First Hoon Car Crushed in WA
Diesel Damo
Car crushed under anti-hoon law
A 19-year-old Karratha man has this afternoon become the first driver
to have their car crushed under WA's tough anti-hoon laws.
Const. Nathaniel Kett said that the man's 1992 Mitsubishi Lancer had
been crushed at about 2pm after police made a successful application
to a Magistrate to have the vehicle destroyed following the driver's
third conviction under the hoon legislation.
He said the driver had on September 18 been convicted of reckless
driving and driving without a motor driver's licence and had also lost
his licence for three years and been given heavy fines.
Const. Kett said police received a report from a member of the public
that the man was driving recklessly on the North West Coastal Highway
between Karratha and Roeburne on June 11. Police then intercepted the
Lancer and charged the driver.
Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
valued at less than $1000.
hippo
>
> http://fat.ly/puxvn
Was that after 2pm? If so, I'd say significantly less!
--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au
Brad
"hippo" <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1@REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote in
message news:hdd5u9$kjp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
"Mr Johnson said the engine was donated to a TAFE college and the body was
provided to SES volunteers for training."
So it wasn't crushed, it was dismantled. Much better idea so as not to waste
the car it's self but not as spectacular as stating it was "Crushed".
Had a friend whose car ended up at a fire station for practise with the jaws
of life. I bet it gave the fireies a real shock, most cars are made of
tinfoil these days, his was an old square shaped val. Would've given the
jaws something to chew on.
--
Brad Leyden
6� 43.5816' S 146� 59.3097' E WGS84
To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit (or
laugh at my mistakes)
>
>
Pit
> "hippo" <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1@REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote in
More Fantastic journalism from the WORST Australian rag
No wonder Journos are usually considered lower than shark shit
Jason James
"Pit" <spaml...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b94f281d-5508-444b...@y32g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Even so, this type of action, destroying property, is one step removed from
Fascist "burn the books" so the population has an attitude adjustment.
Consfiscate it, sell it, use the funds to pay his fines.
Jason
Brad
"Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com> wrote in message
news:7lus1oF...@mid.individual.net...
| Brad wrote:
|
| >>> Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
| >>> valued at less than $1000.
|
| >> Was that after 2pm? If so, I'd say significantly less!
|
| > body was provided to SES volunteers for training."
|
| > So it wasn't crushed, it was dismantled. Much better idea so as not
| > to waste the car it's self but not as spectacular as stating it was
| > "Crushed".
|
It
| was shown on the local news being crushed.
| If you'd read the link properly you would have seen this...
|
| "The first car to be confiscated under the new laws, in May this year, was
| not crushed
| Mr Johnson said the engine was donated to a TAFE college and the body was
| provided to SES volunteers for training."
|
|
|
| Dyna
|
| All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.
|
|
Thanks for that I shouldn't skim so quickly, usually don't click links but
that sounded interesting.
ti...@beerlover.com
So what was the penalty?
Crushing a Mitsubishi can be considered doing the owner a favour.
John_H
>
>Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
>valued at less than $1000.
Hmmm. Daresay it was unencumbered and uninsured then... wouldn't want
to leave the financiers and insurers to carry the can! :)
--
John H
The Raven
do something more environmentally concsious like resell the vehicle or
recycle it through a wrecker?
Jock
"The Raven" <swils...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4afa8ac8$0$5420$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
: Isn't the whole idea of crushing somewhat stupid? Wouldn't it be better to
: do something more environmentally concsious like resell the vehicle or
: recycle it through a wrecker?
:
No.
1. It's a mitsubishi
2. It's old
3. It's a mitsubishi
4. See 1 and 3 then repeat.
:)
Neil Gerace
> Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
> valued at less than $1000.
Was that before or after he stripped it for parts and turned it in?
Pit
<dynasoar..REMOVE..THI...@ozdebate.com> wrote:
> Pit wrote:
> > "Brad" <bradley...@spammail.com> wrote:
> >> "Mr Johnson said the engine was donated to a TAFE college and the
> >> body was provided to SES volunteers for training."
> >> So it wasn't crushed, it was dismantled. Much better idea so as not
> >> to waste the car it's self but not as spectacular as stating it was
> >> "Crushed".
> >> Had a friend whose car ended up at a fire station for practise with
> >> the jaws of life. I bet it gave the fireies a real shock, most cars
> >> are made of tinfoil these days, his was an old square shaped val.
> >> Would've given the jaws something to chew on.
> > No wonder Journos are usually considered lower than shark shit
>
> part read the article. The stripped vehicle happened some time ago.
> I'm sure the Journos will accept your apologies
>
> --
> Dyna
>
> All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.
Ahh so .In that case please pass the tomatoe sauce as I eat humble
pie as I apologise
to the journo . Opens mouth to change feet and havea bite of humble
pie .
Hope your enjoying retirement and staying well
cheers
Pit
<dynasoar..REMOVE..THI...@ozdebate.com> wrote:
> Dyna Soar wrote:
> > It was crushed, Phil, and shown being crushed on Perth TV news. Brad
> > only part read the article. The stripped vehicle happened some time
> > ago. I'm sure the Journos will accept your apologies
>
>
> --
> Dyna
>
> All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.
No wuckers and without the smiley thanks for the correction.
Pit
I recall reading somewhere that they can also be sold at auction
and the money goes into the proceeds of crime tin will check the cat
when get a mo
and back to you .
Not sure if it was only mentioned or got passed through legislation .
