There is no pleasing some people

**sil3nt** · 30th May 2011, 12:17

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/5071...iles-residents

Bet they bitched about boy racers so the council does something to help and now they bitch about that.

Pretty sure if you don't wear hoodies, baseball caps and have the seat reclined back as far as possible when driving your going to be safe.

**scumdog** · 30th May 2011, 12:22

Ah yes, the "You take away the signs - you take away the law" logic.

Tragic.

**rustyrobot** · 30th May 2011, 12:27

Originally Posted by scumdog

Ah yes, the "You take away the signs - you take away the law" logic.

Is that the same as the "You take away the patches - you take away the gangs" logic?

**scumdog** · 30th May 2011, 12:29

Originally Posted by rustyrobot

Is that the same as the "You take away the patches - you take away the gangs" logic?

Almost - but worse.

**unstuck** · 30th May 2011, 12:30

But im guessing these people would not of liked that either.Some people just have to have something to moan about.

**avgas** · 30th May 2011, 12:36

ban roads.
evil fucking things.
kill more people a year than smoking.

**rustyrobot** · 30th May 2011, 12:38

I reckon it's just the perceived lack of consultation that's got their adult-diapers in a twist. New Zealanders in general don't seem particularly keen on change, so you've got to take it slowly, give lots of notice and let them have a say. In two months time, try and take those signs down and they'll be chaining themselves to the posts singing "we shall overcome".

I think it's symptomatic of a general feeling that we no longer have any control over our local environs. In a large part it seems pretty much true too. (bah mumble grumble wellywood).

**unstuck** · 30th May 2011, 12:39

Originally Posted by rustyrobot

I reckon it's just the perceived lack of consultation that's got their adult-diapers in a twist. New Zealanders in general don't seem particularly keen on change, so you've got to take it slowly, give lots of notice and let them have a say. In two months time, try and take those signs down and they'll be chaining themselves to the posts singing "we shall overcome".

I think it's symptomatic of a general feeling that we no longer have any control over our local environs. In a large part it seems pretty much true too. (bah mumble grumble wellywood).

You could well be right there.

**Laava** · 30th May 2011, 12:40

Originally Posted by unstuck

But im guessing these people would not of liked that either.Some people just have to have something to moan about.

True. I am just sick to the back teeth with moaning!

**schrodingers cat** · 30th May 2011, 13:05

This is a typical non story.

Egmont Rd resident David Sampson said residents understood they were exempt from the ban but it had taken a call to the council to confirm it and they feared that exemption could disappear depending on who policed the bylaw.

So residents knew the story. Rang council to confirm it that was the case. Were reassured it was .

Continued to moan anyway until they get a reporter to fill his local rag with something to stop the advertising banging into itself.
Ewwwwwww, says the editor - Boy racer stories are sexy. No time to read it, just print. Tomorrow it will be chip paper anyway.

Except fuckwit Campbell or Walrus will pick it up and it will be whah whah whah

There is no story here. Move along

**slofox** · 30th May 2011, 13:23

As I read that story, the police are going to have to decide who is and who is not infringing the law - in other words they are expected to interpret the law.

Bad move in my opinion. Police are there to administer, not interpret the law. Interpretation is the job of the judiciary.

The way it stands, IF the story is accurate, there is room for abuse.

**far queue** · 30th May 2011, 14:26

Originally Posted by slofox

As I read that story, the police are going to have to decide who is and who is not infringing the law - in other words they are expected to interpret the law.

Bad move in my opinion. Police are there to administer, not interpret the law. Interpretation is the job of the judiciary...

So you would rather the cops didn't make make interpretations/judgement calls but instead just charged people for everything possible and let you fight everything out in court? You prefer not to be given a warning sometimes?

As the thread is titled "There is no pleasing some people"

**oneofsix** · 30th May 2011, 14:59

Originally Posted by schrodingers cat

This is a typical non story.

Egmont Rd resident David Sampson said residents understood they were exempt from the ban but it had taken a call to the council to confirm it and they feared that exemption could disappear depending on who policed the bylaw.

So residents knew the story. Rang council to confirm it that was the case. Were reassured it was .

Continued to moan anyway until they get a reporter to fill his local rag with something to stop the advertising banging into itself.
Ewwwwwww, says the editor - Boy racer stories are sexy. No time to read it, just print. Tomorrow it will be chip paper anyway.

Except fuckwit Campbell or Walrus will pick it up and it will be whah whah whah

There is no story here. Move along

No

the residence didn't know the story, had to ring the council to find out the story and were pissed off because they weren't told what was happening if they had been they could have suggested the signs be moved a meer 400m to avoid any issues. Even though the residence are 'exempt' (yeah how does that work when the cop has pulled you over already?) they are also worried about their visitors being pinged. You do understand that some people do get visitors and have people that actually like them and that they don't all drive SUVs? Do you want them to wait until the cops ping a visitor and then they moan?

**scumdog** · 30th May 2011, 15:08

Originally Posted by oneofsix

No

the residence didn't know the story, had to ring the council to find out the story and were pissed off because they weren't told what was happening if they had been they could have suggested the signs be moved a meer 400m to avoid any issues. Even though the residence are 'exempt' (yeah how does that work when the cop has pulled you over already?) they are also worried about their visitors being pinged. You do understand that some people do get visitors and have people that actually like them and that they don't all drive SUVs? Do you want them to wait until the cops ping a visitor and then they moan?

You're not moaning by any chance, are you??

**slofox** · 30th May 2011, 16:19

Originally Posted by far queue

So you would rather the cops didn't make make interpretations/judgement calls but instead just charged people for everything possible and let you fight everything out in court? You prefer not to be given a warning sometimes?

As the thread is titled "There is no pleasing some people"

I just don't think they should have to interpret ambiguous legislation. The legislation should be clear in itself. Just my own opinion.