Legal advice wanted - Traffic offence

[RUSS]

Bugger, better stop doing that then....

I thought that wheelies are covered under the new 'sustained loss of traction' law?

Yeah, really takes the fun off riding doesn't it.

There is an argument that it is because there is a loss of traction on the front wheel, but that's not what the people who wrote the law had in mind when they wrote it. It's clearly aimed at doughnuts, drifting etc. Better argument would be an unnecessary exhibition of acceleration.

[Jantar]

Yeah, really takes the fun off riding doesn't it.

There is an argument that it is because there is a loss of traction on the front wheel, but that's not what the people who wrote the law had in mind when they wrote it. It's clearly aimed at doughnuts, drifting etc. Better argument would be an unnecessary exhibition of acceleration.

So if I lift the front wheel at 100kmh, and remain at that speed, where is there any exhibiton of accelleration?

[Clockwork]

TBH I doubt wheelies were what they had in mind when the framed the careless use charge too but that's the problem with its use from my POV here.

Look, I agree some actions are dangerous, some are reckless. I believe charges exist for such activities and I have no particular issue with the courts being used to determine if the actions justify these charges but to call an action careless when it isn't just because some individuals in authority need a catch-all with which to punish activities that have not otherwise been legislated against is an abuse of that authority IMO. I was simply pointing out that such an abuse seems to have lead to an inconsistence in its use and consequences. Not a good look for the Judicial system as a whole really.

Until the recent law change, the authorities were reluctant to charge driving cell-phone users with careless use unless there had been some demonstrable consequence for doing so. The result was that laws were written to prohibit the activity. Yet such law still don't exist prohibiting wheelies.

Wheelie through a built up area or while splitting through traffic, sure charge them with dangerous or reckless. But up a Motorway on-ramp??


.

[RUSS]

TBH I doubt wheelies were what they had in mind when the framed the careless use charge too but that's the problem with its use from my POV here.

Look, I agree some actions are dangerous, some are reckless. I believe charges exist for such activities and I have no particular issue with the courts being used to determine if the actions justify these charges but to call an action careless when it isn't just because some individuals in authority need a catch-all with which to punish activities that have not otherwise been legislated against is an abuse of that authority IMO. I was simply pointing out that such an abuse seems to have lead to an inconsistence in its use and consequences. Not a good look for the Judicial system as a whole really.

Until the recent law change, the authorities were reluctant to charge driving cell-phone users with careless use unless there had been some demonstrable consequence for doing so. The result was that laws were written to prohibit the activity. Yet such law still don't exist prohibiting wheelies.

Wheelie through a built up area or while splitting through traffic, sure charge them with dangerous or reckless. But up a Motorway on-ramp??


.

Well opinions are like arse holes. Everyone's got one. In saying that, here's mine (opinion not arse). Being a "catch all" would be exactly what they had in mind when they wrote the legislation. They are all over the law and mean they don't have to come up with a new specific law each week. Sometimes it's a future proofing thing, like the definition of document was changed a couple years back to include electronic records. Back in the day they would never have been able to see text messages etc coming.

And no, speaking for myself as a police constable working on Aucklands Motorways with twenty years road riding experience five of which are as a police motorcyclist, it was discretion that stopped me charging people for careless for using a cell phone. I personally would not send a guy to court for using a cell phone. It's out of proportion to the offending and it costs the taxpayer valuable police and court time. An $80 fine is about right.

But I did not personally witness the wheelie so can't say if I would have done anything about it. I can say I have stopped and spoken to a guy who pulled a short low wheelie, but didn't feel it was worthy of any sort of charge.

As a general rule for riding, just to be safe, if you wouldn't want the police to see you do it - don't do it. If you couldn't care-less if one does then be prepared to go to court.

[BoristheBiter]

Well opinions are like arse holes. Everyone's got one. In saying that, here's mine (opinion not arse). Being a "catch all" would be exactly what they had in mind when they wrote the legislation. They are all over the law and mean they don't have to come up with a new specific law each week. Sometimes it's a future proofing thing, like the definition of document was changed a couple years back to include electronic records. Back in the day they would never have been able to see text messages etc coming.