If Not -I agree 100% with your point
Pit
Found it and spoke with Chief super
vehicle may be sold rather than crushed
see thye act that applies here
ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1974 - SECT 80J
80J . Disposing of confiscated, uncollected vehicles and items
therein
(1) In this section —
confiscated vehicle means a vehicle that is confiscated under
section 80A(1), 80C(1) or 80CB(1);
item means an item that was in or on a confiscated vehicle or
an uncollected vehicle at the time when —
(a) the vehicle was impounded under section 79(1)
or 79A;
(b) the vehicle was surrendered; or
(c) under section 78C, the vehicle was conveyed to
a place for storage,
as is relevant to the case;
uncollected vehicle means a vehicle that was impounded under
section 79(1) or 79A or on an impounding order and not collected
within 28 days after the end of the impounding period.
(2) The Commissioner may sell or otherwise dispose of
a confiscated vehicle, an uncollected vehicle or an item.
(3) The Commissioner is not to sell or otherwise
dispose of a confiscated vehicle, an uncollected vehicle or an item
unless —
(a) any appeal against the conviction for an
offence in respect of which the vehicle was impounded or confiscated
is determined; and
(b) any appeal against an impounding or
confiscation order in respect of the vehicle is determined.
(4) The Commissioner is not to sell or otherwise
dispose of an uncollected vehicle or an item unless —
(a) each responsible person is given at least 14
days’ written notice of the Commissioner’s intention to sell or
dispose of the vehicle or item;
(b) a notice of the intention to sell or dispose
of the vehicle or item is published, at least 14 days before the
proposed sale or disposal, in a newspaper having State-wide
circulation;
(c) in the case of an item, reasonable steps have
been taken to return the item to its owner; and
(d) any proceedings under subsection (5) or (6) in
relation to the vehicle or item and any appeal in respect of those
proceedings are determined.
(5) The owner of an uncollected vehicle may apply to
the Magistrates Court for an order that the sale or disposal of the
vehicle under subsection (2) not take place until after such time as
is specified in the order but no later than 3 months after the day of
the order.
(6) The owner of an item may apply to the Magistrates
Court for an order that the item be returned.
(7) Proceeds of the sale or disposal under subsection
(2) of a vehicle or item are to be paid in the following order of
priority —
(a) for expenses incurred in selling the vehicle
or item;
(b) in the case of a confiscated vehicle, for
expenses incurred consequent on the confiscation of the vehicle;
(c) in satisfaction of an unpaid amount for which
a person is liable under section 79E;
(d) in satisfaction of an unpaid amount of a
judgment debt arising out of a liability under section 79E;
(e) in satisfaction of an unpaid amount for which
a person is liable under section 80H;
(f) in satisfaction of an unpaid amount of a
judgment debt arising out of a liability under section 80H;
(g) for the expenses incurred in storing the
vehicle after the impounding period ends;
(h) in the case of an uncollected vehicle, in
satisfaction of any unpaid amount known to the Commissioner for which
the vehicle is nominated in writing as security for the payment of
that amount;
(i) in the case of a confiscated vehicle, in
satisfaction of any unpaid amount known to the Commissioner —
(i) for which the vehicle was nominated in
writing as security for the payment of that amount; and
(ii) that, but for the confiscation of the
vehicle, would have been payable to a person other than the person
convicted of the offence in respect of which the vehicle was
confiscated;
(j) the balance, in the case of a confiscated
vehicle —
(i) if the vehicle was confiscated under
section 80A(1) or 80C(1), to the Treasurer of the State for the public
uses of the State;
(ii) if the vehicle was confiscated under
section 80CB(1), to the credit of the Confiscation Proceeds Account
established in accordance with the Criminal Property Confiscation Act
2000 section 130;
(k) the balance, in the case of an uncollected
vehicle or an item, to the Treasurer of the State to be dealt with
under the Unclaimed Money Act 1990 as prescribed retained money.
(8) A person who acquires an uncollected vehicle or an
item on a sale or disposal under subsection (2) of the vehicle or item
obtains a good title to the vehicle or item if the person acquires it
in good faith and without notice of any failure to comply with
subsection (4) in relation to the sale or disposal.
[Section 80J inserted by No. 10 of 2004 s. 13; amended by No.
4 of 2007 s. 10, 23 and 31(1); No. 24 of 2008 s. 22, 23, 24(1) and
25.]
Jeßus
8b119a...@u25g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, spaml...@gmail.com said...
:
The only possible reason for crushing is for making a spectacle out of
the whole thing. Any confiscated vehicle should be auctioned off or
otherwise passed onto somebody else, one way or the other. Destroying a
(presumably) perfectly good vehicle is just plain irresponsible and says
more about our government than it does about the offender.
F Murtz
Jeßus
:
So would their fear be any less if their car was sold rather than
crushed? Either way, they still lose the car.
Noddy
"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.256652693...@news.x-privat.org...
> So would their fear be any less if their car was sold rather than
> crushed? Either way, they still lose the car.
They do, but in selling it there's a chance they could get it back. I know
if I had any of my cars confiscated I'd be *far* more upset at the prospect
of it being crushed rather than it being sold to someone else.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Jason James
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4afbaa61$0$14867$c30e...@exi-reader.telstra.net...
Yeah,..but a line is crossed when perfectly good property is destroyed. It
smacks of the IDF destroying Arab houses,..an intensely personal action
designed to terrorify and strike at the heart.
Jason
Jason James
"The Raven" <swils...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4afa8ac8$0$5420$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> do something more environmentally concsious like resell the vehicle or
> recycle it through a wrecker?
Exactly,..it's moronic at best,..criminal waste at worst.
Jason
F Murtz
much more traumatic when the love of their life gets crushed.
F Murtz
Jason James
"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4afbbbfa$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Ohh great,..who's next? Once the gate is opened....
