But we don't have many courts left in Qld now do we, since Cyclone Newman went through....I think lawyers in QLD will be kept very busy & get very rich with all the people who'll have no choice but to fight these laws in court, even if they aren't guilty of anything more than being a car enthusiast.
Qld anti hoon laws to be reviewed
Started by
S pack
, Nov 03 2012 11:54 PM
377 replies to this topic
#76
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Brisneyland
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:39 PM
#77
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Brisneyland
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:48 PM
How's that again? Rudeness/ bullyboy
Why not say you just disagree in a reasoned way?
In response if people are not able to keep the vehicle on the road while going through a roundabout and/or create audible or visible slip on the tyres then most likely they are driving too fast, ie not slowing to an appropriate speed.
I agree driver training is lacking when we have people not recognise that roundabouts are intersections(the majority of where accidents happen, shxxt happens people make mistakes, misjudge)and that slowing down, rather than treat them as chicane practice is the only sensible recommendation.
Please refrain from name calling - it's against the forum rules. If you don't like what someone says, ignore it.
I was in no way rude, I just explained that there is NO onus on the driver to slow for a roundabout if they can safely negotiate it.
Perhaps you should preface your comments with "recommendation" if not based in fact and not arc up about other members getting uppity about your comments.
As for your "audible noise/slip", a copper is going to find it very hard to win in court for pulling me over for a minor squeal at 50kph.....
Grant..
#78
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Brisneyland
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:56 PM
In respectful response, high insurance premiums for under 25s with V8s etc IS NOT due to idiots......it is due to lack of skill and experience creating a disproportionate number of accidents and claims attributed to this group in statistical analyses. It has been well studied and proven, which is why P-platers are barred from these types of vehicle in most circumstances.yet there is a reality that we have idiots attracted to high powered vehicles, that's why it costs a fortune for under 25s to insure v8s and the like.
Otherwise they would just perform idiot tests as part of gaining a licence and ban all the idiots........
The majority of people who own and operate modified cars are over 25, you just see the skylines and stuff more........has something to do with those loud exhausts I guess......Call some of the insurance companies, they are happy to provide statistics.
Grant..
PS. DJ, I won't mention my degree, many years experience and previous employment by a state road authority as an expert........that would be rude.
#79
_Big T_
_Big T_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:34 PM
Did you find the full article Tony?
Grant..
Yes I did thanks Grant. Dave brought it along to a meeting and I had a read. The article, in my opinion, is misleading in that it lists what the CARRS fact sheet describes as "hoon related activities" but almost implies that they are "hoon related offences". There is a difference and the article in the Albert and Logan News did not make that clear. The fact that so many read the "cruising" reference and immediately panicked (I did too) adds weight to my opinion that the article was misleading.
But this is to be expected. Logan City have been on an anti enthusiast campaign for some time. I think it was you (Grant) that brought up the article published in the same newspaper that reported on the legality of Logan residents to service their own cars and carry out repairs. Logan City council by laws in this respect are extremely harsh.
Coupled with the fact that the recent hoon article only appeared in the Albert and Logan news and no other Quest publications kind of highlights where Logan City is headed on this issue.
I am in two minds on what to do next. As the QTCC is essentially based in Logan City (we have our monthly meetings at Fitzys) I am thinking about inviting a reporter from the paper to come out on a run or attend a meeting and get a chance to see what "enthusiasts" are into and at least speak to some semi intelligent petrol heads, not some kid straight out of school with a ute and tonne of testosterone. I dont know what good it will do and it probably wont fit the anti car stance that the paper is trying to make but you never know........
#80
_Bomber Watson_
_Bomber Watson_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:04 PM
In respectful response, high insurance premiums for under 25s with V8s etc IS NOT due to idiots......it is due to lack of skill and experience creating a disproportionate number of accidents and claims attributed to this group in statistical analyses. It has been well studied and proven, which is why P-platers are barred from these types of vehicle in most circumstances.
