Webber sticks it up the Nanny State
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: D Walford on 31 Mar 2010 06:49 On 31/03/2010 8:34 AM, hippo wrote: >> That is true to a point but believe it or there are places on this >> planet where spinning your cars wheels aren't considered to be such a >> big deal. >> >> >> >> Daryl >> >> > > Question Time in Parliament for one :) > Good one:-) Daryl
From: D Walford on 31 Mar 2010 06:56 On 31/03/2010 4:26 PM, Noddy wrote: > "D Walford"<dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message > news:4bb1f323$0$27844$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> Absolutely. > > Incredible. > > I'd bet London to a brick that the coppers had no idea who was driving the > car when they ordered it to stop, and the driver was going down before they > found out who it was. > >> See my reply about my son getting off with a warning. > > We've all been there, but that doesn't mean much. What it does mean is the Police have discretion but they choose not to exercise it in Hamilton's case for reasons best know to themselves. Daryl
From: Noddy on 31 Mar 2010 06:54 "D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:4bb3295d$0$27840$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > I do my best:-) Proud of you :) > Living in a safe seat of any party sucks big time, my protest vote will do > sfa but we have to try. Well, here's hoping that everyone else in your constituency thinks along similar lines, as if they do it'll be a safe Labor seat no longer :) -- Regards, Noddy.
From: Scotty on 31 Mar 2010 07:22 "Spooky" <spooky24042(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:n2Esn.16370$pv.10527(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... : : : "Doug Jewell" <ask(a)and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote in message : : > That is what I heard happened too. Presumably it was a : > borrowed or hired car - if you are in a vehicle that you are : > not familiar with, and it is moderatly high powered, it is : > very easy to accidentally spin the wheels. But even if it : : Oh Rubbish! If you really believe that, or are so incapable, : hand your licence in. I think hes right to a degree. My Hilux ute without trying on a wet surface can lose traction, the difference there is I button off and then accelerate again with full traction, whats not acceptable is trying to get to third of forth while the rears are still lit up. : : > was deliberate, so what? Wheel spin is noisy, and is : > annoying when someone does it in a quiet suburban street at : > night while trying to put the baby to sleep, but it is : : It's also illegal. wheel spin, burnouts, donuts...such an antisocial : behaviour that deserves harsh deterrent penalties. Grow up. If : you want to do burnouts, do them in your own driveway and leave : black marks on that. Not on our streets. : That one I totally agree on. It looks like your a low class scum suburb with tyre marks all over the road. : > hardly a super-dangerous offence. : : Neither is not wearing P Plates, but still illegal. Burnouts : have the potential to be dangerous, but more than that, it is : a total hoodlum offence that is socially unacceptable. : : >Who's more likely to be : > dangerous - the bloke yabbering on his mobile phone totally : > unaware of his surroundings, or the bloke who spins his : : Both. Ever seen an axle break when one of these clowns : does a burnout? i have. Its a pity that they dont do more damage to the cars then they may just have a quick think on the actual costs involved. : : > wheels in a moment of hot-blooded revelry? Now that you've : > answered that, who gets the larger penalty? : : And who deserves it? Id have to say that if a young bloke was with a mate of two in a very out of the way non residential area and he wants to break a diff or ruin a tyre or two then thats almost forgivable. I hate it when these idiots try drifting in the suburban streets. We have a T intersection near us thats frequestly got tyre or tow hook marks up the pedestrian ramp portion where dickheads understeer up onto the pathway. Luckily noone to date has been hurt there yet. : : FFS !!! : : Spooky : :
From: atec7 7 ""atec77 " on 31 Mar 2010 08:15
Neil Gerace wrote: > D Walford wrote: > >> Why, if its not illegal where he come from and it probably isn't it >> could make a huge difference. > > Ignorance of the law ought not to be a defence. Ignorant laws certainly should be |