Jason
Jason James
> Jason James wrote:
>> "The Raven" wrote ...
>
>>> Isn't the whole idea of crushing somewhat stupid? Wouldn't it be
>>> better to do something more environmentally concsious like resell
>>> the vehicle or recycle it through a wrecker?
>
>> Exactly,..it's moronic at best,..criminal waste at worst.
>
> conclusions.
>
> Since the new hoon laws have come in in WA, they're auctioned off quite a
> number of confiscated, then unclaimed, vehicles.
> They've crushed one!
>
> And, considering the make, I wouldn't be surprised if the crushed one was
> one that was passed in at auction.
That's edifying,...still ,they crushed a piece of property,...where does it
stop? Remember Krystalnicht? (sp)
Jason
Atheist Chaplain
news:4afbb1b6$0$78371$c30e...@pit-reader.telstra.net...
no it doesn't, one is designed to make the hons wake up to themselves and
realise that life is not a free ride without rules and the other is designed
as a political message and as you say to strike terror into the Palestinian
hearts and minds, equating the two only serves to cheapen the outrage at the
blatant abuse of one over the other.
And for the record I cannot wait to see the first blinged up BMW on rubber
band tyres and full on doof doof sound system getting dropped in the
crusher, after all its not like the hoons are not aware of the law but they
still continue to flout them, and seeing their pride and joy getting turned
into a 4 foot square garden ornament will have a bigger impact than seeing a
granny drive off with it after the police auctions, where they could
possibly buy it back anyway.
--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi
Noddy
"Jason James" <a...@ass.com> wrote in message
news:4afbb1b6$0$78371$c30e...@pit-reader.telstra.net...
> Yeah,..but a line is crossed when perfectly good property is destroyed. It
> smacks of the IDF destroying Arab houses,..an intensely personal action
> designed to terrorify and strike at the heart.
Well, there's a significant difference here.
The offenders aren't having their cars crushed the first time they decide to
make arseholes out of themselves. They're warned that crushing will be the
ultimate price they'll pay if they continue to re-offend, and in my opinion
if they haven't learned their lesson by the time their car goes into the
crusher then they've got no one but themselves to blame.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Atheist Chaplain
news:4afbb1b6$0$78371$c30e...@pit-reader.telstra.net...
>
no it doesn't, one is designed to make the hons wake up to themselves and
Atheist Chaplain
how is equating war crimes perpetrated against innocent civilians by the
Nazis the same as crushing or confiscating a car from an habitual criminal
offender.
One does not in any way equal the other and bandying such things about wont
make it so.
Noddy
> Ohh great,..who's next? Once the gate is opened....
I think this needs to be put into perspective somewhat.
People *aren't* having their cars crushed for a first offence parking
ticket, and what the government decides to do with the "property" after they
confiscate it is no different to what they may decide to do when they
confiscate property under the proceeds of crime rule, or for breaches of
customs regulations. In other words, the people who loose their cars are
paying the price for committing an offence and that price, while appearing
somewhat heavy in this case, is a last resort for repeat offenders. If you
haven't learned your lesson by having your car impounded for a few days then
you sure as shit will after seeing it made into a coffee table.
Ten years ago if you'd asked me if I agreed with this law I would have
laughed and thought it was crazy, but the situation with hoons has become so
bad I not only think it's a good idea but that it's absolutely *necessary*.
I live a couple of hundred metres from the beach where on a warm night (like
tonight for example) there is no end of hoon behaviour spoiling a pleasant
evening for anyone who just wants to be out and enjoy themselves. A few
years ago one such family was doing exactly that by taking a stroll along
the Esplanade when some fucking idiot P plater thought it'd be a real clever
idea to do a few donuts to show off in front of his mates. His car got out
of shape, mounted the footpath and ran over the innocent ten year old boy
walking along enjoying the night with his mum and dad killing him instantly.
One life taken, two others shattered, and all for the sake of some fucking
brain dead idiot who shouldn't have been doing what he was doing.
If it were up to me I wouldn't just crush their cars. I'd be giving them
lethal injections and wishing them better luck in their next lives.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Albm&ctd
says...
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:00:27 -0800 (PST), Diesel Damo <Diese...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/6456551/car-crushed-under-anti-hoon-law/
> >
> > Car crushed under anti-hoon law
> >
> > A 19-year-old Karratha man has this afternoon become the first driver
> > to have their car crushed under WA's tough anti-hoon laws.
> >
> > Const. Nathaniel Kett said that the man's 1992 Mitsubishi Lancer had
> > been crushed at about 2pm after police made a successful application
> > to a Magistrate to have the vehicle destroyed following the driver's
> > third conviction under the hoon legislation.
> >
> > He said the driver had on September 18 been convicted of reckless
> > driving and driving without a motor driver's licence and had also lost
> > his licence for three years and been given heavy fines.
> >
> > Const. Kett said police received a report from a member of the public
> > that the man was driving recklessly on the North West Coastal Highway
> > between Karratha and Roeburne on June 11. Police then intercepted the
> > Lancer and charged the driver.
> >
> > Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
> > valued at less than $1000.
>
>
> Crushing a Mitsubishi can be considered doing the owner a favour.
>
Does this planet a favour too.
Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
Jason James
"Andy" <no@invalid> wrote in message
news:jp7ts6-pme.ln1@unique_and_different_just_like_everyone_else.westnet.com.au...
> Jason James wrote:
>
>>
>> "Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com> wrote in message
>> news:7m1ub7F...@mid.individual.net...
>>> Jason James wrote:
>>>> "The Raven" wrote ...
>>>
>>>>> Isn't the whole idea of crushing somewhat stupid? Wouldn't it be
>>>>> better to do something more environmentally concsious like resell
>>>>> the vehicle or recycle it through a wrecker?
