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 Skyes law

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by waedwe, Jan 6, 2010.

  1. #1 waedwe, Jan 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2014
    This was in todays daily telegraph and various online news reports

    didnt say it in this article sorry, but was looking and cant find today's telegraph article that also called for mandatory loss of the car

  2. I doubt this will do anything positive. The type of people who try and outrun the cops are likley to just go harder if the new harsher law came into play.

    If they wanted to get serious, they need to look at _safe_ ways to stop or track a vehicle in motion which doesnt involve following it at 140kmph. They just need to get creative and stop living in the 1980's.

    Ultimately, laws dont prevent things from happening.
  3. "The majority of police pursuits were triggered by the driver's reluctance to be picked up for relatively minor traffic matters but when caught"
    -State Opposition spokesman Michael Gallacher

    I call bullshit on this douche.

    on a slight tangent, I understand Tassie cops no longer engage in high speed pursuits because it was generally the same result of an innocent dying over nothing more than a pissant traffic ticket (or youths baiting the cops for a chase out of boredom)
  4. douchebag politicians. what happened was a tragedy but minimum sentencing and following QLD has never worked for anything, particularly law & order issues.
  5. Less than 4 people die per year, and we need tough new laws on this?

    How many were driving stolen cars?
    With the number of cameras the police have access to, a quick investigation should be able to identify most vehicles in crowded population centres, even if the police can't quite catch the number plate at the time.
    But a stolen car doesn't lead back to the owner... they'll still run... and if this law passes, there'll be even greater incentive for them to try to get away.
  6. helicopters.... call one in and wait for em to go home.
  7. You guys really have no idea.
  8. [​IMG]
  9. If you ban pursuits totally then all the scum steal cars and motorbikes with near impunity, if they get spotted, they just accelerate away to safety! Not to mention the drink drivers (who still may kill somebody down the road whether pursued or not!), disqualified drivers etc. This is exactly what happened in WA many years ago where they would steal high powered cars and do drive bys of police stations at high speed for fun, because they could! It is a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't! If you allow pursuits (even in restricted circumstances) some people will die, if you ban them totally the crime rate will increase. Can't have it each way. Perhaps if we raised some of our kids better or restricted breeding we wouldn't have so many car thieves?

  10. Not taking sides here but if you make a statement like this please back it up with a counter argument.
  11. I'm sorry, Smee, but I cannot. Certainly not on a public forum.

    However, my wish is that people who do not know what they are talking about stop making uninformed statements.

    I know, I know, this is the forum to do it, so I will just get back in my box and continue smiling to myself. I apologise for my outburst...
  12. What a copout...

    How do you know people making uninformed statements, you don't know them or their experiences...or is it easier to label them uninformed because their view is different than your own

  13. feel free to expand on that answer
  14. Dunno how I feel about this

    I've had a pursuit called on me simply because I did not hear the sirens for a while (motorway on a windy day + earphones)

    When I saw the lights etc, pulled over immediately... but I wouldn't wanna cop 3 years for it

    If they can't get the plate of whoever commited x minor traffic infringement I would say just let it go. Rolling through a stop sign instead of stopping dead or doing 10 over the posted limit doesn't warrant a police chase imo, let alone 3 years in a box
  15. Mandatory jail terms are unacceptable.
    The judiciary needs discretion.

    I'll fight the urge to quote Mrs Lovejoy.

    Then your first written correspondence should be parliament house, champ.

    Nice of you to wade into the discussion with... well nothing.

    Didn't your mother ever tell you "If you can't say anything that isn't stupid and useless shit, don't say anything at all." ???
  17. If you have nothing to hide from the Police, you have no reason or excuse to run. Until the situation is changed, the Police have the right to stop a motorist breaking the law or suspected of some offence, and it is the citizen's responsibility to obey a clear instruction from the Police. Of course, that's not suitable to the anarchy-lovers, or those who put their rights above other people's rights, but it IS the law of the land.

    That said, a better way of aprehending people who fail to obey a driection and drive off should be investigated. As a start, whatever the eventual outcome of prosecution for the original matter, the failure to obey a legal command should be added it to it, and the sentence or penalty should be IN ADDITION to the sentence or penalty for the original offence.
  18. #18 cejay, Jan 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2014
    I agree with this overall sentiment, but we have to put things into perspective.

    No one is suggesting that pursuits should not take place, but that the guidelines for entering into them and when to break them off should be reviewed. Apparently the system in QLD is to pursue only when there is imminent danger and not for routine or minor offences. Once again, we're talking about perspective.

    Someone failing to stop for a minor traffic offence isn't a danger to anyone, even if they've committed another criminal offence. Is it right to expose the remainder of the community to a risk that didn't exist before the chase began?

    We've all seen both the Australian, US and UK cop shows, where they seem to enter into pursuits for minor and trivial offences, where the person is clearly afraid of something, but chasing them and then them causing a fatal or serious accident leaves everyone worse off.

    The terrible events last week were related to another offence and whilst I expect the police to chase offenders down, the other drivers are likely to be scared, adrenalin pumping and not possessing of the skills of the police drivers, therefore much more likely to eventually crash. Is the chase worth the collar?

    Or because he's a copper?
  19. Of course it isn't, and the Police, at least here in NSW, have very clear guidelines as to whether or not the pursuit should be abandoned. Let's face it, if they have the number-plate of the car, unless it's stolen, they know all they need to know to make an orderly arrest, soon after, or later when the vehicle is spotted again.

    It's worth pointing out, however, that several recent crashes with dreadful results, have occurred after the pursuit has been abandoned. I'm not sure where to lay the blame in that case, because if the Police do not pursue ANYONE who has broken the law, or who is suspected of breaking the law, it will quickly become the norm that there will be a rise in law-breaking since there will be little fear of consequence.

    I should add that I'm in no way advocating the US approach of pursuit and violent apprehension with no thought for consequence; clearly some US Police still think it's the Wild West and they are hunting down the Indians......
  20. You get that impression, don't you? The US do seem a bit over keen.

    I am with you on this Paul, it isn't a simple solution and I'd not want to be run over by a car that wasn't being pursued because the police were scared of the repercussions, but it takes tragedies like this to remind everyone, the police included, that life takes precedence over property, every time.

    One thing though, laws created to address a single issue are almost always bad laws, badly drafted, badly enacted and badly implemented.