It is actually pretty bullshit when on consider the fact that a bog stock base model 2012 lancer would likely woop a GTS 350 monaro in basically any kind of race you can think of.
And this is why we have so many P plater accidents now days, there no stupider now than they were 30 years ago, just the cars are a frOckload faster. Put an 08 Suzuki Swift up against a 138 powered LC four door, typical first cars for two different generations, and work out which ones easyer to do really silly shit in........Answers pretty clear cut.
Cheers.
#81
royalplumss
-
- Members
-
- 246 posts
Forum Member
- Location:Sid- a- knee
- Car:had L31 SS Hatch
- Joined: 29-December 06
Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:10 PM
Eh. No. If they were deemed to meet adrs in their day there is no retrospective legislation that is being introduced that will change that, its a moot point but most likely the shaker meets today's regs anyway.
Apart from seatbelts I can't really thnk of any retrospective legislation that has been imposed on motorists.
Having read the thread up till 9-11-12, I reply to this quote and a few others that I could not figure out how to bundle up.
The new laws (combined with the old laws) are draconian in many respects
Even if you were to forget the fact (and i don't intend to) that it applies to ANYWHERE - not just public roads and is open to ANY interpretation of what constitutes something deemed to be too loud/offensive/reckless/negligent then you would still be missing the point.
An early (nsw) example was roll cages. You cannot legally fit a full cage to a car in nsw and get it engineered -- regardless of how well executed it has been done. Forget the fact that it is safer to have one. It was seen (by the minister at the time) as an item "that only a hoon would want" and therefore any reasonable thinking sheep (i mean citizen) would be offended if they were allowed to be fitted. Retrospective laws that make it an offence to run around in a paddock basher, on your own property, without your seatbelt on and sliding around in the mud are offensive.
There are many historical examples of overzealous police enforcing very poorly thought out or worded laws. Some of these laws are the result of knee jerk reactions.
It is technically illegal to hang an air-freshener card from your rear vision mirror - at least in nsw. There are hundreds of other technical breaches that would astound the general driving/ pedestrian public if they were to get there hands on a current 'motor traffic act' set of regs.I know for a fact, that some of these are arbitrarily enforced depending on the mood of the officer at the time - without any consistency or objectivity. One spinning wheel, uphill, in snow, towing a trailer would be (and has) been subject to the weight of the law.
Worse still, some of these laws are written with the full intention of curbing the supposedly antisocial behaviour of a select portion of otherwise law abiding citizens.
To think that all police behave and enforce the law in a reasonable and objective manner, or are all smart enough to be able to seperate 'the word' from 'intention' is ludicrous.
I have been personally targeted by police for all manner of infringements over a 29 year period in all manner of vehicles. sometimes with very good reasons and sometimes with none at all.
The point is that if only one person is affected by a law that 'can' be interpreted unfairly and unreasonably, and enforced, then that is one too many.
To ignore history has been mans downfall since time immemorial. Yet people still repeat the same mistakes over and over, regardless of their good intentions
I would like to point out that this is not a personal attack, rather an observation of very checkable facts. Unjust laws can only be changed if they are applied in the first place.
FYI I have, and have had, numerous friends and relatives who are police - and not surprisingly, they agree with what I say.
#82
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Brisneyland
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:23 PM
There are, and will continue to be, a number of protests in Brisbane city over the next few months, so it may be a plan to look at organising a run of clubs and enthusiasts into the city on one of these days, supporting the protest occurring and also pushing the anti-hoon line.
Grant..
Grant..
#83
_LH SLR 3300_
_LH SLR 3300_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:30 PM
I fully support Police forces nation wide, they have a tough job & they are for the most part good people. They aren't to blame for the law, it's their job to enforce it. However as with any organisation, there are the odd few that for lack of a better term, are just plain A-holes. It's these few who take these laws to the extreme & use/abuse them as they see fit & some of them believe it is not just their job to enforce the law, they are the law themselves. That is the most concerning aspect, that these select few have been given the power to wage their own little wars & vendetas. I also believe that some people deserve the punishment they are netted out for their behaviour behind the wheel of a car, what i don't agree with is victimisation based on the stigma now attached to driving a modified vehicle.