>>>
>>>> Exactly,..it's moronic at best,..criminal waste at worst.
>>>
>>> Typical comment from people who are unaware of the facts, but jump to
>>> conclusions.
>>>
>>> Since the new hoon laws have come in in WA, they're auctioned off quite
>>> a
>>> number of confiscated, then unclaimed, vehicles.
>>> They've crushed one!
>>>
>>> And, considering the make, I wouldn't be surprised if the crushed one
>>> was
>>> one that was passed in at auction.
>
>
>> That's edifying,...still ,they crushed a piece of property,...where does
>> it
>> stop? Remember Krystalnicht? (sp)
>
>
> And it's an absolutely _ridiculous_ comparison, to the point of being
> offensive.
>
> "Please explain" how mass murder and imprisonment of thousands is even
> remotely similar to some fuckwit having their car (which was probably
> worth around $300) crushed due to their own stupidity?
The use of property destruction holds in both cases. It constitutes unusual
punishment. The car is a piece of property. As such, it can be sold, which
converts it into money, owned by the offender. It then can be used to help
pay his fines. Anything else, crosses the line into an area of hence forth
unknown territory, just as wanton, random destruction of property which
occurred under that fascist regime.
Jason
Jason
John McKenzie
>
>
> Ten years ago if you'd asked me if I agreed with this law I would have
> laughed and thought it was crazy, but the situation with hoons has become so
> bad I not only think it's a good idea but that it's absolutely *necessary*.
> I live a couple of hundred metres from the beach where on a warm night (like
> tonight for example) there is no end of hoon behaviour spoiling a pleasant
> evening for anyone who just wants to be out and enjoy themselves. A few
> years ago one such family was doing exactly that by taking a stroll along
> the Esplanade when some fucking idiot P plater thought it'd be a real clever
> idea to do a few donuts to show off in front of his mates. His car got out
> of shape, mounted the footpath and ran over the innocent ten year old boy
> walking along enjoying the night with his mum and dad killing him instantly.
> One life taken, two others shattered, and all for the sake of some fucking
> brain dead idiot who shouldn't have been doing what he was doing.
>
> If it were up to me I wouldn't just crush their cars. I'd be giving them
> lethal injections and wishing them better luck in their next lives.
Fwiw I still have reservations about the crushing option, but at the
same time, I agree with you on this issue. I never thought I'd be big on
the 'in my day' preaching. I do recall more than a few fuckwits of my
generation, but by and large we had the sense to do our reckless stuff
when and where nobody else would come to harm from it.
Now these fuckwits think it's 'their right' to do it. What also bothers
me is that most of my mates that were into cars were genuinely
interested in being as highly skilled as possible at driving the bloody
things. Now it seems like that's irrelevant, and being old enough to
have a licence is sufficient to qualify one as the worlds greatest
wheelman, no practice or experience required.
Ir was also a matter of relativity. I consider myself a reasonable
driver. I'm an 'ok' motorcyclist, but don't have anywhere near the same
level of skill with a bike (probably still more than many wankers) and I
ride accordingly.
--
John McKenzie
tos...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@earthlink.com
ab...@aol.com vice.pr...@whitehouse.gov pres...@whitehouse.gov
swee...@accc.gov.au u...@ftc.gov admin@loopback ab...@iprimus.com.au
$LOGIN@localhost I knew Sanchez before they were dirty ro...@mailloop.com
$USER@$HOST $LOGNAME@localhost -h1024@localhost ab...@msn.com
ab...@federalpolice.gov.au frau...@psinet.com ab...@asio.gov.au
$USER@localhost ab...@sprint.com ab...@fbi.gov ab...@cia.gov
Jason James
"Atheist Chaplain" <abu...@cia.gov> wrote in message
news:4afbe8b4$1...@news.x-privat.org...
> "Jason James" <a...@ass.com> wrote in message
> news:4afbd04a$0$78374$c30e...@pit-reader.telstra.net...
>>
>> "Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com> wrote in message
>> news:7m1ub7F...@mid.individual.net...
>>> Jason James wrote:
>>>> "The Raven" wrote ...
>>>
>>>>> Isn't the whole idea of crushing somewhat stupid? Wouldn't it be
>>>>> better to do something more environmentally concsious like resell
>>>>> the vehicle or recycle it through a wrecker?
>>>
>>>> Exactly,..it's moronic at best,..criminal waste at worst.
>>>
>>> Typical comment from people who are unaware of the facts, but jump to
>>> conclusions.
>>>
>>> Since the new hoon laws have come in in WA, they're auctioned off quite
>>> a number of confiscated, then unclaimed, vehicles.
>>> They've crushed one!
>>>
>>> And, considering the make, I wouldn't be surprised if the crushed one
>>> was one that was passed in at auction.
>>
>> That's edifying,...still ,they crushed a piece of property,...where does
>> it stop? Remember Krystalnicht? (sp)
>>
>> Jason
>>
>
> how is equating war crimes perpetrated against innocent civilians by the
> Nazis the same as crushing or confiscating a car from an habitual criminal
> offender.
They share a common feature. Can you think of another example where property
was destroyed by a government, as a punishment?
> One does not in any way equal the other and bandying such things about
> wont make it so.
The nazi example brings with it other behaviour which is not relevant to the
property issue. If I offended anyone, I apologise,..but once again, where is
there another example ?
Jason
hippo
Mmmm... Just a thought - if speed really kills, then why are all of us old
farts still here to query that doctrine, I wonder?
My query here though is this: Waht do they then do with subsequent
offenders - of which there's already been at least one in NSW - leave them
in the vehicle?
