Hoon Laws

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by tyson_8238

I work for the QPS and just in our station alone were giving out approxiamatly 25 tickets a week without even leaving the station thats proof enough imho

"Proof enough" Now there is irony for you - What tickets exactly are being handed out without leaving the station?

[Karnage]

Whilst something needs to be done to slow people up and save lives, I don't feel the current angle is right, effective or fair.
How exactly is a hoon hotline where someone who is "dobbed in" becomes guilty until proven innocent fair.
How does a defect for a motorcycle fender eliminator (cut down mudguard), a lowered car or tinted motorcycle screen that most can't see out of anyway deemed as "hooning" and how does this warrant a trip to court?
I listened to a scanner the other night and heard 2 units dispatched to investigate a hooning offence at Redcliffe, the informant could not give a description nor rego, I think that is a pretty wasteful use of Police resources.
If the Govco's were serious about saving lives there would be more money SPENT on police presence/Patrols rather then on speed cameras. I think most people will attest to the fact that being pulled over and chatted by the Police will have a greater effect on ones driving behavior then a flash in the mirror.
Law enforcement SHOULD NOT be about how much money can be generated.

On a side note, during the 80's and 90's a lot of communities had problems with skateboarders, how was this resolved?, not through fines, but through offering facilities, just about every suburb has a skatepark now.
Motoring enthusiasts contribute financially a great deal to the community throught taxes/rego/GST not to mention all of the clubs that hold fundraisers for various charities, it is a great clean pasttime, and with a little common sense does not have any negative effect on the community, why dont we see any proactive actions from the police/government's to offer more places to hold events thus keeping it off the streets?

Also every year when we get our rego's we have pamphlets for private plates, credit cards etc, but never any information on changed road rules/laws I would have thought that telling drivers what has changed would be of high importance if you want people to change their behavior!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by tyson_8238

I work for the QPS and just in our station alone were giving out approxiamatly 25 tickets a week without even leaving the station thats proof enough imho

If it were working, that is stopping young people doing silly things, you would be giving out ZERO tickets.

Like your speed cameras, it they were actually making the roads safer they would never give out a ticket would they?

The simple fact that they each earn millions of dollars proves that as a saftey device they are an abject failure but as a revinue raiser they are an incredible success.

Community policing was once keeping the community safe without interfering with the day to day activities of the people. Local Sergeants used their personal judgement as to how to keep the peace and guide young people in the correct direction whether that was a lecture, a clip around the ears, a night in a cell or prosecution.

Now such things are no longer allowed as too many do gooders complain about "unfair treatment" so instead now everyone is a criminal, all must be controlled as strictly as possible and any officer who uses their judgement faces internal discipline from the "social engineers".

History has taught us that the more often and harder you hit a person the more likely they are to hit back.

[Professor Farnsworth]

enough poo-flinging thanks, keep the personal insults out of it

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by flappist

The penalty for murder is life imprisonment, there is no greater penalty.

That is why there has not been a single murder anywhere in Australia for the last 50 years......or has there.

I will believe that the traffic laws are not revenue raising when the penalties are ONLY custodial or community service based.

Or as that would never happen how about the states lose ALL monies raised from traffic fines to the Commonwealth to be spent on road improvements in every state other than the one where it originated.

If the penalty for 10km over was 'x' hours community service you would be up in arms over that too. Something about putting people out of work as if you genuinely cared. Or the cost to a business that they were gainfully employed in prior to the order. The families suffer now. Or slave labour or some other tripe.

Fines have existed for many, many centuries. They are not the invention of left wing, do gooders. In the modern world they are a fairer penalty for minor offences, than the ... oh wait, the penalties you raised instead. Seems you want to make them more criminal, not less.

You make less and less sense as time goes by. If the commonwealth were to collect and redistribute the revenue they would also have to fund the cost of that enforcement, not the states. Then you would be ranting about Gestapo power grabs or whatever.

Originally Posted by flappist

If it were working, that is stopping young people doing silly things, you would be giving out ZERO tickets.

...


Community policing was once keeping the community safe without interfering with the day to day activities of the people. Local Sergeants used their personal judgement as to how to keep the peace and guide young people in the correct direction whether that was a lecture, a clip around the ears, a night in a cell or prosecution.

Now such things are no longer allowed as too many do gooders complain about "unfair treatment" so instead now everyone is a criminal, all must be controlled as strictly as possible and any officer who uses their judgement faces internal discipline from the "social engineers".

History has taught us that the more often and harder you hit a person the more likely they are to hit back.

Zero? Thats your benchmark for success in matters concerning an entire population?

History has also taught us that if you dont hit hard, they think youre weak and just take advantage. Based on your logic, theft is a crime that is on the rise, so we should tread lightly. If rape was on the increase, again, tread lightly.

Some quality argument strategy youve got going there. /sarcasm.

