Christchurch crash facts

[rastuscat]

I don't think most will have a problem with drink drive checkpoints and random stops, but dedicated targeting of a particular group based on nothing more than tax compliance is not the way to make people excited about the police.

Funny that.

The HP sgt was doing random stops. We don't, we stop folk who do stuff wrong. I guess you'll be pleased about that, love me long time, and carry donut vouchers just in case.

There are enough motorists, cages and bikers, breaking the rules, we don't normally do random stops.

[imdying]

I'm pleased about anything that maintains the integrity of the NZ Police force; without that they're fucked, and without them, we're fucked.

[Jantar]

....carry donut vouchers just in case.....

I may just happen to be in Christchurch for a couple of days next week.. So where is the best place to get these donut vouchers from?

[Ocean1]

Okay, so assuming that it was 4 riders who had no licence, no wof and no reg, it was 4/12 (33%) who were offending.

That's what makes it worth stopping motorcyclists just for a check.

Imagine the outrage.

Thats wot I wuz saying. They werent stopped for no reason. They were stopped as the odds of there being an offence was 1 in 3.

If it were possible to check licence status without stopping the rider, we'd do it. But how can we check licence status without first identifying the rider? It's a bugger for the 2 in 3 that are 100% kosher, but they should blame the 1 in 3 for their inconvenience.

How long do you think we'd keep stopping motorcyclists if every one was legal?

Unfair? Who ever said life would be fair.

At 33% non-compliance you've already lost the battle, dude.

Increased rates of compliance checks won't change that, and I rekon you'll see pretty much the same compliance rates wrt paying the fines.

Time to make life fair again, whatever the boss says; that's your job.

[scumdog]

What were they doing wrong that he had cause to stop them?

A cop needs a 'cause' to stop somebody on the road??

[scumdog]

That attitude is some of the reason why people don't help police officers who're getting assaulted. Even in biblical times tax collectors were considered lowest of the low. Consider that when you're at the next funeral for an officer where the byline reads "Nobody tried to stop the offender from stomping the skull of the officer".

Yes, I realise you'll have plenty of good reasons why you're now dropping motorcyclists into the same bucket as drink drivers. Those reasons will be cold comfort when you throw the roses onto the coffin, I'm sure.

Wah-wah-wah, groundhog day on KB...move along people, nothing to see here...

And this thread was going SO well up until now...

[rastuscat]

At 33% non-compliance you've already lost the battle, dude.

Nah. If we drop it to 25% that's a win.

Everyone we convince to comply with the basic rules is a win. If that means enforcement, so be it. If it's engagement, which is what I'm trying to do here, even better. Education is available, and has worked fro some.

Maybe you've read my posts about letting people off tickets if they play the game of legality. Surely it's not that much to ask.

[rastuscat]

Wah-wah-wah, groundhog day on KB...move along people, nothing to see here...

And this thread was going SO well up until now...

Seems you've finished your shift.

Yeah, it's gone downhill.

[dangerous]

Seems you've finished your shift.

Yeah, it's gone downhill.

ohhh you pigs hang in there... SD your a cunt, but a GOOD cunt... ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I droped the C BOMB

I may just happen to be in Christchurch for a couple of days next week.. So where is the best place to get these donut vouchers from?

call in old boy on ya way through (not in chch but out the back blocks)

A cop needs a 'cause' to stop somebody on the road??

Im a ginger... that a 'cause'

[davereid]

I don't think most will have a problem with drink drive checkpoints and random stops, but dedicated targeting of a particular group based on nothing more than tax compliance is not the way to make people excited about the police.

Every Police state has always had an overwhelming reason in "the public good" to operate checkpoints etc.

There are some who think that any checkpoint for any reason is acceptable.

There are others who think that there should always be a reason to stop / question / search / seize.


For my money, we are currently the beneficiary of a generally benign govt, that by and large acts for our best interests. But we have given them the tools of tyranny, even though they are currently being used for good purpose.

No government has ever resisted the chance to increase its power however. History is absolutely devoid of government that does not either collapse, or turn on it own citizens.

All the early warning signs are there, but we are still building our ID, data centric control based infrastructure. Its not quite ready yet.

But I bet my grandkids will just be turned into monitored, identified, tracked, traced, searched and surveillanced taxpayers and consumers.

