NZ Police public image

**James Deuce** · 10th May 2005, 01:36

Yes I'm a stupid, unresearched neo-conservative.

I promise never to post again. I am obviously completely wrong.

**spudchucka** · 10th May 2005, 06:26

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

If it's dangerous, why is that charge not used?
The Chinese also have a very quick and efficient system of punishment applied upon conviction for many offences. (Used to be a bullet, now it's lethal injection). No messy appeal process and there's no comeback from the offender if they were innocent either.
would you like this in NZ?

In many cases they do lay a dangerous charge, in others its just a TON for exceeding 100 or 50 dependant on the circumstances. The 28 day licence suspension is the Govt's way of saying "you are a dangerous prick and the public don't want you sharing the road with them".

The Chinese would send the offender's family a bill for the bullet too!

**spudchucka** · 10th May 2005, 06:30

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

You have missed the point. The Police have had powers to deal with all these issues prior. If the speed is dangerous or he's a repeat drink/driver, arrest the him. If the car is unsafe, write it off the road etc.
These people are being punished without charges being proved.

How would arresting someone for dangerous speed prevent them from going out and doing it again? They get released on bail, they possess a drivers licence and a vehicle until the matter is dealt with at Court, (probably 12 months down the track). A 28 day suspension is a proactive measure to keep dangerous drivers off the road.

**spudchucka** · 10th May 2005, 06:44

Originally Posted by drummer

What? hang on... you just said that you don't always slow down for roadworks... so an offence happens. Are you saying therefore that descretion doesn't exist..? Are you saying that YOU would be fined everytime in that situation if caught?

You really just read whatever you want into a post it seems. Discretion exists and is used quite liberally in my experience. If I'm caught speeding in any circumstances then it is up to the cop whether or not he or she will write me a ticket.

**spudchucka** · 10th May 2005, 06:45

Originally Posted by drummer

what is YOUR criteria for deciding descretion... do you have hard and fast rules... are you likely to act different if you have just had a hard time with the missus?

Search the forum. I've explained this many times before and I can't be fucked doing it again for your benefit.

**spudchucka** · 10th May 2005, 06:52

Originally Posted by saiko

Fair enough, but I often wonder when I read stuff like this, is it possible to be > 100%?

I mean I can understand when prices go up 110%, but how can a fixed quantity be greater than 100%. "No you can't have 110% of that cake - there will be none left for your brother"!

My failure rate in dating is 100%. It would be a pretty sad outlook if it got to 110%. I probably wouldn't even talk to myself any more....

Basically no ticket gets written unless there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the offence has happened and I have apprehended the actual offender for that offence. If I have any doubt at all then I won't write that person a ticket and very likely won't even stop them.

**scumdog** · 10th May 2005, 09:27

Originally Posted by spudchucka

Basically no ticket gets written unless there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the offence has happened and I have apprehended the actual offender for that offence. If I have any doubt at all then I won't write that person a ticket and very likely won't even stop them.

My attitude excactly, I have no doubt, no 'maybe' or 'looks like him' when the ticket book comes out.
I have at times stopped cars I 'know' and have had reports from locals about the way it is being driven and have a 'friendly' word to them, often works and if they carry on like dicks? well they can't say they weren't warned.

**Lou Girardin** · 10th May 2005, 11:08

Originally Posted by spudchucka

In many cases they do lay a dangerous charge, in others its just a TON for exceeding 100 or 50 dependant on the circumstances. The 28 day licence suspension is the Govt's way of saying "you are a dangerous prick and the public don't want you sharing the road with them".

The Chinese would send the offender's family a bill for the bullet too!

Geez Spud, IF IT"S DANGEROUS, THEN BLOODY CHARGE THEM WITH IT. It's pointless to keep referring to a non-existant danger. The reality is that it's behaviour modification through fear. Except that it's not working, not in terms of fewer road deaths nor from the way it encourages people to run.

But not for the lethal injection apparently. That's on them.

**scumdog** · 10th May 2005, 11:22

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Geez Spud, IF IT"S DANGEROUS, THEN BLOODY CHARGE THEM WITH IT. It's pointless to keep referring to a non-existant danger. The reality is that it's behaviour modification through fear. Except that it's not working, not in terms of fewer road deaths nor from the way it encourages people to run.

But not for the lethal injection apparently. That's on them.

O.K., now we're talking!! New Idea: a reward for those speeding etc so as to discourage them from doing runners and make them stop sooner and to recuce road deaths. "O.K. sir, thank you for stopping so promptly, here's your chocolate fish, best you eat it now before I throw your sorry arse in the slammer and some other low-life steals it from you" .
It's called behaviour modification through reward.

I say dispense with all speeding tickets or any other offence where no particular person was in danger!!

When everybody asks about it say (Bart Simpson voice) 'Don't have a cow man, Lou said it's O.K."

My counter troll troll.

**Ixion** · 10th May 2005, 12:29

Would you not agree though that it is , at best, odd that if charged with dangerous driving but NOT exceeding the speed limit (is this possible ? or is dangerous driving only for speeding. Seems damn silly if it is ) , I do not suffer instant licence loss, impoundment. Even though by definition my driving is claimed to be dangerous .But if charged with exceeding the speed limit, but NOT arrested for dangerous driving, I do have my licence and bike pulled. Because I'm dangerous. Even though I haven't been charged with that.

So if I'm charged with dangerous driving, my driving isn't considered dangerous enough to put me off the road. But if I'm NOT charged with dangerous driving, my driving is considered dangerous enough to put me off the road.

Someone explain the logic of that to me.

**idb** · 10th May 2005, 12:31

Originally Posted by Ixion

...the ...ownership of ...property ...should only be ...by the Crown ...I ...think ...

Aha, so your real agenda reveals itself.
You're a commy!!!!

**Ixion** · 10th May 2005, 12:51

Originally Posted by idb

Aha, so your real agenda reveals itself.
You're a commy!!!!

Yes, I am actually

**Lou Girardin** · 10th May 2005, 15:12

Originally Posted by scumdog

O.K., now we're talking!! New Idea: a reward for those speeding etc so as to discourage them from doing runners and make them stop sooner and to recuce road deaths. "O.K. sir, thank you for stopping so promptly, here's your chocolate fish, best you eat it now before I throw your sorry arse in the slammer and some other low-life steals it from you" .
It's called behaviour modification through reward.

I say dispense with all speeding tickets or any other offence where no particular person was in danger!!

When everybody asks about it say (Bart Simpson voice) 'Don't have a cow man, Lou said it's O.K."

My counter troll troll.

You got it, a discount for stopping. Make this man Commissioner.
(He'd have to do well, look at what he'd replace)

**Lou Girardin** · 10th May 2005, 15:16

Originally Posted by Ixion

Would you not agree though that it is , at best, odd that if charged with dangerous driving but NOT exceeding the speed limit (is this possible ? or is dangerous driving only for speeding. Seems damn silly if it is ) , I do not suffer instant licence loss, impoundment. Even though by definition my driving is claimed to be dangerous .But if charged with exceeding the speed limit, but NOT arrested for dangerous driving, I do have my licence and bike pulled. Because I'm dangerous. Even though I haven't been charged with that.

So if I'm charged with dangerous driving, my driving isn't considered dangerous enough to put me off the road. But if I'm NOT charged with dangerous driving, my driving is considered dangerous enough to put me off the road.

Someone explain the logic of that to me.

That's kind of right, I'm just not sure if the cops arrest offenders for dangerous everytime or not.
And, yes you can be charged with dangerous driving and not exceed the speed limit.