Traffic fine dodgers could lose licence

**Akzle** · 4th February 2014, 19:12

Originally Posted by Grubber

No traffic at all makes it pretty damn safe to do the 101kph and i doubt i am on my own figuring that one out.

but smoking a joint by myself in the middle of two hundred acres.... that's gotta be illegal cos it's so dangerous, right?

**Laava** · 4th February 2014, 19:53

[BB]

Originally Posted by Akzle

but smoking a joint by myself in the middle of two hundred acres.... that's gotta be illegal cos it's so dangerous, right?

Uuumm! And you,re not even a proper person!

**Akzle** · 4th February 2014, 20:00

Originally Posted by Laava

[BB]

Uuumm! And you,re not even a proper person!

have you actually read up or just think youre being facetious?
Watch that igan video i posted and you might get a clue. Then, youre fairly set on staying blind innit.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 4th February 2014, 20:08

Originally Posted by SMOKEU

There must be something I'm missing here. How do airlines get away with serving alcohol aboard the aircraft?

They are licenced premises. Specifically on-licences if memory serves. Its in the Sale of Likker act somewhere. From memory the plane is treated as a little piece of NZ even when overseas, licenced as a pub would be, and NZ likker laws apply.

edit had a quick squizz at the Sale of Likker act AKA THE SALE AND SUPPLY OF ALCOHOL ACT 2012, and very briefly at the Civil Aviation Act 1990 but cannot find any authority for the above proposition. I think they are correct but will ask the barrister I am meeting tomorrow (on someone elses $400 an hour....) what the answer is. I have looked at this but years ago...

**Grubber** · 5th February 2014, 06:37

Originally Posted by Akzle

but smoking a joint by myself in the middle of two hundred acres.... that's gotta be illegal cos it's so dangerous, right?

In your case, standing anywhere with or without a joint would be dangerous!

**Akzle** · 5th February 2014, 08:40

Originally Posted by Grubber

In your case, standing anywhere with or without a joint would be dangerous!

attaway grubby, attaway.

fucking moron.

**Scuba_Steve** · 5th February 2014, 10:18

Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase

They are licenced premises. Specifically on-licences if memory serves. Its in the Sale of Likker act somewhere. From memory the plane is treated as a little piece of NZ even when overseas, licenced as a pub would be, and NZ likker laws apply.

edit had a quick squizz at the Sale of Likker act AKA THE SALE AND SUPPLY OF ALCOHOL ACT 2012, and very briefly at the Civil Aviation Act 1990 but cannot find any authority for the above proposition. I think they are correct but will ask the barrister I am meeting tomorrow (on someone elses $400 an hour....) what the answer is. I have looked at this but years ago...

Am interested to hear the outcome; Would not be at all surprised if they were in breach of law

**Laava** · 5th February 2014, 10:40

Originally Posted by Akzle

have you actually read up or just think youre being facetious?
Watch that igan video i posted and you might get a clue. Then, youre fairly set on staying blind innit.

Of course I was being facetious!
Who gives a flying fuck about you standing in the middle of a paddock huffing on some weed? Not me, not anyone on here I bet and prob not even the cops.

**SMOKEU** · 5th February 2014, 11:47

Originally Posted by Laava

Who gives a flying fuck about you standing in the middle of a paddock huffing on some weed? Not me, not anyone on here I bet and prob not even the cops.

I'm sure Grubber would care, because the joint might blow up and cause a nuclear meltdown or something.

**_Shrek_** · 5th February 2014, 11:52

must be time for it to go to PD

**Grubber** · 5th February 2014, 11:58

Originally Posted by SMOKEU

I'm sure Grubber would care, because the joint might blow up and cause a nuclear meltdown or something.

Typical reply. No substance!

**SMOKEU** · 5th February 2014, 12:40

Originally Posted by Grubber

Typical reply. No substance!

Which is no different to many of your "arguments".

**Akzle** · 5th February 2014, 12:54

Originally Posted by Laava

Of course I was being facetious!
Who gives a flying fuck about you standing in the middle of a paddock huffing on some weed? Not me, not anyone on here I bet and prob not even the cops.

i was speaking more to your understanding or comprehension of the idea of a "person"... as it's applied legally.

**RDJ** · 5th February 2014, 12:54

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

Am interested to hear the outcome; Would not be at all surprised if they were in breach of law

Not quite what you asked, but airports with their operating license, are granted (automatically) the license to store, dispense and sell liquor - so that covers what you drink in airport bars, and what gets loaded onto planes at stopovers.

Individual airliners dispensing grog on board is licensed - or better said, permitted - by their base's regional (international) equivalent of a Airline Beverage Permit. In countries that bother to regulate that.