Fast and Safe

[Hitcher]

Amen to that HItcher, it saddens me riding up and down the country, seeing big arse sighs saying, "such and such straightening (sp)", they best keep away from the coromandel.
Kaitoke hill looks like it'll be a bloody bore to ride over, next thing ys know they'll put a dead staright tunnel under the rima's, Nooooooooooooooo

"Nooooooooooooooo" indeed! Save the Kaitokes!

There's a corner that was allegedly been "straightened" a couple of years ago at the top of the hill just south of Turakina at a cost of a squillion or so dollars. But there is still a corner there and it's no different to the one it replaced. And then there's the "passing lane" just north of Bulls, also on SH3.

And then again, it has taken the "planners" 40-odd years to figure out that a level crossing at McKays isn't that clever. But instead of building a culvert, they're moving half of the Wellington region to build it.

Go figure...

[scumdog]

What a pleasure to talk to a policeman - the usual gross dose of abuse followed by misrepresentation.

My reference was to driving on country roads. I have no problem with keeping lunatics off the roads. It is one of the most essential safety measures. It has almost NOTHING to do with speed limits for sane and competent drivers.

I have not abused you let alone grossly abused you, I've merely , I've just questioned your logic.

So now it's O.K. to speed on COUNTRY roads but not built up areas? pray tell me why you make the distinction.

I get to pick up the pieces, what do you get to do? :spudwhat:

Glad to make it a "pleasure" anyway.

[marty]

Well, I can only assume he is talking about section 113(2)(a) of the Land Transport Act 1998.



The penalty for which is found in section 52 of the same Act.



Doesn't say anything about a power to arrest as far as I can tell.

my point exactly

[spudchucka]

So society should stoop to their level. That will make us..............?

Society should do everything in its power to stop the harmful activities of this minority group, (the criminal fraternity), that has no regard for any laws or socially accepted norms.

Civil libertarians who don't like it should try getting burgled, assaulted, robbed, raped, maimed by a drunk driver or otherwise victimised at least a couple of times and then see if they feel the same.

[spudchucka]

Was just wondering about this cause in the states the police can pull you over and give you a ticket for driving to slow. Not sure if its the same here, maybe spudchuka or one of the other resident police officers could answere this for me. If they can then the maximum limit is a target or atleast the general area within a certain number of kph would be the target.

There isn't a minimum speed limit that drivers must maintain. However drivers who drive very slowly and hinder other traffic without making any attempt to allow people to pass can be charged with inconsiderate driving. This comes under the same section as Careless Driving and carries the same penalty.

[spudchucka]

my point exactly

I knew it would be. Clearly shows he isn't the expert he'd like people to think he is.

[bluninja]

Society should do everything in its power to stop the harmful activities of this minority group, (the criminal fraternity), that has no regard for any laws or socially accepted norms.

Civil libertarians who don't like it should try getting burgled, assaulted, robbed, raped, maimed by a drunk driver or otherwise victimised at least a couple of times and then see if they feel the same.

Her's your quote amended......

The USA should do everything in its power to stop the harmful activities of this minority group, (the terrorist fraternity), that has no regard for any laws or socially accepted norms.

Your justification appears pretty similar to America's 'war on terror', and, IMHO your approach creates a police force that 'catches more criminals than it employs'.

You ever read 200AD? 'The crime is life...the sentence is death'...after all it's only the living that commit crimes, and everyone will commit crime at some time, so why not top the lot and hey presto! no crime.



(PT) Just in case you tedious ill informed lot didn't work that one out

[spudchucka]

Her's your quote amended......

The USA should do everything in its power to stop the harmful activities of this minority group, (the terrorist fraternity), that has no regard for any laws or socially accepted norms.

Your justification appears pretty similar to America's 'war on terror', and, IMHO your approach creates a police force that 'catches more criminals than it employs'.

You ever read 200AD? 'The crime is life...the sentence is death'...after all it's only the living that commit crimes, and everyone will commit crime at some time, so why not top the lot and hey presto! no crime.



(PT) Just in case you tedious ill informed lot didn't work that one out

In the context of the posts prior to mine that you have so innapropriately amended, I have no idea where you are coming from.

No body has suggested topping anybody, maybe you've been spending too long in the legalise herb thread?? :spudwhat:

No those terrible revenue gathering Police were using the law and entirely legal means to attempt to catch a burglar.