--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au
hippo
>
> Jason James wrote:
>
> >
> > "Andy" <no@invalid> wrote in message
> >
news:jp7ts6-pme.ln1@unique_and_different_just_like_everyone_else.westnet.com.au...
> >> Jason James wrote:
>
> >>> "Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:7m1ub7F...@mid.individual.net...
> >>>> conclusions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Since the new hoon laws have come in in WA, they're auctioned off quite
> >>>> a number of confiscated, then unclaimed, vehicles.
> >>>> They've crushed one!
> >>>>
> >>>> And, considering the make, I wouldn't be surprised if the crushed one
> >>>> was one that was passed in at auction.
> >>
> >> Either way they were probably doing the owner a favour.
> >>
> >>> That's edifying,...still ,they crushed a piece of property,...where does
> >>> it stop? Remember Krystalnicht? (sp)
> >>
> >> Krystallnacht.
> >>
> >> And it's an absolutely _ridiculous_ comparison, to the point of being
> >> offensive.
> >>
> >> "Please explain" how mass murder and imprisonment of thousands is even
> >> remotely similar to some fuckwit having their car (which was probably
> >> worth around $300) crushed due to their own stupidity?
> >
> > The use of property destruction holds in both cases. It constitutes
unusual
> > punishment. The car is a piece of property. As such, it can be sold, which
> > converts it into money, owned by the offender. It then can be used to help
> > pay his fines.
>
> incurred after his first two offences obviously didn't act as much of
> a deterrent, did they?
>
> > Anything else, crosses the line into an area of hence forth
> > unknown territory, just as wanton, random destruction of property which
> > occurred under that fascist regime.
>
> that's really saying something.
>
> Do tell - How is this case either "wanton" or "random" destruction?
> (Remembering that only one car has been destroyed in this
> fashion).
>
> The fool had been booked *three times* and was driving without a
> licence. The laws have been well publicised, and this particular
> fuckwit would've been made _well_ aware of the possibilites
> (confiscation and destruction) after the first two offences.
>
> He knew the risks.
>
> He gambled, he lost.
>
> Nothing "random" about the fact his car was sent to the crushers.
>
> I can only hope that when he eventually, and inevitably, comes unstuck
> by driving like a fuckwit that he only takes out himself and avoids
> killing any innocent parties.
>
> Andy.
Stuff it. Give them all a Trabant!
--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au
atec7 7
Such is the nature of humans someone would hot it up
and go 1/2k over the locally posted bullshite speed limit imposed by
some small town council of low brow tossa's
atec7 7
> Noddy wrote:
>
>> Ten years ago if you'd asked me if I agreed with this law I would have
>> laughed and thought it was crazy, but the situation with hoons has become so
>> bad I not only think it's a good idea but that it's absolutely *necessary*.
>> I live a couple of hundred metres from the beach where on a warm night (like
>> tonight for example) there is no end of hoon behaviour spoiling a pleasant
>> evening for anyone who just wants to be out and enjoy themselves. A few
>> years ago one such family was doing exactly that by taking a stroll along
>> the Esplanade when some fucking idiot P plater thought it'd be a real clever
>> idea to do a few donuts to show off in front of his mates. His car got out
>> of shape, mounted the footpath and ran over the innocent ten year old boy
>> walking along enjoying the night with his mum and dad killing him instantly.
>> One life taken, two others shattered, and all for the sake of some fucking
>> brain dead idiot who shouldn't have been doing what he was doing.
>>
>> If it were up to me I wouldn't just crush their cars. I'd be giving them
>> lethal injections and wishing them better luck in their next lives.
Oh holier than tough eh bro ?
remeber the old biblical
"Let he who is with out sin cast the first stone "
>
> Fwiw I still have reservations about the crushing option, but at the
> same time, I agree with you on this issue. I never thought I'd be big on
> the 'in my day' preaching. I do recall more than a few fuckwits of my
> generation, but by and large we had the sense to do our reckless stuff
> when and where nobody else would come to harm from it.
As any thinking creature does
>
> Now these fuckwits think it's 'their right' to do it.
In every generation there was always a small group who did
but in my day most tok up racing or some other self levelling
following and Darwin sorted the thing out
What also bothers
> me is that most of my mates that were into cars were genuinely
> interested in being as highly skilled as possible at driving the bloody
> things. Now it seems like that's irrelevant, and being old enough to
> have a licence is sufficient to qualify one as the worlds greatest
> wheelman, no practice or experience required.
The very reason testing fails so badly although how one makes the
right changes is well beyond me as my first car had 12 HP and so I had
time to learn the skills
>
> Ir was also a matter of relativity. I consider myself a reasonable
> driver. I'm an 'ok' motorcyclist, but don't have anywhere near the same
> level of skill with a bike (probably still more than many wankers) and I
> ride accordingly.
After 40 years driving and riding I realise my once excellent skills
have dulled with age , maybe a few smacks with a fence post might
suitably adjust some of the younger 'tudes we see ?
>
>
atec7 7
Did you know that in the human body there is a nerve that connects the
eyeball to the anus?
It's called the Anal Optic Nerve, and it is responsible for giving people
a
shitty outlook on life.
If you don't believe it, try to pull a hair from your arse and see if it
doesn't bring a tear to your eye.
Noddy
"John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:4AFC46...@bigpond.com...
> Fwiw I still have reservations about the crushing option, but at the
> same time, I agree with you on this issue. I never thought I'd be big on
> the 'in my day' preaching. I do recall more than a few fuckwits of my
> generation, but by and large we had the sense to do our reckless stuff
> when and where nobody else would come to harm from it.
