SA: dangerous driving on private property

[aussie muscle]

oh the insanity
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/s...-1226642430738

DANGEROUS driving offences committed on private properties would attract the same penalties as those on public roads if a legal change put by the State Government is approved.

Where do they draw the line between protection and govt meddling? don't forget race tracks are private property.

[flooded one]

pretty stupid if you ask me

[Nikked]

Nek minnit, speed limits at all motorsport events. Anything over 100km/h on a race track is hooning!

[Morexbs]

Anywhere there's a dollar to be made...

[rancidpunx]

Everyone should Like Grunt files on Facebook and get on board with keeping the idiot nanniests at bay. Some of you wont know yet that last week in less than a week, over 1000 people came together and formed a motoring political party with the intent to stand Candidates for the Senate in every State in the upcoming Federal Election in September. Start writing letters to your members and have these stupid ideas quashed before they can be realised.

[mick457]

I live in qld but when grunt files post this letter on fb tomorrow I for one will be sending it to tis john rau
stand up for ya selfs SA and I think the rest of us should help


John Rau, get real...

Of all the idiotic, pathetic, narrow-minded thinking displayed by politicians over the years, your latest effort takes the cake!

How dare you further erode the rights of those people you pretend to represent by infringing on their civil rights.

To propose that one could be prosecuted for dangerous driving on their own property because of an unfortunate accident which occurred in a State other than your own some five years ago verges on insanity.

No longer will fathers be able to teach sons to drive on their own property. No longer will young teens have the opportunity to hone their driving skills on the land of their father - all because a politician wants to be able to prosecute anyone who is deemed to be driving dangerously on private property.

Police will have the power to enter private property to charge individuals with dangerous driving offenses, and this can be seen as little-more than a further opportunity for the government to gain absolute control of the population. One has to question the true motive behind this proposal, and it would be fair to presume that this would further increase the government coffers with the addition of yet another avenue for the police to issue infringement notices.

South Australians, it is your turn to take action against your nanny government. It is time to write letters to your MP's stating your objections to this further erosion of your civil liberties, your rights as a citizen of our democracy.

People need to be responsible for their own actions, and one has to question how this will effect motoring events which, in most cases, are held on private property. One also has to ask how this would affect farmers mustering on unregistered quad bikes on their own property, 4x4 drivers in the bush, on private and on crown property. Will we witness the end of V8 Supercar and Indy races because the drivers are considered to be driving dangerously due to high speed - the list is endless.

Tomorrow, Grunt Files will draft a sample letter and post a link for those prepared to make a stand. Remember, one letter can make a difference - hundreds, or even thousands, send a strong message for those who choose to stand up for their rights. And remember also, that John Rau holds his position only because of a ballot box - you have the power to sack him. Power to the people...

Share this message with all your friends - let's stop this insanity now.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/s...-1226642430738

[tex]

Its a scary scenario that law change presents.

The legislation could put an end to those events such as powercruise. Despite being conducted on a private track, in theory, Police will be able to slap down participants for driving n a manner dangerous. All in the name of safety, even though the people they keep safe have entered, or paid an entry to watch, and in a lot of cases already signed some kind of disclaimer or waiver.

What about those drift type events? Or supersprints.

Or 4x4 mud runs? Off road rally?

Burnout competitions will in the next few years be exactly the same as what goes on in good old America. They'll be static events, front wheels chocked, car surrounded by concrete barriers. Sounds exciting don't it!

There's been whispers about 'Policing' of events such as Tarmac rallies (such as Targa's etc) for a little while. Driving in a manner dangerous? In a Tarmac rally, with timed stages, nooo, really? Who'd have thought competitors (soon that word will be politically incorrect due to conitations of speed and fastest performance) EDIT Participants would enter for the joy of making progress at a velocity that may by many be deemed "dangerous". Are they mad those participants? Got a death wish? Desire to cause harm and injury to the 'helpless other humans' that wish to spectate?

It's always been a bit blurry, closed (public) road stages for racing. Fatalities during an event always brings on much more heat, and 'negative noise' from do gooding save the 'stupid helpless' human being types. Recent incident in 2013 Targa Tas has re ignited the behind seens 'noise' in Gummit. Even local councils are getting restless about stages conducted through their municapality.

Australia is seriously on the path to state controlled and sanctioned lifestyle. Gummit imposed safety strategy to protect al the dumb citizens, the robots that make up Australian society, Because we (apparently) can't make informed decisions, take on considered risk, engage in activity that by nature presents some kind of exposure to risk, regardless of whether it's managed, mitigated or controlled.

