New Hoon Laws In Place

[blackrex]

So, you want to overtake a truck on a country road that is doing 95kp/h, and you are limited to a maximum of 100kp/h? Quick maths on that states that you will be exposed to danger on the wrong side of the road for over 40 seconds, where as at 120kp/h it drops to 8.5seconds (assumption made that to overtake the truck at a steady speed you need to gain 60m on the truck)

[gdogzgtr]

Since when is 25Km/h over fall into the "hoon" laws. All my training and reading has been 45+ Km/h over. Also the Car too low doesn't fit into the criteria for car to be seized either.

My basic knowledge is 45+km/h over speed limit, drive whilst disqualified/suspended with prior conviction for same, engage in speed trial (race) or improper use with loss of traction/excessive acceleration (burn out etc)

I've only impounded cars that have been for excessive speed and/or suspended. Tried twice to impound car that deliberately fish tailed around bend and then over 3 lanes of traffic but the S/SGT wouldn't authorize it.

I think if it means taking matter to court to impound then there will be a massive drop in impounds. At present we can issue fine and fill out paperwork for impound and all done by time tow arrives. I don't see many members wanting/willing to put full brief of evidence together for court to impound a car when they can just give you fine and be done in 5 minutes.

[Harey]

I think if it means taking matter to court to impound then there will be a massive drop in impounds. At present we can issue fine and fill out paperwork for impound and all done by time tow arrives. I don't see many members wanting/willing to put full brief of evidence together for court to impound a car when they can just give you fine and be done in 5 minutes.

Interesting so it may actually reduce the number of cars impounded. These changes could be an improvement to the current situation.

[DAS KAMU]

Also the Car too low doesn't fit into the criteria for car to be seized either.

You can loose your car for this

[TwoThumbsUp4UrNana]

These laws are created by ppl who r out of touch, who hav no idea about how to decrease 'hoon behaviour' who then pass it down to law enforcement which is then interpreted by them in their own individual way. But inturn there are those out there who are just irresponsible and dont learn creating this stereotype that ruin it for a lot of us. Its a vicious cycle, i dnt c a solution in the near future that will please everyone but i guess that idealistic of me to think every1 can be pleased

[Birds]

What about my nanna?

[Taso84]

You know, I agree with your sentiments...but you're doing exactly what you're complaining about...arguing/flaming on a forum with no real action occurring. Where's your petition and lobby group?

Sorry im too busy to actually organise but imsure theres some ppl on here that (work part time/unemployed/dont have to actually do work at work) and have the time to organise, but point taken

[Taso84]

In my opinion hoon laws should apply to any1 breaking any law whatsoever. In fact we should just get rid of the word defendant, and just insert the word hoon.

If u talk on the mobile whilst driving - phone impounded

If u ride a bike without a helmut - bike impounded

if u but out a ciggie on the footpath - pack of cigs impounded

if u drink drive - car and all alcohol in ur house impounded

if u shoplift - any possession of the hoon to the equal value of item stolen, impounded

if u try to bribe a police officer - money impounded

if u forge a doctors certificate - medicare card impounded

if u download pirated software - computer impounded

the list goes on....

[frozenpod]

well going the way it does, it'll only be a matter of time before everyone in VIC is a hoon according to the pollies.

can't blame the cops, they're not the ones that make up the laws. blame the people you've elected into state government, who are clearly passing bills to appease joe public by scapegoating. "we're spending $600,000 p/a on making our roads safer... by labelling people as hoons."

"hoons" unfortunately cop it as they are the ones people notice on the road. you can't tell a mass murderer or petty thief from a normal person, but you sure as hell can tell a loud or brightly coloured car.

knee jerk reaction politics. find the largest brightest target, do something about it, even if it doesn't solve the actual problem, and people will think you've revolutionised the system. gets you re-elected.

+1

Their just the ones that get paid the big dollars to enforce it....but some of them take it to far.

Something to think about, pollies are not experts in all areas and they seek expert advice on all different issues and review the information presented then make a decision. In terms of traffic laws the expert is Vic police and the laws are a direct result of there experiences/expert advice.

IMO the police have a lot to answer for as does the government.

So whilst you blame the pollies and support the police just remember they have a big hand in this as well.

What has happened that has lead to the current position, the analysis of accidents was changed I think in 2003 and the key difference the cause of accident relating to speeding. Under the current system accidents which are not related to excessive speed and deemed to be caused by speeding. So the statistics provided to the governement justify harsher penalities for speeding, justify more speed cameras.

