BRONZ BIKEOI ! Man up or bend over and spread them

[StoneY]

I am quite keen...
how far in could i get?

It was an MP who did it and Police prosecured him Carver

Im all for the Mormon Few bro but not THIS time (one legal fund running NOW!)


However...maybe...maybe you and ya crazy mates can give a "sanctioned' demo of stunt skills somewhere sometime to thrill public, boost opinions, PR sort of shit?

HAS to be PC tho bro

Maybe?

[Ixion]

There is a problem here and I'm surprised nobody has brought it up (or at least I haven't seen anybody bringing it up).

On one hand ACC is supposed to be a "no fault finding" system (or whatever is the correct term) - basically an egalitarian system, so they don't bother calculating how much of the money payed to injured motorcycles is of their fault and how much is the car drivers' fault. However, on the other hand, when it comes to cars vs. motorcycles, they forget that it is an egalitarian system and split them apart, setting different levies for each.

If it is indeed an egalitarian system all road registered vehicles should pay the same amount. If not, they should see who causes the accidents that create the injuries they need to pay for and make that category of road users pay for them (in our case most for the bike accidents are caused by car drivers).

I think this should be added (in a better form than above) to the list of arguments against the ACC levy increase to the proposed ammount. This way (as it has been said above) we concentrate only on one subject to debate.

Yes. You are quite correct.

Bikes, and only bikes, are singled out to be hit up. They could as easily single out SUVs for instance. But don't. And the real injustice is that if they put SUVs into a separate category they wouldn't pay much because in a crash an SUV driver is less likely to be hurt. Whereas when we are singled out we end up paying the cost (as far as ACC accounting goes) of both our mistakes, and the othe rpeoples.

[Hopeful Bastard]

However...maybe...maybe you and ya crazy mates can give a "sanctioned' demo of stunt skills somewhere sometime to thrill public, boost opinions, PR sort of shit?

HAS to be PC tho bro

Maybe?

Hehe.. I could be in for watching this

[dipshit]

However...maybe...maybe you and ya crazy mates can give a "sanctioned' demo of stunt skills somewhere sometime to thrill public, boost opinions, PR sort of shit?

Great, then the public will think we are a bunch of immature fuckwits.

Are all motorcyclists as thick as pig shit..???

[scissorhands]

Obviously some speeches for the media, and maybe a chance to address either an ACC droid or a pollie.[/QUOTE]

Lets not rile the people we will rally against, by denigrating them. Even if its true.

Just like a cop doing his job, yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir (except higher bike taxes sir)

[Genestho]

Agreed. Everyone is human and deserves respect, you get a little further if you put forward a good argument and sensibly state your case, without the BS To do otherwise is to create your own crappy PR.

People do listen.

[k2w3]

Centaurus's post about ACC either being an egalitarian system or not is very interesting. However I think the egalitarian nature of the ACC system was lost many years ago. It might have been the holy grail of ideas at its inception, but look at employment ACC levies. The riskier your job, the higher the ACC levy.

My office occupation attracts quite a high levy (God only knows why - paper cuts?), but it's less than, say, a tree-feller.

So I'd go the whole hog. If it's user pays, make it user pays. Insurance actuaries have no problem assigning risk/cost.

[Katman]

Fucks sake John - you're not doing us any favours.

I'm sure ACC would have a field day with that video of one of the regional protest ride organisers.

Grow up man.