#84
S pack
-
- Members
-
- 15,542 posts
Scrivet Counter
- Name:Dave
- Location:Luggage Point
- Car:73 LJ
- Joined: 25-January 10
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:02 PM
Found this piece written in 2010 about the Victorian Anti Hooning Laws.
Well written and gets to the heart of the political motivation for these BS laws being implemented.
http://www.caradvice...al-vote-winner/
Well written and gets to the heart of the political motivation for these BS laws being implemented.
http://www.caradvice...al-vote-winner/
#85
_torbirdie_
_torbirdie_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:22 PM
Having read the thread up till 9-11-12, I reply to this quote and a few others that I could not figure out how to bundle up.
The new laws (combined with the old laws) are draconian in many respects
Even if you were to forget the fact (and i don't intend to) that it applies to ANYWHERE - not just public roads and is open to ANY interpretation of what constitutes something deemed to be too loud/offensive/reckless/negligent then you would still be missing the point.
An early (nsw) example was roll cages. You cannot legally fit a full cage to a car in nsw and get it engineered -- regardless of how well executed it has been done. Forget the fact that it is safer to have one. It was seen (by the minister at the time) as an item "that only a hoon would want" and therefore any reasonable thinking sheep (i mean citizen) would be offended if they were allowed to be fitted. Retrospective laws that make it an offence to run around in a paddock basher, on your own property, without your seatbelt on and sliding around in the mud are offensive.
There are many historical examples of overzealous police enforcing very poorly thought out or worded laws. Some of these laws are the result of knee jerk reactions.
It is technically illegal to hang an air-freshener card from your rear vision mirror - at least in nsw. There are hundreds of other technical breaches that would astound the general driving/ pedestrian public if they were to get there hands on a current 'motor traffic act' set of regs.I know for a fact, that some of these are arbitrarily enforced depending on the mood of the officer at the time - without any consistency or objectivity. One spinning wheel, uphill, in snow, towing a trailer would be (and has) been subject to the weight of the law.
Worse still, some of these laws are written with the full intention of curbing the supposedly antisocial behaviour of a select portion of otherwise law abiding citizens.
To think that all police behave and enforce the law in a reasonable and objective manner, or are all smart enough to be able to seperate 'the word' from 'intention' is ludicrous.
I have been personally targeted by police for all manner of infringements over a 29 year period in all manner of vehicles. sometimes with very good reasons and sometimes with none at all.
The point is that if only one person is affected by a law that 'can' be interpreted unfairly and unreasonably, and enforced, then that is one too many.
To ignore history has been mans downfall since time immemorial. Yet people still repeat the same mistakes over and over, regardless of their good intentions
I would like to point out that this is not a personal attack, rather an observation of very checkable facts. Unjust laws can only be changed if they are applied in the first place.
FYI I have, and have had, numerous friends and relatives who are police - and not surprisingly, they agree with what I say.
Sorry I've missed the point of your post , to be more specific don't see a point? No you haven't provided any examples of retrospective legislation that will see cars of yesteryear in orignal condition defected off the road.
Rollcages? No car came with these as original equipment.
It may be your opinion that they were banned because they were a hoon accessory, but believe you are mistaken.
roll cages are dangerous to the occupants unless they are strapped in with full racing harness and are wearing helmets, and there lies the problem as I believe itis frowned upon by some that the combination of a helmet and the visiblle obstruction created by the cage impairs the driver's vision significantly in the rel world of driving in traffic.
#86
_Bomber Watson_
_Bomber Watson_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:31 PM
Rollcages? No car came with these as original equipment.
Wrong, again.
Cheers.
#87
_torbirdie_
_torbirdie_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:35 PM
]
Unfortunately idiots are able to pass the driving test just fine. You are claiming that the high accident rate amongst the young is due to just lack is skill and experience?
