Funny Things that 'Foreigners' Do -

[Jim Cate]

Re revenue from traffic fines:

A long time ago (1960) I was living in a small town in the central valley of California. The local council was debating the purchase of an early model traffic radar speed gun. They were pretty expensive in t hose days, and several of the councilors thought it too extravagant and just a toy for the cops to play with. None the less, they purchased one , overruling the naysayers.

It paid for itself in the first week of use.

I don't think things have changed much!

Jim

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by IslandHopper

In Queensland......

https://mypolice.qld.gov.au/bundaber...ng-headlights/

Been there done that and had the fine to prove it, although it was only $60 at the time.....

I'll go out on a limb here and suggest you were flashing with your high beam; if so, now that is clearly an offence in all Australian states. This is something I would never do; low beam only for Wottie

Do the crime - do the time

And I probably wouldn't take legal advice from the Qld coppers, they do have history of being biassed and when they use the word 'hypothetically,' then all bets are off!

However each to their own!

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Re revenue from traffic fines:

A long time ago (1960) I was living in a small town in the central valley of California. The local council was debating the purchase of an early model traffic radar speed gun. They were pretty expensive in t hose days, and several of the councilors thought it too extravagant and just a toy for the cops to play with. None the less, they purchased one , overruling the naysayers.

It paid for itself in the first week of use.

I don't think things have changed much!

Jim

Yep, nothing has changed except the wider spread use of these tidy little revenue earners! City hall must rub their hands in glee every time they order a new batch 'revenue raisers'.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

.....

The flasher is working under the premise that the flashie is speeding. If you aren't trying to warn them not to speed, why are you flashing your lights at them?

.......

Ahead, Will Robinson.

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I'll go out on a limb here and suggest you were flashing with your high beam; if so, now that is clearly an offence in all Australian states. This is something I would never do; low beam only for Wottie

Do the crime - do the time

And I probably wouldn't take legal advice from the Qld coppers, they do have history of being biassed and when they use the word 'hypothetically,' then all bets are off!

However each to their own!

Don't go to far out on that limb, it's a long drop headlights only, and i've heard of many an instance of fines been issued for such all over Aus including my Brother in WA. Having been involved in the car scene all my life this is not new news at all, it's been going on for years even for flashing a warning of Random Breath Test ahead......

Not sure whether you can access it but here a random thread from a Ford forum im a Mod on, plenty more on the subject in there....

https://www.fordforums.com.au/showth...dlight+Warning

[dannc]

Originally Posted by double u

all POI warnings on mobile phones, Apps, nav-systems illegal in Germany & Switzerland!

Interesting. I wonder how that works with Google Navigation application, which does alert one to "speed traps" up ahead.

Funny thing about the Google Navigation alerts is that they are mostly wrong or they occur too late.

Later,
Dan

[double u]

they catch ya-they fine ya!

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Speaking of foreigners:
If foreigners are upset to have had their visas cancelled ...
Why don't they just apply for MasterCards, instead?

Wrong thread Gord.

[Mike Cunningham]

With Lucas electrics, it's a wonder either one of you was moving.

[Mike Cunningham]

Dana-Tenacity, What you describe is a symptom of the abyss our United States of America finds itself in.
Elimination of sidewalks in suburbia and the electric garage door opener have contributed to people seeing less and less of each other, seeing each other as humans less and a loss of empathy in general.
Throw in the divisiveness of our era and suspicion of anything not exactly like you is the result.
We're workin' on it.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Mike Cunningham

With Lucas electrics, it's a wonder either one of you was moving.

As a previous owner of a lotus, an austin healy, jaguar, mga and several triumph's, I am absolutely convinced that english people should not be allowed to play with electricity.

Proud foreigner since 1964.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by IslandHopper

Don't go to far out on that limb, it's a long drop headlights only, and i've heard of many an instance of fines been issued for such all over Aus including my Brother in WA. Having been involved in the car scene all my life this is not new news at all, it's been going on for years even for flashing a warning of Random Breath Test ahead......