[tyson_8238]

The laws are getting harsher and the road toll is getting lower though I would prefer more Police presence on the road rather than more camera devices anyday though its all about money which the government wont supply.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by tyson_8238

The laws are getting harsher and the road toll is getting lower though I would prefer more Police presence on the road rather than more camera devices anyday though its all about money which the government wont supply.

A few questions:

1) Do you think that the increase in safety level of the average car has anything to do with the reduction in the road toll?

2) Do you support the concept that if a "hoon" is caught committing an offense the car is crushed regardless of who owns the car?
e.g. Parents or friends or rental or car in for a service and being test driven or loan car from a dealer/hotel/whatever?

3) Why do we never see the "accident rate" statistics as opposed to the "road toll"?

4) If there are so many speeding cars that hundreds of millions of dollars are raised in fines on an almost weekly basis why are there not dead people everywhere especially in front of the cameras as we KNOW they are speeding there?

5) Why does Victoria with squillions of speed cameras and the harshest traffic law enforcement in the country have about the same road toll as everywhere else?

6) And the last and most important question, why did QPOL severely curtail doing random breath tests as soon as the federal government stopped funding the straws?

We have a coin operated traffic policy.....

[svo supporter]

To the OP's original query. My original reply still exists. That is, there are plenty of stories out there, where people have been caught "hoon" driving in someones elses car, all over this country. So it's nothing new at all. The only new bit is, unfortunately you're one of the innocient people caught up in it all.

[tyson_8238]

Originally Posted by flappist

A few questions:

1) Do you think that the increase in safety level of the average car has anything to do with the reduction in the road toll?

2) Do you support the concept that if a "hoon" is caught committing an offense the car is crushed regardless of who owns the car?
e.g. Parents or friends or rental or car in for a service and being test driven or loan car from a dealer/hotel/whatever?

3) Why do we never see the "accident rate" statistics as opposed to the "road toll"?

4) If there are so many speeding cars that hundreds of millions of dollars are raised in fines on an almost weekly basis why are there not dead people everywhere especially in front of the cameras as we KNOW they are speeding there?

5) Why does Victoria with squillions of speed cameras and the harshest traffic law enforcement in the country have about the same road toll as everywhere else?

6) And the last and most important question, why did QPOL severely curtail doing random breath tests as soon as the federal government stopped funding the straws?

We have a coin operated traffic policy.....

Name a country that doesnt have a penalty system involving fines?

[Flaming Mo]

Originally Posted by flappist

I will believe that the traffic laws are not revenue raising when the penalties are ONLY custodial or community service based.

If speeding offences WERE punishable by community service only, I am quite certain that the budget and staff for traffic enforcement operations would be about a quarter of what they are today. And we certainly wouldn’t see police being paid overtime rates to man speed cameras - I doubt we would even have speed cameras. They balk at paying overtime to catch thieves and robbers.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by tyson_8238

Name a country that doesnt have a penalty system involving fines?

What? You did not answer any of my questions.....

So, OK, I will start..... Hutt River Province does not issue fines.

And I am fairly sure neither does Nuie, or at least not monetary fines.

So now your turn....

But while you are doing that ponder this.

If a government relies on income from penalties to operate then the only way they can continue to exist is to encourage crime........

[Jim Goose]

Hutt River Province??? a 75sqkm piece of land owned by one man who declared himself a principality.... hardly a country...
Nuie a small polynesian island with 1400 people... 260sqkm...

[tyson_8238]

There is roughly 195 countries in the world minus the 2 mention leaves 193 of fine system. Sorry Flappist but your turning this into an argument rather than a discussion. Im out.

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Hutt River Province??? a 75sqkm piece of land owned by one man who declared himself a principality.... hardly a country...
Nuie a small polynesian island with 1400 people... 260sqkm...

I believe he did answer the question, not just dodge it with another.

[JaguarDave]

Seems to me that in our society there's always loud group of people who don't want to adhere to the traffic laws and they cry foul about erosion of freedom and make accusations of rampant revenue raising but then there's also people like me who do not break the speed limits and never indulge in "hoon" behaviour. Being one who doesn't break the limits or spin wheels etc, I'm already quite free to go about my business and I contribute none of this supposed "revenue". What I do want is to be free of the potential risks posed by lawbreakers on the public roads and I would like to publicy thank our governments and their personnel for their increasing efforts to expunge unlawful behaviour from our roads.

Not liking laws doesn't make them wrong.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by my_gxl

I believe he did answer the question, not just dodge it with another.

Hutt River isnt a country.... its principlaity.
Niue is part of the COmmonwealth and "The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. Niue has a High Court, a Court of Appeal, and enjoys appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, in London."

He may have answered the question but his answers are bordering on sarcasim and contempt for the person he is replying to

[Professor Farnsworth]

for the usual reasons (arrogance, condescension and narrow minded remarks) this thread is done.