Doesn't explain why we have particular demographics in the age group who are over represented and lower rates for females. The difference is the idiot factor, call it whatever you like, balls overpowering limited brains , these are the ones that are attracted to the higher power offerings and get themselves into even more trouble. Yes, The average p plater trying to do the right thing is still going to have more incidents than experienced drivers, but are going to be no more likely to crash driving a v8 than a 4cyl, it's only the idiots that drive harder and faster in the higher powered cars that crash more often and create the discrepancy.
In respectful response, high insurance premiums for under 25s with V8s etc IS NOT due to idiots......it is due to lack of skill and experience creating a disproportionate number of accidents and claims attributed to this group in statistical analyses. It has been well studied and proven, which is why P-platers are barred from these types of vehicle in most circumstances.
Otherwise they would just perform idiot tests as part of gaining a licence and ban all the idiots........
The majority of people who own and operate modified cars are over 25, you just see the skylines and stuff more........has something to do with those loud exhausts I guess......Call some of the insurance companies, they are happy to provide statistics.
Grant..
PS. DJ, I won't mention my degree, many years experience and previous employment by a state road authority as an expert........that would be rude.
Unfortunately idiots are able to pass the driving test just fine. You are claiming that the high accident rate amongst the young is due to just lack is skill and experience?
Doesn't explain why we have particular demographics in the age group who are over represented and lower rates for females. The difference is the idiot factor, call it whatever you like, balls overpowering limited brains , these are the ones that are attracted to the higher power offerings and get themselves into even more trouble. Yes, The average p plater trying to do the right thing is still going to have more incidents than experienced drivers, but are going to be no more likely to crash driving a v8 than a 4cyl, it's only the idiots that drive harder and faster in the higher powered cars that crash more often and create the discrepancy.
Edited by torbirdie, 09 November 2012 - 09:48 PM.
#88
_Quagmire_
_Quagmire_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:39 PM
where you ever young?Unfortunately idiots are able to pass the driving test just fine. You are claiming that the high accident rate amongst the young is due to just lack is skill and experience?
Doesn't explain why we have particular demographics in the age group who are over represented and lower rates for females. The difference is the idiot factor, call it whatever you like, balls overpowering limited brains etc.
never done anything under peer pressure?
mmmm maybe not...
#89
_Bomber Watson_
_Bomber Watson_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:45 PM
DA was born at the age of 60 with all the worlds wisdom held within his head.
Cheers.
Cheers.
#90
_LH SLR 3300_
_LH SLR 3300_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:53 PM
No need to provide examples of retrospective legislation that will see cars of yesteryear defected, a Police officer can do that on the belief that the car is defective, retrospective legislation or not & herein lies the issue. Under the new laws, the Police don't have to prove a car is defective, they can pretty much defect a car & fine the owner for anything they BELIEVE isn't to the letter of the law. They don't even need to know the laws surrounding modifications that are legal or not. It then becomes the owner's responsibility to prove the car is roadworthy & any modifications are legal. And they can impound a car they find in their view to be illegaly modified, such as a loud exhaust. Of course they need their superior's authorisation to do so, but realisticaly, how often do you think a superior is going to question their subordinate's judgement? If it sounds to unreal to be true, in a recent crack down on modified vehicles in Sydney recently, they defected 30 cars, eight of which were impounded for "illegal" modifications.
#91
_Bomber Watson_
_Bomber Watson_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:58 PM
Its quiet true. A lad at work got defected for driving a modified vehicle without a mod plate, cause his landcruiser had a turbo on it.
the fact that it was a factory turbo, and stated so on the build plate, had no bearing.
Had to go through all the bullshit, over the pits, etc etc, under these new laws the bullshit added would be increased greatly with trying to get the car out of the impound lot, for driving a factory turbocharged diesel landcruiser......
Cheers.
the fact that it was a factory turbo, and stated so on the build plate, had no bearing.
