Judge shocked at biker's bridge stunt - The Mormon's Bridge Video

[LBD]

So where & when do we get tough ???
As a society we gear everything to the lowest common denominator , we remove any discretion on the part of plod & the courts , hence !!!!!.

That is the million dollar question without any doubt…and the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior will always be a fuzzy and contentious one as I think this thread is a testament to.

A guide line I like to use is “intent and impact”
Example 1; Where a person commits an act with the intention of causing disadvantage, physical harm, theft etc, to another by breaking laws then they are guilty whether they were successful in their attempt or not. I doubt any one could argue that.
Example 2; Where a person knowingly and intentionally breaks laws that have the potential to cause harm, ie drink driver, speeding etc, then they are guilty. (Some argue that riding over bridge arches fall into this category)
Example 3;Where a person causes harm or disadvantage (Impact) to another by an accidental act (not intentional) then there is liability and dependent on severity, a possible case for negligence.

Where a person rides over a bridge arch for the challenge, adventure and bragging rights, and …
1) Does not intend to cause disadvantage to others
2) Does not risk his or others well being any more than normal adventurous activities.
3) Has not caused harm or adversely affected others.
…then in my books there is nothing to answer to.

A question … NZ, the great place that it is in so many ways, is officially the world’s least corrupt country, that is quite some achievement. But ask your self why this is and is it really a good thing?
I would suggest that NZ has become so stifled with petty mindedness, the making and enforcing of laws to suit the lowest common factor, that we are fast losing any individual freedom to enjoy life and liberty.

[Quasievil]

I had a wicked Spagetti tonight at Metropolis, awesome recommend it

[carver]

So do i deserve to lose my license for it?

and what do they gain by doing so?

[dipshit]

what do they gain by doing so?

First page... "However, the court had to emphasise the danger and enforce a penalty that would deter anyone else from "pranks of this nature".

[MaxB]

So do i deserve to lose my license for it?

and what do they gain by doing so?

Just my opinion. I saw your vid and thought if you had done that on a Sunday at dawn with just your buddies around you might have gotten away with it.

To answer the questions, you might deserve points and a decent fine IMHO but I'm not a judge. If the law comes down on you hard it would be to make an example to other riders not to try similar shit.

By all accounts you have got yourself a good lawyer so good luck with the case.

[oldrider]

So do i deserve to lose my license for it?

and what do they gain by doing so?

Thousands of perfectly well behaved kids are going to be prevented from even going for their licenses because of petty incompetence!

Instead of dealing to the "offenders" they punish "everybody" because that's the way they were treated by their state school teachers!

Even the innocents who have yet to be even given the chance to be tested are punished by raising the driving age beyond their reach!

What did they do wrong?

Driving has nothing to do with age!

Driving is about competence, confidence, attitude, behaviour and consequence!

Either they can or they can't and they should be judged according to whether they do or do not!

To judge an individual by their age alone is criminal act in it's self, IMHO!

Raising the driving age to punish people who did not conform is ridiculous, because the "offenders will still be driving"!

The only ones being punished are those would be new drivers who are now going to be punished instead!

Please teacher don't punish my little darling, just punish the child next to him, that will be enough to keep him in order!

What a crock of incompetent shit, no wonder our young people appear to be getting confused!

Carver's case is the same, he didn't harm or inconvenience anybody and he didn't damage any property, he simply aroused people who don't have the skill, the balls or the inclination to do what he did!

If they don't want anyone else to do it, simply fence it off and post a sign!

That will do it and it will also give the police something "substantial" to act on, next time!

Punish the offenders, NOT the innocent!

[Big Dave]

>>and the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior will always be a fuzzy and contentious one,<

I have Zero difficulty identifying the line, where it runs or keeping on the trouble free side of it.

(or when I do cross it - due diligence making sure I don't get caught!)

[Big Dave]

So do i deserve to lose my license for it?

No. It wasn't a traffic offence - It was a crime against Darwin.

and what do they gain by doing so?

Disincentive to others. So bend over and spread 'em.

[Big Dave]

[LBD]

>>and the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior will always be a fuzzy and contentious one,<

I have Zero difficulty identifying the line, where it runs or keeping on the trouble free side of it.

(or when I do cross it - due diligence making sure I don't get caught!)

I have no problem identifying my line either, but invairable your line and my line will not perfectly superimpose on one another. Then add the lines of everyone on this thread/website/country and the lines will become very fuzzy and contentious ....

[Big Dave]

Then add the lines of everyone on this thread/website/country and the lines will become very fuzzy and contentious ....

Pretty sure that will be the mind set of Carver's Judge.

[carver]

First page... "However, the court had to emphasise the danger and enforce a penalty that would deter anyone else from "pranks of this nature".

If they don't want anyone else to do it, simply fence it off and post a sign!

That will do it and it will also give the police something "substantial" to act on, next time!

Punish the offenders, NOT the innocent!

Old rider, my thoughts exactly...that is a deterrant

[pritch]

Carver

I've followed this thread, not so much with interest, as some dread fascination.

I'm going to take the charitable view. The skills and attributes that enabled you to conceive of, and successfully perform, this stunt are to be admired and, appropriately channelled, could lead to success in some more socially acceptable pursuit.

You need a good lawyer, and a different judge, and I wish you luck with that.

Should you manage to survive your current lust for thrills and self publicity you will one day doubtless look back on all this and laugh. Regardless of whatever happens in court, after all they don't hang people any more.

If at all contemplative in nature you may even be moved to say the words so many of us have uttered when contemplating the deeds of our youth,
“Fuck I was an idiot!”

[Oscar]

If they don't want anyone else to do it, simply fence it off and post a sign!

That will do it and it will also give the police something "substantial" to act on, next time!

Punish the offenders, NOT the innocent!

The is the dumbest thing in an already dumb thread.
"I did it 'cause there was no sign to stop me"



Whay happened to personal responsibility and a moral code?

[merv]

The is the dumbest thing in an already dumb thread.
"I did it 'cause there was no sign to stop me"



Whay happened to personal responsibility and a moral code?

Isn't that exactly how most riders take things as they find them - no sign means its OK - now don't tell me Oscar that you haven't done that at least once in your life as an off road rider in particular?

Now where was that question I asked many posts back?