Not sure whether you can access it but here a random thread from a Ford forum im a Mod on, plenty more on the subject in there....

https://www.fordforums.com.au/showth...dlight+Warning

I'll take my chances in persisting with the view that 'flashing' low beam is not illegal under the traffic act anywhere in Australia. I can't find any section that prohibits it. I have yet to hear of anyone who have challenged this in the courts and lost. Actually I have never heard of anyone challenging it - losing or winning.

Most people get a fine from a copper and think it's a fair cop and pay up. I think almost all of the 'headlight flashers' use the flash function of the steering column stalk which flashes high beam lights. As previously posted, this is an open and shut case - the flasher is guilty under the traffic act with respect to the operation of the high beam headlights.

I think most coppers would never give moments attention to what lights are been flashed, see the headlight flasher and pull 'em over and write the ticket.

The thing is - you are only guilty if the action (of flashing low beam) is prohibited under the traffic act. The coppers can write the ticket if they want and you can pay the fine without thought but if you challenge the legality of the ticket, you can go off to court for a ruling. You don't have to prove your innocence, the coppers have to prove your guilt. The prosecution has to prove you used high beam.

Now this is where it might get sticky as most likely it would become a 'he said / you said' argument. If the copper wants to lie about what beam was being used and you don't have proof otherwise, then most likely the court will side with the copper's word rather than the defendant.

Wottie is now designing a data logger to log the time (and place) when the headlights (high and low beam functions) are ON and OFF. See you in court fellas .

I dunno about all the states, but here in Tassie (and I think in WA and Qld) there have big government paid for roadside signs saying that speed cameras are in use. Down here they even have permanently mounted radar camera sites and permanent signs alerting you that they are up the road. Pretty argue to argue that the flashers are more nefarious!

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I'll take my chances in persisting with the view that 'flashing' low beam is not illegal under the traffic act anywhere in Australia. I can't find any section that prohibits it. I have yet to hear of anyone who have challenged this in the courts and lost. Actually I have never heard of anyone challenging it - losing or winning.

Most people get a fine from a copper and think it's a fair cop and pay up. I think almost all of the 'headlight flashers' use the flash function of the steering column stalk which flashes high beam lights. As previously posted, this is an open and shut case - the flasher is guilty under the traffic act with respect to the operation of the high beam headlights.

I think most coppers would never give moments attention to what lights are been flashed, see the headlight flasher and pull 'em over and write the ticket.

The thing is - you are only guilty if the action (of flashing low beam) is prohibited under the traffic act. The coppers can write the ticket if they want and you can pay the fine without thought but if you challenge the legality of the ticket, you can go off to court for a ruling. You don't have to prove your innocence, the coppers have to prove your guilt. The prosecution has to prove you used high beam.

Now this is where it might get sticky as most likely it would become a 'he said / you said' argument. If the copper wants to lie about what beam was being used and you don't have proof otherwise, then most likely the court will side with the copper's word rather than the defendant.

Wottie is now designing a data logger to log the time (and place) when the headlights (high and low beam functions) are ON and OFF. See you in court fellas .

I dunno about all the states, but here in Tassie (and I think in WA and Qld) there have big government paid for roadside signs saying that speed cameras are in use. Down here they even have permanently mounted radar camera sites and permanent signs alerting you that they are up the road. Pretty argue to argue that the flashers are more nefarious!

I neither said it was or is under the Traffic Act, i said you will still get busted for it, and if you read/research a little more you will find you are NOT getting busted under the Traffic Act, i was fined for hindering Police business (can't remember the exact terms as was years ago) and i think flashing your high beams (Traffic Act) within 200m of another vehicle was around only $30 if i remember correctly.

If you read the link to the Bundy Police i provided again you will see.....

Several provisions under the law apply, ranging from a traffic offence dealt with by a traffic infringement notice with a $188 fine, up to being arrested for obstructing/hindering an officer and an appearance in court. In this case the punishment carries a maximum of 40 penalty units or 6 months imprisonment.

