THL322 - Red P-Plater

1-800-whocares?

Sorry Karl, I care, but they won't. No way can they ticket someone for
a 'minor' offence on your say-so.

Donga

Donga said:

1-800-whocares?

Sorry Karl, I care, but they won't. No way can they ticket someone for
a 'minor' offence on your say-so.

Donga

waddya reckon this may come up as an election promise this state election?
ie legisalation or process to fine/whatever drivers the same way you can a smokey car at present?

J

flyingdutch said:

Donga said:

1-800-whocares?

Sorry Karl, I care, but they won't. No way can they ticket someone for
a 'minor' offence on your say-so.

Donga

waddya reckon this may come up as an election promise this state
election?
ie legisalation or process to fine/whatever drivers the same way you
can a smokey car at present?

Dunno about that, I mean you can prove a smoky car after the fact. To
prove mobile 'phone usage after the fact you'd need:

Access to 'phone records (currently prohibited if I'm not mistaken)

Proof of who was driving the car, not necessarily the owner

Can't see it happening.

I did see loads of police out today though, four cars stopped on my way
in on St Kilda Road and I saw one stopped on Flinders Street on my way
to the office at about 11:00. Seems like they're having a big crackdown.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

Euan said:

Dunno about that, I mean you can prove a smoky car after the fact. To
prove mobile 'phone usage after the fact you'd need:

Access to 'phone records (currently prohibited if I'm not mistaken)

"The state" can do anything it likes.

Quoted message said:

Proof of who was driving the car, not necessarily the owner

The car owner is liable, unless they point the finger at someone else,
e.g. red light and speed cameras operate this way.

Alternatively, you could set your camera/video up to record date and
time on the images. they might just accept that.

Basically it comes down to you word against theirs unless there are
independent witnesses and a camera/video might just provide that.

Terry Collins said:

Euan said:

Dunno about that, I mean you can prove a smoky car after the fact. To
prove mobile 'phone usage after the fact you'd need:

Access to 'phone records (currently prohibited if I'm not mistaken)

"The state" can do anything it likes.

Quoted message said:

Proof of who was driving the car, not necessarily the owner

The car owner is liable, unless they point the finger at someone else,
e.g. red light and speed cameras operate this way.

Alternatively, you could set your camera/video up to record date and
time on the images. they might just accept that.

Basically it comes down to you word against theirs unless there are
independent witnesses and a camera/video might just provide that.

It's the same as littering in that case. I've reported people for
flicking cigarette butts out of car windows through the EPA website.
[censored] ...

Bleve said:

It's the same as littering in that case. I've reported people for
flicking cigarette butts out of car windows through the EPA website.
[censored] ...

That is cool, but I'm gunna need voice recognition for on the bike
unless I want to spend all my time writing.