I can hear the usual suspects now saying
"if you do nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear" or
"as if the police will start issuing tickets or clamping cars at a burnout comp" or
"no way over zealous police responses will happen at organised events.."

Um, ok, if you say so LOL.

This is scary stuff.

[FGII-XR6]

It all depends on how the law is to be applied. in the case mentioned the driver should have been charged. his actions and lack of judgement caused the death of another person. if it is used only in the event of gross negligence where death or serious injury occurs the law has merit. if on the other hand it is applied gratuitously then that's another matter.
if your actions cause death or injury in the workplace you can be charged, if your actions cause death on the road you can be charged, surely if your actions cause death on private property you should face equal justice

[mick457]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

It all depends on how the law is to be applied. in the case mentioned the driver should have been charged. his actions and lack of judgement caused the death of another person. if it is used only in the event of gross negligence where death or serious injury occurs the law has merit. if on the other hand it is applied gratuitously then that's another matter.
if your actions cause death or injury in the workplace you can be charged, if your actions cause death on the road you can be charged, surely if your actions cause death on private property you should face equal justice

of course it does and it should there is such a thing is over the top
if I ever kill someone in a car on private land or on the road ill be the one to hand myself in
but really is that what this is all about?

[FGII-XR6]

sure you have the morals to do this but there are many out there who look for the loophole. that's why they do this sort of thing in the first place. It's sad they have to do this but with cases like the one mentioned the need is there to make people accountable.
I don't believe it should be applied indiscriminately though they shouldn't have the power to act on organised and sanctioned events unless there is an incident . but john smith and his mates get drunk at a BBQ and start doing burnouts on private property? yes there is a high risk lives are at risk and action should be taken ( it is already an offence to drive drunk on private property in NSW)

Originally Posted by mick457

of course it does and it should there is such a thing is over the top
if I ever kill someone in a car on private land or on the road ill be the one to hand myself in
but really is that what this is all about?

[ozpacman]

Don't panic ladies and gents!

This has been the case in Queensland since Adam was a boy. How many race car drivers do you know of that have been charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle following a few hot laps at Lakeside?

The legislation doesn't apply to racing.

Cheers,

Russ

[XR Martin]

Its illegal to drive drunk even on private property...

[Franco Cozzo]

Do you even need these laws? Surely if some uleh is doing burnouts on his small suburban property, the police could give them some sort of fine without resorting to these laws?

Chances are if you have the room to drive around on your property in the case of the drink driving on private property, you're probably on acreage and the five-oh wouldn't randomly pop out of the bushes to bretho you on your own property.

[mick457]

meh I say we support grunt files anyways
this guy sounds like a right twat

[new2ford]

When I read that article I had to scroll back up to the top to make sure it wasn't dated April 1st. Unbelievable. Well OK, Australia is becoming a proto-fascist country so it is believable. Surely, other laws cover the issue of somebody causing injury or death on a private property, by whatever means - motor vehicles included. People in power (control freaks) seem to like getting their rocks off on this sort of thing.

[GTP-RPD]

What's happening to our rights? Honestly do we have any?. WTF. To quote a legend what the ******* is the constitution for "on just terms" And here's the reason why folks we keep getting shafted.

The Australian Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights. Some delegates to the 1898 Constitutional Convention favoured a section similar to the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, but the majority felt that the traditional rights and freedoms of British subjects were sufficiently guaranteed by the Parliamentary system and independent judiciary which the Constitution would create. As a result, the Australian Constitution has often been criticised for its scant protection of rights and freedoms.

So basically tyrants like Rau can do what he wants in the name of protecting the public...eg getting votes from brain dead dogooders.

1898? Maybe time for a revisit. Got the thing changed for one group of Aussies recently.

Off topic guys but this sort of thing gives me the sh***. And I suddenly have an urge to do some paddock bashing.

[FGII-XR6]

That's the point, the existing laws didn't cover the case mentioned the driver who killed his passenger had a smart lawyer and got off. so really it's not the law makers to blame here it's the idiots who behave irresponsibly ( killing people in the process) and the smart lawyers who get them off on a technicality.
how would you feel if your family member was killed and the person responsible used a loophole to avoid his responsibility? I'm sure we would hear you screaming for his blood

Originally Posted by new2ford

When I read that article I had to scroll back up to the top to make sure it wasn't dated April 1st. Unbelievable. Well OK, Australia is becoming a proto-fascist country so it is believable. Surely, other laws cover the issue of somebody causing injury or death on a private property, by whatever means - motor vehicles included. People in power (control freaks) seem to like getting their rocks off on this sort of thing.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

That's the point, the existing laws didn't cover the case mentioned the driver who killed his passenger had a smart lawyer and got off. so really it's not the law makers to blame here it's the idiots who behave irresponsibly ( killing people in the process) and the smart lawyers who get them off on a technicality.