As I have posted before the crash investigation/road toll statistics according to Peter D from monash accident research center are no longer valid. Dispite the governement using the statistics claiming speed is the number one killer on the road by international standards and proper accident investigation speed is the 17th highest cause.

My previous post

"

The governement in Australia uses fear to change public opinon to creat new laws and the public is conned into thinking we despirately need them when we don't.

We don't need hoons laws, as everything in the hoons laws was perviously covered by exsisting laws which are still in place. The hoons act has only changed one thing which allowed at the same time the government to introduce impounding cars.

It is a disgrace the attitude the police and government are trying to inforce/create is that if you are driving at 5km/hr below the speed limit you will be fine yet speed by just a couple of km/hr you are highly likely to quote Ken Lay "slide of the road into a tree".

The skill of feeling a car and driving to the conditions is totally lost.

IMO the roads are getting more and more dangerous with drivers that are not paying attention to anything other than there speedo.

The comment about having an instruction book is not how I would put it but perfectly in line with what is happening.

Car control no longer exsists, people are not driving but they are passengers sitting in the drivers seat.

IMO the current actions of government and police is resulting in a lower standard of driving and resulting in more accidents and in some cases more deaths on road.

The police have modified/tweaked the statistics to support there revenue rasing approach to traffic safety and the truth has been lost.

Earlier this year Ken Lay said we have had record large number of increase in young driver deaths on the road, the offical statistics drivers under 24 were down 30% from previous years yet the two older age group was up 700 and 800% and accounted for almost all the road toll on there own.

A good example of non truthfull statics was present on another forum by Peter D from the accident research center at Monash University which a fatal accident which he investigated he put down to by him to be 'failure to give way'. The police on the other hand recorded the cause of the accident 'speed'. The situation was as follows, major rual HWY with a side road meeting it ie T intersection, the vehicle on the main road going straight was estimated to be travelling at 105km/hr in a 100km/hr zone, car pulled out from a small side road which had a stop sign and they failed to stop. The vehicle on the HWY was unable to avoid the other car and a collison occured which resulted in multiple deaths (all occupants).

Pretty clear what was the cause of that accident 'failure to give way' and speed had nothing to do with the cause at all. Even if the vehilce on the major HWY was doing 100km/hr instead of the estimated 105km/hr it wouldn't have prevented the accident and would have been highly unlikely to have prevented deaths. But as the driver that was not at fault was estimated to be travelling at just above the speed limit police were able to use speed as the cause.

In other posts by Peter D

"Would be interesting to know how many road deaths are specifically attributable to hoon defined actions. The last data I looked at showed you were more likely to be killed on the road by mum, dad and the kids than a hoon. Most road deaths occur at or below the speed limit and speed is No17 on the list of major causes of road fatalities."

Given speed is the 17th highest cause of fatalities on the road there is no doubt there is 16 higher causes which at least some of could easily be targeted by media advertising, public awareness and police inforcement. But by doing so you don't generate the revenue from fining people for going 3km/hr over the speed limit and it actually costs money to educate and train people by both better driver training and community awareness to save lives.

The current approach is not helping and is creating a much bigger problem on the roads which is only getting worse. If there was a sudden change in governement approach it would probably take a generation or two too have a major impact as a lot of young to middle age drivers have bad habbits which are already ingrained. There are a lot of unaware passengers that sit in the drivers seat.

"

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Ma....html&st=80

[Wheezy]

couldn't have put it better frozenpod

[evade]

someone posted this comment to one of my youtube vids..although I haven't seen any backup for their claims, I sorta agree with the way they think...

---

it's been proven overseas that confiscation doesn't work. permanent confiscation is the worst because the great financial loss pushes the people into lower socio-economic brackets which in combination with the influence this has on their attitude towards the governing bodies, statistically makes them more likely to commit other crimes and be disadvantaged in ways that make the punishment far worse for society than the "hooning".

[Harey]

frozenpod for PM!!

[blackrex]

Something to think about, pollies are not experts in all areas and they seek expert advice on all different issues and review the information presented then make a decision. In terms of traffic laws the expert is Vic police and the laws are a direct result of there experiences/expert advice.

IMO the police have a lot to answer for as does the government.

So whilst you blame the pollies and support the police just remember they have a big hand in this as well.

What has happened that has lead to the current position, the analysis of accidents was changed I think in 2003 and the key difference the cause of accident relating to speeding. Under the current system accidents which are not related to excessive speed and deemed to be caused by speeding. So the statistics provided to the governement justify harsher penalities for speeding, justify more speed cameras.

