Webber sticks it up the Nanny State
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Noddy on 31 Mar 2010 08:45 "D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:4bb32a5e$0$27850$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > 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. Jeez, you're making it sound like Hamilton was the only person who *ever* got busted in Victoria for smoking his tyres. There's been over ten thousand people prosecuted under the "hoon laws" since they were introduced. It's not like Hamilton was unfairly singled out :) -- Regards, Noddy.
From: Noddy on 31 Mar 2010 08:46 "D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:4bb32bc0$0$8814$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > Has anyone heard Hamilton complaining about being booked? Apparently he had a small sook about it in a press conference, and refused to appologise for it. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: Clocky on 31 Mar 2010 20:39 atec7 7" <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com wrote: > 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 And most certainly ignorant fools such as you.
From: Clocky on 31 Mar 2010 21:00 D Walford wrote: > On 30/03/2010 11:58 PM, Neil Gerace wrote: >> D Walford wrote: >> >>> Do the Poms have such laws? >>> If Pommy laws on such things are the same as ours and he knew it >>> was a big deal than I would agree but most sane people wouldn't >>> think spinning a cars wheels warranted such a furore. >> >> It should no difference whether he knew what the law was, or not. > > Why, if its not illegal where he come from and it probably isn't it > could make a huge difference. Ignorance is no defense, he should have used common sense. >> >>> Hands up those here who have never span a cars wheels, >> >> Not having been in his position, I've never done it next to a cop car >> while thinking, "I'm famous, I'm untouchable." > > Nothing to suggest that he thought that, like most people who get done > he probably didn't see the cop car which was most likely hidden to > maximise its chances of collecting cash. > Nothing to suggest that load of speculative nonsense is anything like what actually happened. You would make a perfect ACA reporter... grab a headline, ignore the facts and fill in the blanks with speculative sensationalism.
From: Noddy on 31 Mar 2010 21:30
"Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> wrote in message news:4bb3ef3a$0$27803$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > You would make a perfect ACA reporter... grab a headline, ignore the facts > and fill in the blanks with speculative sensationalism. I think an important point needs to be made here, as Hamilton's "supporters" seem to be suggesting that he was unfairly targeted for a trivial offence. The story as reported in last Sunday's Herald-Sun is that Hamilton drove the Benz out of the track onto Lakeside Drive at 9:15pm on Saturday night where there were a crowd of spectators, police on foot and in cars. The crowd apparently cheered him on and *despite* the obviously visible police presence Hamilton did a "Donut burnout" where he span the car around 360 degrees while smoking the tires, and then fishtailed up lakeside drive before he was flagged down and booked. By any stretch of the imagination, this was *not* a trivial event where he was made a scapegoat. This was lunatic behaviour within close proximity of pedestrians and other vehicles, and he was *always* going to get pinched for it regardless of how important he thought he was. If he thought he wasn't, then the bloke's as sharp as a custard tart. -- Regards, Noddy. |