I'm not a lawyer so tell me how this differs from, say, if a person on a private property was operating a piece of farm machinery or waving a chainsaw around irresponsibly and caused such an event?

[Sprint]

They want us to be factory slave cyborgs, not have a life and be controlled.

They will need a warrant to come onto your land and fine you, but then they will just say they had just cause.

[jpd80]

Maybe the government should look at the frequency of dangerous activities on private property
and deals with them case by case instead of making blanket legislation.

Dangerous driving is not a breach if the traffic act, it's normally covered by criminal code,
so there's already legislation to stop activities considered dangerous to others in the vicinity
be that in public or on private property and If someone caused death of another,
they usually face manslaughter charges, not a fine. This is just some knob politician
trying to exact punishment on people he perceives as escaping justice, he needs to
pull his head in and work with the laws already in place and let the courts decide guilt or otherwise.

Properly sanctioned sporting events would of course be exempt from such actions.

[pottery beige]

dangerous driving is a hoon law offence.. they will crush..

know few dudes that motorcross on their blocks of scrub..

can of worms time...

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by ozpacman

Don't panic ladies and gents!

This has been the case in Queensland since Adam was a boy. How many race car drivers do you know of that have been charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle following a few hot laps at Lakeside?

The legislation doesn't apply to racing.

Cheers,

Russ

They just want to stop paddock bashing, farm hooning and mudding, which are such a deadly pastimes.

[blueoval]

new world order here we come

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

They just want to stop paddock bashing, farm hooning and mudding, which are such a deadly pastimes.

It's a few years ago now but a friend of the family let his teenage son go to his friend's home on a Farm in central Queensland.
the two boys were allowed to drive an unregistered car on the block even though both were under ages and unlicensed.

The unthinkable happened when the car rolled and killed one of the boys while the other was trapped in the car.
The ensuing Coroner's inquest was gut wrenching with the very real potential that an under aged boy could
possibly be charged with manslaughter of his best mate, and the parents also charged.

Fortunately, things worked out for the best but I can tell you, there were some sleepless nights until the future was certain.

[EFFalcon]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It's a few years ago now but a friend of the family let his teenage son go to his friend's home on a Farm in central Queensland.
the two boys were allowed to drive an unregistered car on the bloc even though both were under ages and unlicenced.

The unthinkable happened when the car rolled and killed one of the boys while the other was trapped in the car.

I heard someone drowned from swimming last year.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by EFFalcon

I heard someone drowned from swimming last year.

This involved the case of an underage driver killing his mate.

There is a world of difference between the two events

[Trump]

Originally Posted by GTP-RPD

What's happening to our rights? Honestly do we have any?. WTF. To quote a legend what the ******* is the constitution for "on just terms" And here's the reason why folks we keep getting shafted.

The Australian Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights. Some delegates to the 1898 Constitutional Convention favoured a section similar to the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, but the majority felt that the traditional rights and freedoms of British subjects were sufficiently guaranteed by the Parliamentary system and independent judiciary which the Constitution would create. As a result, the Australian Constitution has often been criticised for its scant protection of rights and freedoms.

So basically tyrants like Rau can do what he wants in the name of protecting the public...eg getting votes from brain dead dogooders.

1898? Maybe time for a revisit. Got the thing changed for one group of Aussies recently.

Off topic guys but this sort of thing gives me the sh***. And I suddenly have an urge to do some paddock bashing.

Very valid points you raise.
I will up the ante by saying the following:

The reason the numpties in the bureaucracy can (and will) pass "laws" like these is because we don't actually own our land/property. Fee simple ownership is nothing but a lifelong lease of land vested in the Crown.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by jpd80

This involved the case of an underage driver killing his mate.

There is a world of difference between the two events

And how would that be different to any accident where the actions of one resulted in the death of another INCLUDING playing in water and jumping out of a tree landing on another person or whatever.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by flappist

And how would that be different to any accident where the actions of one resulted in the death of another INCLUDING playing in water and jumping out of a tree landing on another person or whatever.

You know what Flappist....your absolutely right.

It was an accident.

Sorry I ever brought it up.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by jpd80

You know what Flappist....your absolutely right.

It was an accident.

Sorry I ever brought it up.

Yes it was. There is a problem with our society that we are always trying to blame and exact punishment after any situation where someone is hurt.

The world as a dangerous place and tragedies happen and no amout of bureacracy, legislation or cotton wool is ever going to change that.