As I have posted before the crash investigation/road toll statistics according to Peter D from monash accident research center are no longer valid. Dispite the governement using the statistics claiming speed is the number one killer on the road by international standards and proper accident investigation speed is the 17th highest cause.

The MUARC has a lot to answer for regarding these statistics that they publish. I know a few of the students in the Monash Uni Auto/Mech Engineering course, and each one of them has told me that is you want to work in that center, you have to subscribe to the philosophies contained in their briefs to the government, and that an opposing view (i.e. fatigue, lack of knowledge/concentration, conditions being causes) will get you removed very quickly.

The government in Australia uses fear to change public opinion to create new laws and the public is conned into thinking we desperately need them when we don't.

This line could be applied to global warming as well, it has long been used to justify government spending and to control the actions of the general populace, consider the fear of MAD and the Red Threat, this managed to keep the population fearful and looking towards the government to provide for them, rather than being self responsible. If the government can make the population totally subservient to themselves, then they have won.

[TwoThumbsUp4UrNana]

What about my nanna?

Two thumbs up.....

[FrangaR33]

The MUARC has a lot to answer for regarding these statistics that they publish. I know a few of the students in the Monash Uni Auto/Mech Engineering course, and each one of them has told me that is you want to work in that center, you have to subscribe to the philosophies contained in their briefs to the government, and that an opposing view (i.e. fatigue, lack of knowledge/concentration, conditions being causes) will get you removed very quickly.

This line could be applied to global warming as well, it has long been used to justify government spending and to control the actions of the general populace, consider the fear of MAD and the Red Threat, this managed to keep the population fearful and looking towards the government to provide for them, rather than being self responsible. If the government can make the population totally subservient to themselves, then they have won.

I agree wholeheartedly. This is just like any other time in history, the government of the day uses something the people are afraid in order to maintain control and distract people from the short comings in their respective societys. Your examples are quite right but you can also add:

Fear of the day

1930's - Financial Meltdown ,Facism, Communism and Japanese expansionism

1940's- More Facism, Communism and Japanese expansionism

1950's - Mcarthyism aka paranoid fear of Communism

1960's - More fear of Communism and advent of MAD (Mutually assured destruction)

1970's - Terrorism and the spread of Communism after the fall of South Vietnam

1980's - More fear of Communism

1990's - Nothing really stands out in this particular decade for people in the west to have to fear

2000's - Sars, Bird Flu, Terrorism, Financial Crisis's

So between the major unfounded fears like Sars and Bird Flu they need something to keep the people afraid whether its hoon driving, ethnic minorities, big bad corporations etc (basically ACA and TT wrapped up together)

[Taso84]

top post frozenpost.... assuming that you can quote sources/ justify the figures, you should submit that to a person or organisation that will do something about it or at least publicise it so that it becomes more well known

[blackrex]

1990's had global cooling at the start of it, as well as follow ups from the Chernobyl incident and HIV, and then was topped of by the so called millennium bug.

[DAS KAMU]

i want the 90's back

at least there were no

jet pilot/justift your existance/southern cross/unit/metal mulisha / flat cap / sisters jeans / fixie bike/ hipster cokheads around

[frozenpod]

The MUARC has a lot to answer for regarding these statistics that they publish. I know a few of the students in the Monash Uni Auto/Mech Engineering course, and each one of them has told me that is you want to work in that center, you have to subscribe to the philosophies contained in their briefs to the government, and that an opposing view (i.e. fatigue, lack of knowledge/concentration, conditions being causes) will get you removed very quickly.

I was at Monash from 2000 to 2005 I spent most of my time in the building next door to the accident research center. Whilst I don't know exactly what goes on there working 6-7 days a week often to 11pm I had the oppertunity to see quite a lot of testing which happened out of hrs. They had items sent to them from all over the world for testing.

I also saw the results from the barriers testing which are now on the monash fwy and seem to be popping up everywhere and I can assure you that from the crash test results it was clear which barrier was better and this is what the report recommeneded. The government how ever choose the cheaper option and the guys at Monash were not happy about it. It appears to me at that time they were credible.

As to students opinion there is a reason why they are still students, when the cause of accident in not obvisous blaming fatigue conditions ect becomes an easy way out. I don't know the specifics of the international standards but this is what Monash claim to use.

assuming that you can quote sources/ justify the figures,

Yes all my quotes come from Peter which he put in writting.

[evade]

i want the 90's back

at least there were no

jet pilot/justift your existance/southern cross/unit/metal mulisha / flat cap / sisters jeans / fixie bike/ hipster cokheads around

well said