Picked on by cops

**motor_mayhem** · 2nd March 2010, 09:35

Originally Posted by Big Dave

So Dath - are you now an ardent civil libertarian or still an advocate for compulsory safety clothing?

I had the fuzz gesturing wildly at me on Saturday for that, I gather they don't approve of riding a gixxer in T-shirt, shorts and sneakers.

**CookMySock** · 2nd March 2010, 09:43

Originally Posted by hellokitty

The problem was that they felt they needed 2 cars to pull him over, and treated him like a criminal. Looking him up and down, talking crap to him. One car followed him and when he had another car to back him up they pulled him over. Excessive I think.

As you say, it is not the cops business to stop ordinary citizens acting within the law, but one day it might be your pinched bike with some unsavory-looking character on it. So where to draw the line?

Steve

**Big Dave** · 2nd March 2010, 09:52

Originally Posted by motor_mayhem

I had the fuzz gesturing wildly at me on Saturday for that, I gather they don't approve of riding a gixxer in T-shirt, shorts and sneakers.

Well, face it - who in their right mind approves of Gixxers? :-P

**Hoon** · 2nd March 2010, 11:21

Originally Posted by freedom-wedge

a quick plate check would of given the answer to the machine being stolen or not..

No as already mentioned several times this would only identify if it had already been reported, not if it is in progress or false plates etc.

Originally Posted by freedom-wedge

If that was the reason for being detained on the side of the road, we better be sure our clothes fit and we arnt wearing incorrect shoe size, let alone odd socks, come on fellas its a weak reason to stop a person going about their business.

No one said anything about being detained. I would imagine that the guy got pulled over and once he supplied his drivers license to confirm he was the registered owner (cops would have known this before pulling him over), they would've realised their mistake and sent him on his way. If the guy was detained for an unreasonable amount of time after confirming ID then yes harrassment would be valid but since this isn't mentioned in the original post I guess it didn't happen.

**Toot Toot** · 2nd March 2010, 11:35

Hey this wasnt in Hazzard County by any chance??? (Rodney District Highway Patrol) If it was, then join the club.

**BoristheBiter** · 2nd March 2010, 12:41

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

As you say, it is not the cops business to stop ordinary citizens acting within the law, but one day it might be your pinched bike with some unsavory-looking character on it. So where to draw the line?

Steve

maybe they needed to know where to get an ice cream

**BoristheBiter** · 2nd March 2010, 12:43

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

As you say, it is not the cops business to stop ordinary citizens acting within the law, but one day it might be your pinched bike with some unsavory-looking character on it. So where to draw the line?

Steve

So what are you saying you think they should or shouldn't be able to stop someone? you can't have it both ways.

**dogsnbikes** · 2nd March 2010, 12:55

If there is reasonable doult...Hey why not pull someone over and cheak it out??it sounds like thats all they were doing anyway...

We were pulled over a couple of years ago In Wanganui after picking my bike up with the trailer...It was 2am and the bike was in show room condition,and Wanga's is a dodgey place,its just them doing there Job and at the end of the day its the guilty that will do a runner

**CookMySock** · 2nd March 2010, 12:58

Originally Posted by Swoop

Good on them.
Something looked suspicious and they investigated. Just like if they see a shady character sneaking around a house at night. It might be the householder having a wizz on the lemon tree or it might be a burglar.

Yeah its fair enough, but I think the cops should do their checks politely and dispense with the full attitude check.

It also wouldn't go astray for the officer to offer an apology along the lines of "our apologies, just wanted to make sure that it wasn't someone ELSE on YOUR bike", and maybe a little thanks from the member of the public like "hey thanks for watching out for my gear", because we really DO appreciate that. The problem is the full multi-car multi-cop shakedown followed by the full attitude check, tends to swing everyones' feelings in the wrong direction.

Maybe the fuzz should review their procedure there.

Steve

**Swoop** · 2nd March 2010, 13:13

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

The problem is the full multi-car multi-cop shakedown followed by the full attitude check, tends to swing everyones' feelings in the wrong direction.

I have seen the same sort of event on the southern motorway. Multiple cop cars for one bike, but then again it was a patched gang member who they had pulled over on a harley.

Police S.O.P. in these situations...

**CookMySock** · 2nd March 2010, 13:26

Originally Posted by BoristheBiter

So what are you saying you think they should or shouldn't be able to stop someone? you can't have it both ways.

Hence the rhetorical question.

Steve

**marty** · 2nd March 2010, 14:12

If the question asked by the cops is 'wonder who that is/who's bike that is/that looks sus/that looks strange' then they should be having a chat.

It's amazing the shit you can find.

**Genie** · 2nd March 2010, 15:11

Originally Posted by hellokitty

The problem was that they felt they needed 2 cars to pull him over, and treated him like a criminal. Looking him up and down, talking crap to him. One car followed him and when he had another car to back him up they pulled him over. Excessive I think. Perhaps if it had been some kid on an expensive new bike going fast, but not a guy in his forties on a bike that is worth bugger all.

I see where you're coming from but...the cops have to protect themselves. Just the other day some fella up norf was on a pushbike with no helmet, when the police went to question him, he did a fast get away. they caught up with him and discovered he was carrying a loaded gun! Not saying your husband would ever do this just that the job of the police is becoming more dangerous with every day. Better to be safe than sorry.

**Littleman** · 2nd March 2010, 17:16

Originally Posted by p.dath

Ever heard of the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty? A founding principle of our justice system? How was this gentleman given this right? He was assumed guilty until they could establish he was innocent.

The big picture - civil liberties. I want mine. You can surrender yours if you want.

Try blipping your throttle?

Yeah I didn't think so.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing p.dath.