For their own good of course.

[Ocean1]

Nah. If we drop it to 25% that's a win.

Everyone we convince to comply with the basic rules is a win. If that means enforcement, so be it. If it's engagement, which is what I'm trying to do here, even better. Education is available, and has worked fro some.

Maybe you've read my posts about letting people off tickets if they play the game of legality. Surely it's not that much to ask.

Obviously it is, otherwise that level of what I can only call civil disobedience wouln't be there, would it?

And you're missing the point. When a third of a significant part of society don't agree with a rule to the point they'll cheerfully ignore it then it's far more likely that they're right than that you are. And there's a danger in such imbecilic regulatory pedantry, once you've undermined the rule of law that far in the name of what seems to most to be only gross political expediency then how much easier is it to ignore more rules?

Tell you what, give me the education and enforcement resources you have, give me a couple of months to deploy them and then let's have a wee debate about who the rules are there for, eh?

[rustic101]

A cop needs a 'cause' to stop somebody on the road??

I could be wrong but a smart cop would use the Land Transport Act. 'Just checking your licence sir, ma'am etc...' and btw did you know your bike is not displaying a current registration label... Have a nice day.'

Could be wrong but - Land Transport Act 1998, ss.114 and 115

[dangerous]

I don't think most will have a problem with drink drive checkpoints and random stops, but dedicated targeting of a particular group based on nothing more than tax compliance is not the way to make people excited about the police.

OHHH fuck it... ya know what, "I don't think most will have a problem with boy racer checkpoints" yeah thats right, ok between me and you (and RC/SD) I dont have a problem with "dedicated targeting of a particular group based on..." what ever, but Id like to see the wimps we call inforcment stand up grow some balls and take on the boy racers... them up against bad bikers makes us (not saying im a bad biker) look like JC... yeah I know the police lack funding and man power, but fuck em if they want to target bikers cos we are 33% or some shit, PARTOOOOO E, hassle them poxy riden pimple faced cock suckers and sort out the milions of damage they do to the roads, it cant be that hard... come on NZ pigs, over a 100 boy wankers meet up McLeans Is rd last weekend, its a one way in one way out road... how hard is it to block off each end and screww there poxy faces to the wall... ohhh no easier to target a bunch a bikers...

[Drew]

Wah-wah-wah, groundhog day on KB...move along people, nothing to see here...

And this thread was going SO well up until now...

Nah. If we drop it to 25% that's a win.

Everyone we convince to comply with the basic rules is a win. If that means enforcement, so be it. If it's engagement, which is what I'm trying to do here, even better. Education is available, and has worked fro some.

Maybe you've read my posts about letting people off tickets if they play the game of legality. Surely it's not that much to ask.

Seems you've finished your shift.

Yeah, it's gone downhill.

Why is it, that you get to be completely unbending in your way of thought, and we don't?

I break the law every time I ride, on purpose with full knowledge of what I'm doing. There are reasons for and against, but no one from your side of the fence will ever let me explain my reasons for, with any hope of being taken seriously. Why should I listen to you? My way is cheaper.

[rastuscat]

Why is it, that you get to be completely unbending in your way of thought, and we don't?

I break the law every time I ride, on purpose with full knowledge of what I'm doing. There are reasons for and against, but no one from your side of the fence will ever let me explain my reasons for, with any hope of being taken seriously. Why should I listen to you? My way is cheaper.

Hey no pobs Drew.

Thing is, it's not just about you and me. I stayed in Akaroa last Friday night. It was my birthday, and me and Mrs Rastuscat had a romantic night away over there.

Sitting in a pub I had a chat to a bloke, who once he found out what I did, gave me a serve about how little we did about the fancily dressed motorcycle lunatics who flew up and down the main Akaroa Road each weekend.

You and me have views, but so do the few hundred (or thousand) people who live in Banks Peninsula, who are sick of being spectators of the Akaroa GP. See, we represent a lot more people than just the bikers on here, and act on their behalf at times. It's called public reassurance, and it's another thing we do.

Part of Operation Matiki is to make the locals feel like we are doing something abou the racetrack that SH75 is at weekends.

So go mad put there, but do so in the knowledge that we just might be at the exit of the next bend, waiting to hand you some demerit points. Revenue only gets collected from those who voluntarily donate it.