C***T! Watch out for cops around Wellesley & Princes St @ Auck Uni

[Squiggles]

:P, you should look left anyway. What if theres a car there reversing out of a parking space, or a pedestrian, or etc.

No shit sherlock... Stop, look both ways, you'd see the cop but he wouldnt be ticketing you. Suspect the OP did the slow to near stop, look right and go... Didnt see the cop & didnt stop.

Unless you get nailed by a car reversing at speed, then the only danger to look for to the left at this intersection would be a cop car.

Funny that the pic is of a U turn accident, plenty of morons doing that just after they turn left onto princes

[vifferman]

Yeah you stop for 3 seconds and than get hit up the bum by the car behind who than yells at you how come you did not move as there was no cars coming

That happened to me a few years ago - twice in the car, once on the bike. On each occasion, the person behind me must've assumed I was going to just roll through, not come to a complete stop. When it happened on the bike, I parked it, and got off to see if there was any damage. The eejit behind me also got out of their car, but I couldn't be farkt talking to them, so as there was no damage, I just took off and left them standing in the middle of the road.

[BevanPT]

Here's the relevant section from Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004:

Regulation by clause
Contents › Part 4 Stopping and giving way
4.1 Giving way where vehicles are controlled by stop sign or give-way sign
(1) A driver approaching or entering an intersection on a roadway where the vehicles that are moving in the direction in which that driver is travelling are controlled by a stop sign at or near the intersection must—

(a) stop his or her vehicle before entering the path of any possible vehicle flow at such a position as to be able to ascertain whether the way is clear for the driver to proceed; and

(b) give way to any vehicles approaching or crossing the intersection from a roadway not controlled by a stop sign.

Definitely no 3 second rule there.

Contest that bullshit!!

[bogan]

yea it has to be 3 seconds cuz I asked the cop...and complete stop

I have been through this place almost every week for the last 4 years.... kind of got used to it and never realised it has yellow lines and stop signs. habits eh...

Also the way the cop parked on the side I think she is stationed there just to catch all the ppl who didnt follow these rules. Well it's gonna be a fat year for them...

Contest that bullshit!!

But what is he getting fined for, stopping but not for 3 seconds, or not stopping at all? If its the latter theres no point contesting that shit!

[motorbyclist]

look, the cop is there purely because drivers arn't looking and are hitting pedestrians when they make their left hand turn.

yes, if pedestrians were themselves looking or using any of the pedestrian crossings this wouldn't be an issue.

yes there is a risk of hitting parking cars but i suspect that isn't their main concern here.

the fact is that if you didn't see the cop (and then stop for the stop sign) then clearly you didn't look.

if you DO see the cop, stop, then set off again and he tries to ticket you regardless for failing to stop, that is exactly what contesting tickets is for.

[firefighter]

Both feet need to touch the ground apparantly. I know someone who failed their restricted because of this ruling.

Awesome. Internet lawyers.

Apparently your wrong. You are permitted to use your rear brake, which means one foot down, and iv'e never seen any literature to support it being law to have even one down. (i'm not debating whether this is or not but two down is false and incorrect advice)

[Thani-B]

Awesome. Internet lawyers.

Apparently your wrong. You are permitted to use your rear brake, which means one foot down, and iv'e never seen any literature to support it being law to have even one down. (i'm not debating whether this is or not but two down is false and incorrect advice)

My mum knew someone who the cop tried to ticket for not stopping as he didn't put his feet down, he then proved to the cop that he could stop and be absolutely stationary for longer than 3 seconds with no feet touching the ground. He got off the ticket. And the cop was later seen trying to practise it himself.

[Berries]

So is it to be assumed that anyone who has got, or gets a ticket, has not looked properly and therefore put themselves at risk of getting hit by a vehicle coming along the road.

I think so.

Assuming the Stop sign is there for the correct reasons, ie limited visibility then you would be right. But many go up to placate residents or without checking visibilty constraints. Those constraints are measured from a drivers eye height so in a number of cases, say if the restriction is caused by bridge railings for example, a rider can see over them and not be subject to the same limitations. So on a bike you can often look properly and not put yourself at risk of getting hit by a vehicle coming along the road because a) you are higher and b) sometimes the sign does not meet the required criteria for its use.

You can't argue that wth the cop because a Stop sign means stop and you are supposed to obey the signs so you'd be lucky to get off the ticket.

I don't know this particular intersection so maybe the visibility really is poor. But someone is having a laugh with the failing to stop for three seconds and not putting both feet down bollocks. I'm surprised the cop didn't throw the book at the OP and charge him for wearing a white helmet on a Tuesday as well.

[Hanne]

White helmets on Tuedays? Wy, that's almost treason!!!

[motorbyclist]

Awesome. Internet lawyers.

Apparently your wrong. You are permitted to use your rear brake, which means one foot down

as the poster said, for your licence test, many "testing officers" will require you to use both feet. The fact that they have no clue about motorcycling is not part of that equation. I nearly failed my restricted because I gave way when I had right of way - for some reason the fact that I avoided an accident as the other driver failed to give way was beyond him.

not that what you do in your licence has any bearing on what you do in practice anyway

Assuming the Stop sign is there for the correct reasons, ie limited visibility then you would be right. But many go up to placate residents or without checking visibilty constraints

you're right - but this one went up because auckland drivers are totally fucking hopeless, and the pedestrians on that intersection are even worse. Visibility is fine, but the drivers are still hitting pedestrians

[Swoop]

Definitely no 3 second rule there.

Contest that bullshit!!

Damn' right! Stop, make sure the way is clear and then proceed.

... because auckland NEW ZEALAND drivers are totally fucking hopeless...

Fixed it for ya!

[zzzbang]

SO, how did this douche time your stop? did he stand there going 1001, 1002, 100..... bet he couldnt even count to 1003.

[scumdog]

SO, how did this douche time your stop? did he stand there going 1001, 1002, 100..... bet he couldnt even count to 1003.

I timed it - one minute forty three seconds to count to 1003..

[sAsLEX]

I believe its more of an issue with pedestrians, people dont look left just glance right and go... straight into the person crossing the road =\

On a marked pedestrian crossing?

I bet they won't be caught out again though....

lol, recidivism is zero in this country?

The law states you must stop ONLY. This means the vehicle can not move for a period. Since a period of response it typically 0.7 sec.....this means you must stop greater than atleast 0.5 second (any less and people external to you may not register that you stopped).

Does the law state you must stop long enough for geriatric police to register, or just to stop? Innocent until proven guilty......... .except on traffic convictions.

[Danae]

On a marked pedestrian crossing?

It's not exactly a zebra crossing, just a traffic island. I believe motorbyclist coming from wellesley st almost hit some numpty who wasn't looking; the car giving way to the bike beeped their horn. The pedestrian finally looked up and stopped, saving the riffer from getting a new paintjob.