I think that's one of the major things that seperates kids of today to those
of a generation ago. Kids today don't seem to give a shit where they do
stuff, or who may happen to be in the way if it all turns to shit in a hurry
(which, these days, it seems to more often than not).
> Now these fuckwits think it's 'their right' to do it. What also bothers
> me is that most of my mates that were into cars were genuinely
> interested in being as highly skilled as possible at driving the bloody
> things. Now it seems like that's irrelevant, and being old enough to
> have a licence is sufficient to qualify one as the worlds greatest
> wheelman, no practice or experience required.
Agreed.
> Ir was also a matter of relativity. I consider myself a reasonable
> driver. I'm an 'ok' motorcyclist, but don't have anywhere near the same
> level of skill with a bike (probably still more than many wankers) and I
> ride accordingly.
And therein lies the difference.
I get into a car with my nephew who's in his early 20's or any of his mates
(who all drive relatively potent cars) and I'm pulling my knees up under my
chin just waiting for the inevitable prang. None of them seem to have the
slightest clue about the consequences of what they're doing, and the general
consensus seems to be if you can get the tyres turning enough to have a bit
of smoke you're a bona fide race car driver. On the other hand, the few
blokes I went to school with who are still into powerful cars seem like
genuine V8 Supercar drivers by comparison. They're obviously not competition
drivers, but they just show a level of competency *and* understanding that
seems to be completely lacking in the youth of today.
A new neighbour moved into a rented unit a few doors down a couple of weeks
ago, and last week he had some mates over for a few beers. One of them, who
would be in his mid 20's at the most was driving a V8 Dunny ute, and when he
left he decided to put on a "display" out the front of his mate's unit. He
revs up the engine and lights the tyres attempting to do a quick youie, and
apart from flicking the odd bit of loose gravel all over the place he
promptly tossed the tail of his car around far quicker than he expected it
to and clipped a power pole on the other side of the street with the left
rear corner smashing his taillight and pulling the corner off his bumper.
I was watching from my lounge room window and just shook my head and thought
it's no fucking wonder the fatality rate for 18-25's is as high as it is.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> They share a common feature. Can you think of another example where
> property was destroyed by a government, as a punishment?
There's a difference here Jason. The Jews were persecuted for no reason
other than them being Jews. They weren't breaking any laws or placing
anyone's lives at risk. As far as their property being destroyed goes, it
generally wasn't. Most of what belonged to the Jews in Europe was stolen
from them and used by the Germans for whatever they wanted. This is just a
*tad* different to crushing someone's car after they've ignored warnings and
continually flouted the law.
Destruction of "private property" by the authorities is not a new concept in
this country, and it's been going on here for years.
> The nazi example brings with it other behaviour which is not relevant to
> the property issue. If I offended anyone, I apologise,..but once again,
> where is there another example ?
There's plenty.
Material in breach of customs regulations is often seized and destroyed, and
it doesn't have to be contraband for that to be the case.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Jeßus
m...@home.com said...
:
:"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
:
:> So would their fear be any less if their car was sold rather than
:> crushed? Either way, they still lose the car.
:
:They do, but in selling it there's a chance they could get it back.
If they pay for it to get it back, I'm not sure I have a huge problem
with that. Theyre likely going to buy another vehicle anyway, and if
they can't - well theyre not going to get their old car back anyway.
Unless they're meth dealers with unlimited funds perhaps...
Surely the rego system could be used to preclude this from happening to
a great degree anyway?
:I know
:if I had any of my cars confiscated I'd be *far* more upset at the prospect
:of it being crushed rather than it being sold to someone else.
I'm going to have to accept and take your word on that. I don't
understand it, but clearly there are many who feel that way. So maybe
crushing is a genuine deterrent for some of these fuckwits.
It's still a terrible waste though.
Me, unless it is some classic collectable, or something that required
loving restoration (you don't see many cars of that type driven by
backwards-cap-wearing mongoloids), well I don't get all that attached to
modern cars to be honest. Not to the extent that I'd go off the deep end
over it's loss anyway. One can easily replace and modify a modern car
again, assuming you have the funds.
Jeßus
:
:Je�us wrote:
:> In article <4afb9fbc$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, hag...@hotmail.com said...
"Love of their life"? That's fvcking sad, LOL :)
But yeah... there are people out there like that, I guess.
Tony in Oz
"Brad" <bradl...@spammail.com> wrote in message
news:hdda1p$vic$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
>
>
>
> "hippo" <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1@REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote in
> message news:hdd5u9$kjp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> | Diesel Damo wrote:
> | >
> | > http://fat.ly/puxvn
> | >
> | > > Had a friend whose car ended up at a fire station for practise with
> the jaws
> of life. I bet it gave the fireies a real shock, most cars are made of
> tinfoil these days, his was an old square shaped val. Would've given the
> jaws something to chew on.
>
>
> --
>
Wouldn't feel it any more than a tinfoil car. I'm a firie, and I've used
the jaws on many occasions, both in training and in anger. They will cut
through anything cars are made of, easily.
The Raven
>
> "The Raven" <swils...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4afa8ac8$0$5420$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Isn't the whole idea of crushing somewhat stupid? Wouldn't it be better
>> to do something more environmentally concsious like resell the vehicle or
>> recycle it through a wrecker?
>
>
Atheist Chaplain
every time you pay a fine would equate to that just fine, your being
deprived or your property (in this case your money) and lets face it, the
government then destroys it.
so now explain to me how destroying a persons property as a terror campaign
equates to depriving a repeat offender (who lets face it knows the law but
still flouts it) of the instrument used to commit the offence and from what
I can gather from other commenter's generally gets sold rather than
destroyed!!
so far ONE car has been crushed from all the others that have been
confiscated from REPEAT OFFENDERS who knew the price they would pay but
thought they were too smart of lucky.
