out with you, at random times, to see how you are performing in the field and ensuring you do things "by the book", etc?