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.

VIC Criminal Bikie Gangs

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by chicken78, Nov 14, 2012.

  1. #1 chicken78, Nov 14, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012

    New laws will enable police to strike pre-emptively against criminal bikie gangs and make interstate orders enforceable in Victoria.
    The legislation introduced into Victorian parliament on Wednesday gives police the power to apply to the Supreme Court to order criminal bikie gangs and other gangs to be declared banned.
    Once an organisation is declared illegal, the court can then make control orders banning members of that group from associating or participating in gang activities, including riding together and wearing their club colours and emblems.
    Attorney-General Robert Clark says the legislation allows for control orders in other states to be enforceable in Victoria.
    "It's important that these gangs are not able to simply shift their operation from one jurisdiction to another," he told reporters.
    Individuals who breach a control order will face up to five years' jail and organisations can be fined up to $400,000 and have assets confiscated.
    Laws cracking down on criminal bikie groups in South Australia and NSW were struck down by the High Court after successful challenges by bikie gangs.
    But Mr Clark said he was confident the Victorian legislation would stand up to a
    High Court challenge as it was based on normal judicial process.
    "The South Australian legislation provisions, the part that was struck down by the High Court, sought ... to have the court give effect to a decision of the government," he said.
    "We are saying all along this is a matter for Victoria Police to make a decision to put the information before the court."
    Police may apply to the Supreme Court to hold closed hearings if sensitive criminal intelligence needs to be raised.
    Mr Clark said while bikie gangs operate under a pretence of legality the feedback from law enforcement agencies across Australia was that they were involved in serious criminal activity, such as drug trafficking, extortion, violence and arson.
    "The current law means that police are acting against individual criminal offences and prosecuting those particular offences," he said.
    "But the police do not have the power to act pre-emptively against gangs to strike at the entire activity of the gang; that is the gap that this legislation will fill."
    Serious criminal activity is defined as systematic and organised activity involving offences carrying jail time of more than 10 years.
    The government hopes to have the legislation passed by parliament before Christmas and plans to introduce more bills to allow police to remove criminal bikie and other gangs' fortifications early next year
  2. Lets see if this gets through. Lets hope not.

    Maybe they are planning on using it against the catholic church
  3. Hey let's ban skydiving teams and paintball teams and Muslims next, I bet at least one person from each of those is a criminal, too. WHATEVER YOU DO DON'T LET THEM HANG OUT.

    Yay fascists.
  4. What is their definition of a "gang"? Have they reported that anywhere?
  5. How long before its illegal to ride in a group of more than 2?
  6. must be the gang of 'mothers' hanging around outside primary schools with their evil, dangerous, anti-social SUV's.
  7. "
    Tipping its covering gangs & "similar groups" that they perceive pose a threat to public safety & order.
  8. Isn't it a good thing then that most of the OMC's are incorporated clubs and associations and not gangs.
  9. Will be interesting to see how it pans out. I think it was SA that tried a similar tactic, the new laws were challenged in the high court and subsequently overturned as the courts found powers to determine any group as a criminal organisation as invalid.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Yes I realise that's what they are intending it to cover but they would need to be working with an actual definition.

    All I can envision is Kristallnacht
  11. #11 chicken78, Nov 14, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    I agree with you.

    Definition- tatts, motorbike, more than one=gang?
  12. That's an unworkable definition. They couldn't possibly be that overtly stupid.

    Does anyone from SA know what they used as the working definition in that state?
  13. Black robes, horsehair wigs, secrecy, private clubhouses...

    Blue shirts with 'patches', matching cars, guns, private clubhouses...

    Beige suits, hookers, drugs, house of representatives, private clubhouses...

    Just sayin'... :whistle:
    • Like Like x 2
  14. NSW also tried a similar law and it too was overturned.

    The definition of 'gang' is irrelevant, it's a term being used by the government and police to instill fear in the general population.

    At a fairly basic level they (the government/police) have to prove that the organisation exists for the sole purpose of committing crime. Kind of like the USA's RICO laws which have been used against the OMC's in America with limited, or even zero, success.

    The issue with the NSW and SA legislation (if memory serves me correctly) was that the legislation removed the common law right to hear the evidence against you and removed your right to 'have your day in court'.

    I'm sure Justus would be able to give us the actual legal definition of why it was overturned.
  15. Does anyone else find the usual Police argument of "We have to keep arresting these people because, well, look at how often they've been arrested in the past" absurdly circular. I noted it used in a news story on the Rebels MC the other night.
  16. Agreed.

    Also interesting is that given the police KNOW they are criminals, why aren't they arresting them, presenting the evidence in court and ultimately locking them up.

    Oh, sorry, that's right, that requires real evidence, not the made up stuff that they tried to use in SA and NSW.
  17. Also, the biggest, most dangerous gang in the state are the ones doing the arresting. Makes sense.
  18. Quite so. I'd take the "Look at their record" argument far more seriously if the number quoted was for convictions. Because, unless there is something valid to back it up, the number of arrests may only be evidence of an orchestrated campaign of harassment.

    First rule of business. Eliminate the competition.
  19. 2 is enough anyway.
    Otherwise you get stuck being a conga line of retards.
    • Like Like x 2
  20. Interesting attitude from the Vic government.
    "Well the other states tried to do this and it was unconstitutional, so lets fiddle around with the variables and have another crack!"

    Because surely the laws were only unconstitutional on a technicality...[/sarcasm]