If you wish to make this an emotional rather than a rational argument,
cheapening the memories of the atrocities committed by the Nazis and the IDF
isn't winning you my support by a long stretch.
D Walford
I've often asked the same question because most of my mates and I have
certainly done our fair share of "hoon" driving and speeding.
I think the answer is traffic volumes, in the 70's there was bugger all
traffic compared to now and late at night when we did out worst
"hooning" there was hardly anyone on the roads at all.
>
> My query here though is this: Waht do they then do with subsequent
> offenders - of which there's already been at least one in NSW - leave them
> in the vehicle?
>
Arrest them and lock them away, its what they do with other criminals
who have no regard for other people.
Daryl
Albm&ctd
Diese...@yahoo.com.au says...
> Car crushed under anti-hoon law
>
doing a giddy goat drift or burnout so why bother? The car is realy the victim
in this case. Cars need a good lawyer to stop this kind of thing.
Jason James
[. . .]
> every time you pay a fine would equate to that just fine, your being
> deprived or your property (in this case your money) and lets face it, the
> government then destroys it.
Not the same thing. Acquired property eg car, is an expression of the
individual's pursuit of expediency ( as an expedient mode of transport),
aesthetic appeal (type and style of car), happiness (enjoyment of use,
maintenance of car) and in some cases, to maintain standard of living (car
used to get to work etc), plus finally but not least, the car as an
implement to pursue social issues eg love-life). There are probably
others...
> so now explain to me how destroying a persons property as a terror
> campaign equates to depriving a repeat offender (who lets face it knows
> the law but still flouts it) of the instrument used to commit the offence
> and from what I can gather from other commenter's generally gets sold
> rather than destroyed!!
A thorough understanding of constitional law would help here, but the act of
a fascist or democratic government destroying property, has the same result
ie property is lost. We are conditioned to respond here ie "the nazis were
dictators, what do you expect?" OK,..but how does that leave our government?
The answer here, ie if I had to justify destruction of property, is that the
judiciary are aware of the multi-faceted (see property-definitions above)
nature of the punishment, for not to be aware, would be a great failing.
At first I thought that "properrty rights" would exclude destruction as a
lawful act. But I was wrong. British, US and our constitional rights, does
place property high on the rights-list,..BUT, in all cases, the reigning gov
has the right to legislate, to acquire said property. Financial compensation
has been an issue in the past in cases not related to a crime, but not these
days.
So, my position is not supported by law (ie that property rights are
paramount), and any further position I have, is based on an argument of
cruel and unusual punishment and precedents.
> so far ONE car has been crushed from all the others that have been
> confiscated from REPEAT OFFENDERS who knew the price they would pay but
> thought they were too smart of lucky.
I agree that they need to be punished.
> If you wish to make this an emotional rather than a rational argument,
> cheapening the memories of the atrocities committed by the Nazis and the
> IDF isn't winning you my support by a long stretch.
Agreed.
Jason
John_H
>
>Shirley the car would be crushed against a pole etc with him and all his mates
>doing a giddy goat drift or burnout so why bother?
Why does everyone assume that's what hoons get done for?
Apart from a range of mundane traffic offences, Qld hoon laws also
cover "lapping" and "parking up".
"Lapping" is driving slowly around the block with the sound system
turned up loud (for which crushing the amp and speakers ought
suffice).
"Parking up" would seem to be a social event where a mob of hoons
gather around to ogle each others cars and plot illegal activities,
such as lapping.
--
John H
Pit
Since when have speed limits been imposed by councils on roads
controlled by other sections of the Government.?
Unless it is Bananbenders type thing
Atheist Chaplain
news:5ea27250-ea47-4aaa...@e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
================================================
Actually Councils can and do impose many speed limits, Bathurst and Orange
Council are two that I can comment on. Bathurst City Council kept the 60k
limit on the sections of the Great Western Highway that passes through the
town and in on section they have a 70k limit, the RTA can recommend a limit
for the town but ultimately the Council can (though often doesn't) overrule
them. I don't know exactly what their reasoning was apart from keeping the
highway traffic moving at a reasonable pace. Orange City Council on the
other hand had a local council member who thought that we all needed Nanning
and as he was the head of the traffic committee we were all going to suffer
because apparently we are worse drivers that those in Bathurst, even after
repeated petitions and delegations of ratepayers to follow the lead set by
Bathurst, so we are stuck with a 50k limit on every road in town because of
a Council decision.
Jason James
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4afcff4b$0$14864$c30e...@exi-reader.telstra.net...
>
> "Jason James" <a...@ass.com> wrote in message
> news:4afc5df2$0$78371$c30e...@pit-reader.telstra.net...
>
>> They share a common feature. Can you think of another example where
>> property was destroyed by a government, as a punishment?
>
> There's a difference here Jason. The Jews were persecuted for no reason
> other than them being Jews. They weren't breaking any laws or placing
> anyone's lives at risk. As far as their property being destroyed goes, it
> generally wasn't. Most of what belonged to the Jews in Europe was stolen
> from them and used by the Germans for whatever they wanted. This is just a
> *tad* different to crushing someone's car after they've ignored warnings
> and continually flouted the law.
Good grief,..I wasn't referring to the antisemetica in any way shape or
form. I was using the property destruction aspect, on its own. They
destroyed Jewish property in the form of shop-fronts, hence the name "night
of the glass". By no stretch f the imagination could the racist aspect of
nazi terror, apply to the WA gov.
>
> Destruction of "private property" by the authorities is not a new concept
> in this country, and it's been going on here for years.