.....a whole range of possibilities are available for the Rozzers to use, not just the Traffic Act, and as everyone knows, what actually happens depends a whole lot on your attitude when nicked

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by IslandHopper

I neither said it was or is under the Traffic Act, i said you will still get busted for it, and if you read/research a little more you will find you are NOT getting busted under the Traffic Act, i was fined for hindering Police business (can't remember the exact terms as was years ago) and i think flashing your high beams (Traffic Act) within 200m of another vehicle was around only $30 if i remember correctly.

If you read the link to the Bundy Police i provided again you will see.....



.....a whole range of possibilities are available for the Rozzers to use, not just the Traffic Act, and as everyone knows, what actually happens depends a whole lot on your attitude when nicked

Well of course I wasn't commenting on your particular case; not only do I not know the details, it would not be appropriate to do so on CF. I apologise if it sounded like I was.

As a generalisation, if someone in a similar circumstance was fined under whatever act and they thought they were guilty, the smart thing to do is pay the fine. However if they thought differently and had reason to believe the Rozzers could not prove the allegation, then they have the option to have the matter heard in a court.

Coppers do make mistakes and they don't always follow the letter of the law when writing up a ticket. I have challenged a couple of remote camera speeding tickets and both times I was vindicated. One because the face of the driver was sufficiently unclear (too blurry) to determine the identity of the driver. Note, it wasn't a case of me refusing to identify the driver, rather it wasn't possible from the evidence provided by the coppers. If I couldn't or wouldn't identify the driver, it would be on my head and I would have to pay. However if it wasn't possible due to their lack of suitable evidence, they had not met the standard of evidence required and I would win. They withdrew the ticket before getting to court.

The other time was because there were two vehicles in the photo and the number plate of my car was outside the 'sweet spot' of the photo The police had given their own guidelines of size and shape of the 'sweet spot' but in this instance, they hadn't followed their own guidelines - they lost. Both in WA. Of course I wasn't speeding in either case but I didn't contest that!!!!!

A Qld copper (or several) was writing tickets for trailer boat owners for not having a marked rated shackle on the safety chain between trailer and car. Apparently he hung out at boat ramps and wrote tickets accordingly. People paid up (they assumed they were guilty) even though the law did not require a marked rated shackle. It simply required the shackle to meet a certain load rating. This continued until someone took umbrage and knew the exact wording of the act. Off to court and the trailer owner won. The onus on the prosecution was they had to prove the shackle did not meet the standard. There was no requirement on the owner to prove it met the standard.

The copper stopped writing up such tickets - presumably he had to do some proper policing after that.

This is past history, I dunno what the requirements are today and I'm too lazy to look it up .

I totally agree with your last sentence - as they say, many people talk themselves into trouble. I would not argue with them, just answer the necessary questions politely, admit nothing, take the ticket, go home and consider your options.

[dannc]

Originally Posted by Mike Cunningham

Dana-Tenacity, What you describe is a symptom of the abyss our United States of America finds itself in.
Elimination of sidewalks in suburbia and the electric garage door opener have contributed to people seeing less and less of each other, seeing each other as humans less and a loss of empathy in general.
Throw in the divisiveness of our era and suspicion of anything not exactly like you is the result.
We're workin' on it.

It is not a lack of sidewalks or electric garage door opener but air conditioning, lack of a porch and TV that has caused be to see less of each other.

I have never seen a neighbor hood with out a sidewalk. Most of the new subdivisions have them and they are putting in porches in many of the developments I have seen down here.

I used to have a dog and lived in the 'burbs. The dog and I would go for a walk every evening through our neighborhood and the one next to us. We would seldom see people outside. Even kids where inside. You would only see people come home from work and disappear into the house...

Then Hurricane Fran paid a visit and the power went out in the neighborhood next to ours for over a week. It was amazing to see people outside talking, sitting on their porches if they had one, and the kids playing in yards and streets...

Then the power went back on and the people all disappeared back in the house.

With no power there was no AC so they went outside to cool off. With no power there was no TV or other electronic entertainment. Once that power appeared the people disappeared.

Later,
Dan