Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

QLD Australia’s toughest hooning laws passed

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by alexanderino, Apr 20, 2013.

  1. From the horse's mouth [emphasis in bullet points is mine]:

    Remember, folks: the tougher we are on crime, the better ;-)

    • Like Like x 1
  2. Hey fantastic policy to save lives. Good on you QLD. There's no way these laws will be abused by law enforcement...And frankly anyone who even 'wilfully' starts any motor vehicle is a kitten killer. MUARC recently found that in every road accident 100% of vehicles involved in the crash, at one point, had been started. Starting a vehicle is asking to die.
    • Like Like x 4
  3. Does an a-hole that willfully annoys the shit out of a neighbourhood from a late night party also get their stereo sold or crushed?
    People are going to need cameras for their own evidence, to counter one person's opinion.
  4. Unnecessary noise, shit, all Harley's in QLD will be crushed on that basis!
  5. The state sanctioned theft of private property reaches QLD. What a weak and pathetic government.
    • Agree Agree x 5
  6. More pathetic legislation which relies on police opinion rather than evidence. Great.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Why the emphasis on 3 of 4 bullet points alexanderino?

  8. In my opinion, those points are not specific enough in their wording. Their scope is too broad, and that brings the potential for their abuse.

    Of course, the actual legislation could employ different definitions [and stipulate conditions to reduce ambiguity], but I'm working off this press release.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. I look forward to those on their phones and not headchecking when they change lanes having their cars crushed for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

    Agree with Alex, much too broad. They need to define the exact offences and the level of breach (1km over/40km over) where required.

    Excessive noise is ok if it is reference people revving the crap out of their vls in the driveway. But again too broad, what's stopping my neighbour complaining about my stock-piped bike warming up for a couple minutes every morning, is that enough to get my bike crushed?

    Evade police again too broad, if I choose to continue until I find a safe place to stop, am I correct in thinking that is ok?

    Hoon laws are always too broad by definition though, nothing in line with the intent as listed above is not already illegal, it just means that less or zero proof is required and its harder to fight charges you consider unfair. Eg burnouts are illegal, speeding is illegal, failing to stop for police is illegal. If this is the case, why new laws? Why not just choose existing offences as Hoon offences (eg speed by in excess of 30kmh) and have the increased penalties apply to those only?
  10. No offence intended dude, but that reasoning is more stupid than what I'd given you credit for :oops:

    I thought the points were highlighted because you didn't know or was surprised they were Type I offences, or maybe because you don't think they should be category one offences, to which I would have advised they've always been classed as such, and the same applies for other states.

    I do not make assumptions, so asked you the Q to clarify.

    ["In my opinion, those points are not specific enough in their wording. Their scope is too broad, and that brings the potential for their abuse."]

    Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle
    • Racing and speed trials on roads
    Wilfully starting a motor vehicle or driving a motor vehicle in a way that makes unnecessary noise or smoke
    Evade police

    If you want to increase your knowledge, there are 000's of posts to read from the last two years eg.

    New Hoon Laws
    Anti-hoon laws
    Penalties get nastier

    to name a few,

    or better still, read Hansard or judicial proceedings which have interpreted parliaments intent.

    But to expect more, or make conclusions on law based on four short sentences from a newspaper article is impetuous in anyone's language.

    ["Their scope is too broad, and that brings the potential for their abuse."]

    Irrelevant to the message the article is putting forward. Under previous anti-hoon laws, police could impound a vehicle for 48 hours after a first repeat offence, up to three months for a second repeat offence, or permanently for a third repeat offence.

    That is what changes, not the "scope" or "potential for their abuse" which always has and will be, something which can be exploited. That applies to any other law you want to discuss.

  11. Good. Hopefully will get rid of some idiots on the roads :). If you dumb enough to repeatedly do stupid stuff and get caught then you deserve nothing more then this :D.... Hell, I hope they make you watch too.
  12. Since 'Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle' and 'unnecessary noise or smoke are separate offences.. wouldn't speeding with an exhaust = permanent loss of vehicle? I'm glad 'Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle' is well specified and not open to abuse by fuzz who don't like the look of you..
  13. "speeding with an exhaust" means nothing. 60km/h in a 50km/h zone is speeding with an exhaust and bears no relevance to hoon laws.