>
>> The nazi example brings with it other behaviour which is not relevant to
>> the property issue. If I offended anyone, I apologise,..but once again,
>> where is there another example ?
>
> There's plenty.
>
> Material in breach of customs regulations is often seized and destroyed,
> and it doesn't have to be contraband for that to be the case.
Incinerating perishable contraband is warrented for parasites etc. Property
of a non-perishable nature, is auctioned offto recover duty, as I understood
it.
Jason
Noddy
> Good grief,..I wasn't referring to the antisemetica in any way shape or
> form. I was using the property destruction aspect, on its own.
Which was understood, but the fact remains that the Jews, and their
property, were persecuted for no reason other than them being Jews. They
weren't breaking any laws.
> They destroyed Jewish property in the form of shop-fronts, hence the name
> "night of the glass".
I'm aware of the incident, but I don't think it was ever official government
policy. It was most likely encouraged by the government, and I'm sure a fair
portion of the community took great delight in taking part, but I doubt
there was ever an offical government decree stating "All good German
citizens must go out and kick the shit out of your local Jewish shopkeeper".
> By no stretch f the imagination could the racist aspect of nazi terror,
> apply to the WA gov.
I don't think anyone took you as meaning that.
> Incinerating perishable contraband is warrented for parasites etc.
> Property of a non-perishable nature, is auctioned offto recover duty, as I
> understood it.
Not in all cases, and it doesn't have to be contraband for it to be
confiscated and destroyed.
There's been plenty of cases where both companies and individuals had to
turn property over to the government where it was then destroyed. Some years
ago PBR in East Bentleigh imported a small number of then current model
Corvettes to use as test beds for the brake systems they were developing for
the cars locally, and it was a condition of the importation agreement that
once the testing was completed the cars had to be destroyed in the presence
of a government representative if they wished to avoid paying import duty.
Sure enough, at the end of the test period half a dozen or so very low
mileage Corvettes were delivered to the local Sims recycling plant and had
three tonne slabs of metal plate dropped on them while a government
inspector watched happily.
On the other side of the coin, a local criminal by the name of Dennis Allen
used to live in Richmond when I lived there, and he was a notorious murderer
and drug dealer who went by the name of "Dr. Death". I really nice character
who would shoot someone at a party simply because he thought it was a fun
thing to do, and then he'd run their bodies through the industrial mincer he
kept in his backyard and feed their remains to his dogs.
When his activity got really hot the local coppers raided his house without
warning, and spent a week completely demolishing it looking for money and
drugs which they believed were hidden in wall cavities. Apparently they
never found anything, but the house was completely levelled and the remains
hauled away in skips. The vacant land that remained was confiscated by the
state government, and after Allen died in hospital it was sold to a private
buyer where a new house stands to this day.
To my knowledge, Allen wasn't under arrest or charged with anything at the
time the government decided to turn his house into a parking lot.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Albm&ctd
Pit
> "Pit" <spamlis...@gmail.com> wrote in message
And your point is what exactly ?
Whomever. imposes the limit it is up to you do choose to obey or
not .
If not cop the pain .If one does not likje it write a letter .
:)
hippo
Well, smack me with a kipper, but I thought he was answering your question.
--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au
Atheist Chaplain
:)
=========================================================
you asked the question "Since when have speed limits been imposed by
councils on roads controlled by other sections of the Government.?" :-)
I just gave you an example of when that does actually happen. :-p
and I agree, if you choose not to obey then you choose to suffer the
consequences :-)
Pit
Not all states have the same interaction and compliance
between what I shall call main roads (state ) the FEd national
highways bull shit and then local and regional (including remote
communities)
But I take your point .
Now go try running over a Robber crab on a certain Island :)
and see how you go
the feds
the state
The local Govt
the local mullahs all get a go at you
I still run over the things (run flat tyres have their uses )
Albm&ctd
says...> news:4afbaa61$0$14867$c30e...@exi-reader.telstra.net...
> >
> > "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.256652693...@news.x-privat.org...
> >
> >> So would their fear be any less if their car was sold rather than
> >> crushed? Either way, they still lose the car.
> >
> > prospect of it being crushed rather than it being sold to someone else.
>
> smacks of the IDF destroying Arab houses,..an intensely personal action
> designed to terrorify and strike at the heart.
>
It's to give those in control the neeeerr neeeerr factor.
neeeerr neeeerr we destroyed your house.
neeeerr neeeerr we destroyed your car.
Albm&ctd
>
> much more traumatic when the love of their life gets crushed.
>
darling? The last thing he sees as she goes into the crusher.
Albm&ctd
dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com says...
> They've crushed one!
>
The one that had been really bayud.
Pit
> http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/6456551/car-crushed-und...
>
> Car crushed under anti-hoon law
>
> to have their car crushed under WA's tough anti-hoon laws.
>
> Const. Nathaniel Kett said that the man's 1992 Mitsubishi Lancer had
> been crushed at about 2pm after police made a successful application
> to a Magistrate to have the vehicle destroyed following the driver's
> third conviction under the hoon legislation.
>
> He said the driver had on September 18 been convicted of reckless
> driving and driving without a motor driver's licence and had also lost
> his licence for three years and been given heavy fines.
>
> Const. Kett said police received a report from a member of the public
> that the man was driving recklessly on the North West Coastal Highway
> between Karratha and Roeburne on June 11. Police then intercepted the
> Lancer and charged the driver.
>
> Police Minister Rob Johnson this afternoon said that the vehicle was
> valued at less than $1000.
Todays paper the Worst Australian
states same bloke has been caught again
driving while suspended
His excuse " I was hungry and on way to the shops "