Had to go through all the bullshit, over the pits, etc etc, under these new laws the bullshit added would be increased greatly with trying to get the car out of the impound lot, for driving a factory turbocharged diesel landcruiser......
Cheers.
#92
_torbirdie_
_torbirdie_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:09 PM
]Police have always had the right to defect a car they believed was defectiveNo need to provide examples of retrospective legislation that will see cars of yesteryear defected, a Police officer can do that on the belief that the car is defective,
it sounds to unreal to be true, in a recent crack down on modified vehicles in Sydney recently, they defected 30 cars, eight of which were impounded for "illegal"
So were the cars in breach of regs or not?
#93
_Bomber Watson_
_Bomber Watson_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:19 PM
I love it when i win.
Cheers.
Cheers.
#94
_LH SLR 3300_
_LH SLR 3300_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:20 PM
I don't the owners of all the vehicles, so of course i can't answer that, however i know the owner of one of the cars (ESP Fairmont Ghia) defected (too low, too loud) that later passed a full EPA & RMS inspection (required under the defect notice) without changing a thing on the vehicle.
#95
_CHEVED_
_CHEVED_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:37 PM
When can we introduce the death race cars to bring it on lol.
#96
_torbirdie_
_torbirdie_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:38 PM
I don't the owners of all the vehicles, so of course i can't answer that
So for all you know they were sound reasons why the cars were defected, the fear mongering here is pathetic.
#97
_LH SLR 3300_
_LH SLR 3300_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:09 PM
I assume that is entirely possible but then is it possible the defect notice handed to my mate's fully legal & roadworthy (stated in black & white by EPA & RMS inspection) ESP was sound too? I don't think so, neither does my mate & obviously neither did the EPA & RMS, otherwise they wouldn't have cleared it.
#98
_Skapinad_
_Skapinad_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:28 PM
, the fear mongering here is pathetic.
Hate to say it but I agree. And to be honest you should have added " ill informed" prior to fear mongering. Knowledge is power and it appears somewhat lacking by a lot of the responses here.
Edited by Skapinad, 09 November 2012 - 11:30 PM.
#99
_SmartE_
_SmartE_
-
- Guests
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:53 PM
Sorry I've missed the point of your post , to be more specific don't see a point? No you haven't provided any examples of retrospective legislation that will see cars of yesteryear in orignal condition defected off the road.
Rollcages? No car came with these as original equipment.
It may be your opinion that they were banned because they were a hoon accessory, but believe you are mistaken.
roll cages are dangerous to the occupants unless they are strapped in with full racing harness and are wearing helmets, and there lies the problem as I believe itis frowned upon by some that the combination of a helmet and the visiblle obstruction created by the cage impairs the driver's vision significantly in the rel world of driving in traffic.
Up to this point I was reading along with all replies to each post you were making in defence of most car enthusiasts' with an open mind until the roll cages came up. To say the these cars didn't have these as original equipment is just as a negative comment. Take me I just sold a 317KW 2008 malloo that would give my torana a run in the performance stakes equipped with an airbag supplied at every angle to protect me in the case of a accident. It sounds like you would happy that I wouldn't use proven technology to protect myself in my 1970s car with a roll cage with protective foam.
Everything that I added or modified to my car will supersedes most 5 - 10 year old cars are still driving around on public roads. If for arguments sake I get into a 100km crash I 'm pretty sure the mods that I have installed in torry will give me half a chance of walking away compared to what was acceptable in the 70s I . To say that an over worked and over stressed law enforcer will judge 100 of hours of professional modifications done to my car and look in my window and class me as hoon is ignorant.
Can anyone tell me the last accident caused by a pre 1980s car that killed and maimed anyone. I'm pretty sure the last two months there wouldn't be one!
#100
Collo
-
- Members
-
- 114,647 posts
( . Y . )
- Location:Newcastle...Home of me.
- Car:A Black POS
- Joined: 29-February 08
Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:22 AM
I love it when i win.
Cheers.
Bump
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