    Besides, you can be charged and convicted in court for dangerous driving under the speed limit. That has been the case long before you were even born so it's something you should already know. If not, you do now (y)

    I refer you to Regina v Conventry [1938] at 637-38, where the High Court of Australia said:

    ‘... indifference to consequences is not an essential element ... of driving ... at a speed ... or in a manner which is dangerous to the public. The driver may have honestly believed that he was driving very carefully, and yet may be guilty of driving in a manner which is dangerous to the public. The jury is to determine, not whether the accused was in fact, as a matter of psychology, indifferent or not to the public safety, but whether he has driven in a manner which was dangerous to the public. The standard is an objective standard, “impersonal and universal, fixed in relation to the safety of other users of the highway” ... The standard is impersonal in the sense that it does not vary with individuals, and it is universal in the sense that it is applicable in the case of all persons who drive motor vehicles.

    No doubt the ... section does not exclude a defence of mistake of fact on reasonable grounds or of involuntariness (for example, interference by another person with the driving of the car). ... But, speaking generally, the expression of “driving at a speed, or in a manner ... dangerous to the public” describes the actual behaviour of the driver and does not require any given state of mind as an essential element of the offence.’

    Even referring to legislation alone will improve your knowledge. SECT 328A Criminal Code 1899 states:

    (1) A person who operates, or in any way interferes with the operation of a vehicle dangerously in any place commits a misdemeanour for which the maximum penalty is 200 penalty points or 3 years imprisonment.

    (2) If the offender-

    (a) at the time of committing the offence is adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or​

    (b) at the time of committing the offence is excessively speeding or taking part in a dangerous race or unlawful speed trial; or​

    (c) has been previously convicted either upon indictment or summarily of an offence against this section;​

    the person commits a crime for which the maximum penalty is 400 penalty points or 5 years imprisonment.​

    (3) If the offender has been-

    (a) previously convicted either upon indictment or summarily of an offence against this section committed while the offender was adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or​

    (b) twice previously convicted upon indictment or summarily (or once upon indictment and once summarily) of the same prescribed offence or different prescribed offences;​

    the court or justices shall upon conviction, impose as the whole or part of the punishment, imprisonment.​

    (4) A person who operates, or in any way interferes with the operation of, a vehicle dangerously in any place and causes the death or bodily harm to another person commits a crime and is liable on conviction on indictment-

    (a) to imprisonment for 10 years, if neither paragraph (b) or (c) applies or​
    (b) to imprisonment for 14 years if, at the time of committing the offence, the offender is-​
    (i) adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or​
    (ii) excess speeding; or​
    (iii) taking part in an unlawful race or unlawful speed trial; or​

    (c) to imprisonment for 14 years, if the offender knows, or ought reasonably know, the other person has been killed or injured, and the offender leaves the scene of the incident, other than to obtain medical or other help for the other person before a police arrives.​

    In order for the Police to prove their case at Court, they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused:

    (1) operated a motor vehicle
    (2) in a place, namely...
    (3) dangerously
    (4) as a result of the dangerous operation of the motor vehicle, causing the death of the deceased/ grievous bodily harm
    (5) was adversely affected by alcohol, and
    (6) if it has been alleged that the defendant has been previously convicted of any of the offences referred to in 328A (2) or (3) this circumstance of aggravation must be pleaded and proved.


  14. This guy is a troll right? I mean, if you own a (any) road vehicle in QLD you're pretty fcuked. All it takes is not paying attention/police trap when the speed goes from 80 to 60 down a hill or you don't see the sign because you were too busy staring at a roo that jumped onto the road or is about to, combined with a backfire when you started your bike that morning, and your bike's gone.
  15. I see the governments propaganda is working.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Why the big kick up??. If your a serial hoon and have been caught countless times for doing stupid shit you should pay the price, simple.

    I would prefer your car gets crushed because you were speeding and racing around my suburb then to have a innocent child or by stander injured or killed.

    Sometimes when I see stupid people speeding past everyone or recklessly cutting in and out of traffic on freeways or roads I someones wish they would stack into a pole and really hurt themselves so that they cannot hurt anyone besides then selves!
  17. Again more laws when police don't even enforce existing ones. How many times you seen a cyclist run a red in front of a cop with no repercussion? It's all just political BS.
  18. Is that directed specifically at cagers?