He's completely incorrect, Obstruction is almost entirely a matter dealt with by arrest. Really Allan don't you even bother to research at all before jumping to conclusions and slandering Police all based on what you read in a Sunday Tabloid?

An 'alleged' burglar, if I'm not mistaken.
It also seems the the guiding principle here is "the end justifies the means" (terrorising a Mother into confession), not terribly encouraging for notions of civil rights really.
But then the war cry of fascists everywhere is "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" isn't it?

Even the ones caught red handed are "alleged" burglars and none of them give a stuff about the civil rights or the property rights of the poor shmucks they steal from.

So society should stoop to their level. That will make us..............?

Society should do everything in its power to stop the harmful activities of this minority group, (the criminal fraternity), that has no regard for any laws or socially accepted norms.

Civil libertarians who don't like it should try getting burgled, assaulted, robbed, raped, maimed by a drunk driver or otherwise victimised at least a couple of times and then see if they feel the same.

[bluninja]

In the context of the posts prior to mine that you have so innapropriately amended, I have no idea where you are coming from.

No body has suggested topping anybody, maybe you've been spending too long in the legalise herb thread?? :spudwhat:

You may consider it innapropriate, but I see a definite parallel. One state saying that anything goes to protect it's people; and the other saying that anything the criminal does can be done to catch them. Or have I misunderstood that? BTW notice I did leave your quote intact and put my version underneath.

As for the other stuff......it's just a small leap of stupidity to suggest that living people commit crime, so if we remove them then the crime stops...that was a premise for a fictional character called Judge Death in the 200AD comic.

Oh and it was all a Piss Take. Guess someone must have thrown a spud back and hit you on the head

[spudchucka]

You may consider it innapropriate, but I see a definite parallel. One state saying that anything goes to protect it's people; and the other saying that anything the criminal does can be done to catch them. Or have I misunderstood that? BTW notice I did leave your quote intact and put my version underneath.

As for the other stuff......it's just a small leap of stupidity to suggest that living people commit crime, so if we remove them then the crime stops...that was a premise for a fictional character called Judge Death in the 200AD comic.

Oh and it was all a Piss Take. Guess someone must have thrown a spud back and hit you on the head

I've been hit on the head plenty of times but not by a spud.

I had a feeling you piss taking and thats why I made the comment about spending too much time in the herb thread.

As for your analogy with the USA and the war on terror, I can't see how invading another country and justifying it with dodgy intel can be compared to cops doing all they legally can to bring a criminal before the courts.

And I've never seen a Judge Dred comic book to have any idea of what that other stuff could have been about.

[bluninja]

I had a feeling you piss taking and thats why I made the comment about spending too much time in the herb thread.

Duh!. I guess putting

(PT) Just in case you tedious ill informed lot didn't work that one out

at the bottom was a bit too obvious

As for the USA analogy. I guess I was thinking more about ignoring (or bypassing) the Geneva convention with the prisoners held at Guantanemo Bay.

[Clockwork]

Sorry Spud, I got lost in the interchange between you and Marty can you please restate your/his point? :confused2

"(a)Direct a person on a road (whether or not in charge of a vehicle) to give the person's name and address and date of birth, or such of those particulars as the enforcement officer may specify, and give any other particulars required as to the person's identity, and (unless the person is for the time being detained or under arrest under any enactment) give such information as is within the person's knowledge and as may lead to the identification of the driver or person in charge of a vehicle: "

The way I read the above legistlation you've posted it seems to me that she couldn't be asked any such questions if she was under arrest. Or am I missing something else? :spudwhat:

[Clockwork]

I also consider myself to be something of a civil libertarian. To be honest I don't give too much consideration to the right of criminals (just the basics you understand ) but I'm very strong on the idea of innocent until proven guilty and I'm not sure I approve of an "anything goes" approach to getting a conviction.

At extremes of this debate I could live in fear of criminals or I could live in fear of the Police. I'd like to sit somewhere in the middle. Which is why I think its important that the Police don't have a completey free hand.

[scumdog]

. Which is why I think its important that the Police don't have a completey free hand.

But criminals do??? - and they seem to a lot of the time, and when things DO go wrong for them it is still the tax-payer who forks out the money to make sure they get a "fair trial" and "reasonable living" when sent to prison.
And when was the last time any honest-joe got a $40,000 debt wiped in exchange for a couple of hundred hours 'community work'? Lucky old criminals!

Best the criminals live in fear though eh?

[Holy Roller]

And I've never seen a Judge Dred comic book.

Mate you have just not lived