And no, speaking for myself as a police constable working on Aucklands Motorways with twenty years road riding experience five of which are as a police motorcyclist, it was discretion that stopped me charging people for careless for using a cell phone. I personally would not send a guy to court for using a cell phone. It's out of proportion to the offending and it costs the taxpayer valuable police and court time. An $80 fine is about right.

But I did not personally witness the wheelie so can't say if I would have done anything about it. I can say I have stopped and spoken to a guy who pulled a short low wheelie, but didn't feel it was worthy of any sort of charge.

As a general rule for riding, just to be safe, if you wouldn't want the police to see you do it - don't do it. If you couldn't care-less if one does then be prepared to go to court.

Common sense what are you thinking?

[Gremlin]

Common sense what are you thinking?

He only has 61 posts, leave the poor man alone and give him some time to sink to the level of those around here... or go mad at the stupidity and still sink to our level

[wysper]

He only has 61 posts, leave the poor man alone and give him some time to sink to the level of those around here... or go mad at the stupidity and still sink to our level

Wise words Master Gremlin.

[rastuscat]

Careless driving. Were the actions of the driver those of a careful and prudent driver, judged objectively?

Dangerous driving is careless driving (see above) that poses a danger to a person or persons.

Reckless driving is driving which is dangerous (see above) where it can be proved that it was done with intent, or with reckless disregard for the consequences.

Escalating scale, careless is first, then dangerous, then reckless.

Sorry to be so damn factual.

Cinnamon donuts are still the best.

[FJRider]

So if I lift the front wheel at 100kmh, and remain at that speed, where is there any exhibiton of accelleration?

It's a suzuki ... from 100 km/hr .... any increase from there would be unlikely ...

[Drew]

So if I lift the front wheel at 100kmh, and remain at that speed, where is there any exhibiton of accelleration?

Did you step off and literally pick up the front wheel whilst running beside the bike? Because it requiers the rear wheel accelerating faster than the bike to lift the front wheel.

It's a suzuki ... from 100 km/hr .... any increase from there would be unlikely ...

I can prove otherwise!

[DEATH_INC.]

Wheelie's aren't really dangerous or careless all the time. Myself along with plenty of others are quite capable of tootling along in the motorway traffic on the rear wheel, quite safely, even safer than a lot of the idiots on four wheels. I even know a couple of guys that are pretty damn safe wheelying at 50k in the traffic, yet it is still seemingly an offence.
No point arguing about it, we've all tried, and lost.

[FJRider]

Did you step off and literally pick up the front wheel whilst running beside the bike? Because it requiers the rear wheel accelerating faster than the bike to lift the front wheel.

I can prove otherwise!

You haven't seen the bumps in his driveway. (I have)

Pic's or it didn't happen ...

[FJRider]

Wheelie's aren't really dangerous or careless all the time. Myself along with plenty of others are quite capable of tootling along in the motorway traffic on the rear wheel, quite safely, even safer than a lot of the idiots on four wheels. I even know a couple of guys that are pretty damn safe wheelying at 50k in the traffic, yet it is still seemingly an offence.
No point arguing about it, we've all tried, and lost.

The same could be said about marajuana ... the goverment is going to great lengths (and expense) to eradicate it ... and all these people (experts on the subject ... all of them) say it's safe.

They've tried arguing about it too ... and lost. But they think there's a point to continue trying ...

[Jantar]

You haven't seen the bumps in his driveway. (I have)

Is that why I sometimes have both wheels off the ground even when not accellerating?

[DEATH_INC.]

The same could be said about marajuana ... the goverment is going to great lengths (and expense) to eradicate it ... and all these people (experts on the subject ... all of them) say it's safe.

Soooo, riding through heavy traffic sitting on the bars facing the wrong way while rolling a joint is even more Illegal? You can't do anything fun in this damn country....