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.

NSW Cops don't need to follow road rules right

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by kolaemcee, Aug 10, 2011.

  1. Other day, pulled out from street parking in Wiley Park and turned right, just before a set of lights. Cop car in front of me decides he'll start reversing in my lane without warning, to go back and talk to a dodgy looking rider in hoodie on a babyblade.

    No wave to say sorry for backing me up, or for holding up traffic for 3 minutes talking to this bloke before deciding to tell him to pull over. Didn't know whether I should filter past or not, so just waited but wasn't happy. Rude pricks, at least show some sort of apology for holding up other people. Didn't even have sirens on.
  2. Sadly, cops don't seem to do as much stupid shit around me with the gopro on my head. Alas.
  3. Yeah, I wish I had one that day. I've been thinking for ages about getting one, I think this and other recent stupidities have sealed that decision.
  4. I'm sorry, I just can't resist. No, police don't have to follow any of the road rules, at any time. And no, they don't have to have the lights and/or sirens on whilst doing so.

    You said he was a "dodgy looking character" yet you're upset the police officer was talking to him? If he was as dodgy as you say he was, he could have been on his way to do a break and enter at your house.

    I bet if you saw a dodgy character next to a cop and the cop didn't stop him & talk to him you would get upset by that too. And he held up traffic for 3 whole minutes? Boo hoo. And he didn't stop doing his job to offer you an apology? Wow, that is really inconsiderate of him. :-({|=

    Half of people get upset with lazy cops, the other half with the ones who are working hard, lose/lose really.
    • Like Like x 9
  5. I can go one better. Driving behind a wagon heading east along broad arrow road at narwee shops, one lane each way. Another cozzer going the other way, they decide to stop and chat for 30 seconds in the middle of the road. tossers.

    Welcome, it's always good to know when we've got another one. Police are well respected on this forum, you'll feel right at home.

  6. The dodgy looking fellow could have distracted the cop, who might have been on the way to do a break and enter at his house. We can't know.
  7. If some one held your boys up for 3 mins thet would probably pull em over and give them a ticket.
  8. [​IMG]
    • Like Like x 2
  9. lol ok, the cop pretty much didn't seem to check if I was there before backing up. What if in my place was someone who wasn't paying attention and the copper runs into him?

    And my point is he could've taken him off the road to chat straight away instead of doing it in the middle of the road. Yeah I'm sure you'd just sit there patiently if you were in the same situation instead of thinking 'why can't he just pull him off the road'? ](*,)
  10. [​IMG]
    • Like Like x 3
  11. The next time I see a dodgy character on the road I'm not going to stop and talk to him, which may lead to searching him, because some people may be offended that I would hold them up for 2 minutes. That will solve it.

    Oh, and Lilley, don't worry, I'm well trained in sarcasm, so I'm right up there with ya :wink:

    Also, to the OP, yeah, fair enough he could have pulled him off the road. Was it possible in this circumstance though?
  12. I'm offended that you'd accost someone and search him without probable cause. How's that?
  13. Is that a requirement in this country? Where can we find a reference to that?8-[
  14. I consider it a basic civil right, and it shits me to no end that Australia is such a police state in that regard, wherein the police can apparently stop and search people with no evidence that they committed a crime, simply that the officer wants to search them. There are very few checks and balances on police and government power over individuals here, and it's something that needs to be changed as far as I'm concerned.

    on a similar note: Video game, movie, book censorship. Censorship is one of the single most offensive things out there, and yet in 2011 it's still widely practiced here. Why are people OK with this?
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Why do people need a reason not to be bothered by trivial matters? It's the ones who do get bothered that need to explain why they do.

    If I recall correctly, the US army purchased 40000 copies of a book of an ex-soldier to make sure that certain things did not get released.
  16. The US government can go **** themselves, too, though I haven't heard that particular story.

    Anyway, trivial? When the government thinks the people cannot be trusted with information, it's the government itself that's not trustworthy.
  17. In fact in one instance that just came to me, censorship is absolutely critical. The case where that victorian no-name big mouth got done for contempt of court, I would argue that above any freedom of speech/censorship argument is the right to a fair trial. That's already under strain today with trial by media as it is, but there is no chance of a suspect or alleged getting a fair trial if media is free to publish anything they wish about a court case as long as it doesn't cross the bound of defamation.
  18. See, I don't view that as censorship in the way I mean. I'm ok with that sort of thing on a temporary basis, and frankly I think the media are disgusting when it comes to that sort of thing. I'm VERY strongly opposed to LAWS preventing the media from talking about ongoing cases, but I think they shouldn't be reporting on them until they're complete.

    Anyway, I'm not ok with a government saying "no, you cannot have books about euthanasia", or "Video games with drug use will not be available to anyone". That's the sort of censorship that pisses me off, because if they're willing to ban one book, they're willing to ban more.
  19. He said he'd stop and talk to him, which may lead to him being searched. Depends on the results of the conversation, I'd guess...