Police not knowing the rules

Forums › Off topic › Police not knowing the rules

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#111575 7-Nov-2012 18:46

So earlier today, I was getting on the motorway to go visit a friend who just moved to a new place in Ponsonby, doing everything to avoid study basically lol.

Get on the motorway, big truck crash ahead and traffic is completely stopped because its happened over the on-ramp so no traffic can get through. While I was sat there waiting, I got a text on my phone (iPhone 5) and thought I might as well have a look, wasn't anything important so I didnt open it (ie. unlocking the phone, I read the preview on the lock screen), while I had the phone up, I decided to snap a quick photo of the incident, then put my phone back on the passenger seat away from me.

Next thing I know, a cop comes up to me and asks for my licence, so I show it to him, he writes down a few things, asks if its my car, so and so. Then says "Expect your ticket in the mail" and I replied "excuse me? What for?" (Keep in mind, he had not said anything prior to this, other than "Can I see your licence" and "is this your car". He said "don't text and drive" to which I replied "Well actually Im not, and the car is stopped" and he just walked off. Another thing to note here, he hadnt pulled me over, he actually just walked up to me because traffic was completely stopped.

I knew that this law had exceptions with regards to traffic flow, because I read about it when it came out. I called mum after this happened and asked her to find me the link for it and email it to my phone (I had pulled over off the motorway when I did this) and read up about it when I got to my friends place. It clearly states on the NZTA website: "A driver may, while driving a vehicle, use a mobile phone to make, receive, or terminate a telephone call if the vehicle has stopped for a reason other than the normal starting and stopping of vehicles in a flow of traffic." - Land Transport (Road User) Amendment Rule 2009, Clause 7.3A, Section 6. (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/docs/road-user-amendment-2009.pdf)

Now I'm confused to what I can do. I know I'm not paying their fine, but thats not what I'm annoyed about, I'm more annoyed with cops blatantly not knowing the rules they're meant to be enforcing. The 20 demerit points are kind of annoying too but not enough to cause a problem as my record is clean. What do I do to get this cancelled?

Please, save the "dont text and drive" lectures for those of you that want to come in and say that, I know the rules, I know I can use my phone there, and I was taking a photo and glancing at a text, not like I was typing an essay or making a call, and the car was stopped, as you can see from the above picture, all traffic infront and behind was stopped due to the accident in front, clearly not normal stopping and starting of the flow of traffic.

-Sam

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 15

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#713709 7-Nov-2012 18:53

You were in a flow of traffic

blackjack17

1713 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

#713711 7-Nov-2012 18:56

if the vehicle has stopped for a reason other than the normal starting and stopping of vehicles in a flow of traffic."

would a crash be considered normal starting and stopping?

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#713712 7-Nov-2012 18:58

johnr: You were in a flow of traffic

Did you even read it John? If you did, you'd see that is says: "A driver may, while driving a vehicle, use a mobile phone to make, receive, or terminate a telephone call if the vehicle has stopped for a reason other than the normal starting and stopping of vehicles in a flow of traffic.". Thats a direct quote from the Road User Rules. The traffic was stopped due to an accident ahead blocking the on ramp. This is not normal stopping and starting of traffic as accidents are not normal. Even on the NZTA site it says: "If a driver is stuck in traffic due to the road ahead being blocked, for example because of an accident, they may use their mobile phone to make, send and receive calls and text messages."

Please read the whole post.

mjb

996 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

#713713 7-Nov-2012 19:01

tardtasticx: Did you even read it John? If you did, you'd see that is says: "A driver may, while driving a vehicle, use a mobile phone to make, receive, or terminate a telephone call if the vehicle has stopped for a reason other than the normal starting and stopping of vehicles in a flow of traffic.". Thats a direct quote from the Road User Rules. The traffic was stopped due to an accident ahead blocking the on ramp. This is not normal stopping and starting of traffic as accidents are not normal. Even on the NZTA site it says: "If a driver is stuck in traffic due to the road ahead being blocked, for example because of an accident, they may use their mobile phone to make, send and receive calls and text messages."

Please read the whole post.

Ignore johnr, he's just frustrated that this thread isn't basking in his glory as well ;)

Seriously, the second quote you gave is more significant, and I didn't see it in your first post (but may have missed it). I suggest that you wait for the ticket to come, and then follow the directions on it on how to dispute the ticket - you'll need to write a letter. Quote that line from the road rules, and you'll be fine.

contentsofsignaturemaysettleduringshipping

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#713714 7-Nov-2012 19:01

I read your post so let a judge decide take it to court

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713715 7-Nov-2012 19:05

I'd tend to agree with Johnr, you were in the flow of traffic. Even if the traffic was stopped, it is still in the driving lanes. One could also argue that an accident is a normal factor. Interesting that the NZTA says otherwise.

Note that Clause one applies to text and calling, clauses 2 to 6 override that, being exceptions? Those only refer to calling, giving me the impression that texting in any form is a no no, presumably as texting requires the eyes to leave the road 100%

Not passing judgement, just my interpetation of the clauses.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#713719 7-Nov-2012 19:11

tdgeek: I'd tend to agree with Johnr, you were in the flow of traffic. Even if the traffic was stopped, it is still in the driving lanes. One could also argue that an accident is a normal factor. Interesting that the NZTA says otherwise.

Note that Clause one applies to text and calling, clauses 2 to 6 override that, being exceptions? Those only refer to calling, giving me the impression that texting in any form is a no no, presumably as texting requires the eyes to leave the road 100%

Not passing judgement, just my interpetation of the clauses.

I see your point, (the picture should work now, uploaded it somewhere else) the picture shows the trucks hazard lights are on, indicating a hazard. Hazards shouldnt be there, they are not normal. And see the police officer is stood in the 'flow of traffic'. I dont normally see that on a motorway on ramp. lol. I dont see anything in the rules against taking a photo though, which is what he saw me doing. And that takes like 2 seconds, slide the camera icon on the lock screen, press shutter button, lock phone and put away.

I'm not trying to excuse drivers texting and driving. In cases like this i can see it not being a problem, traffic is stopped completely and no one can go anywhere. Kind of think it should be allowed in traffic jams too but thats not the problem, while you're driving however, texting and calling while moving however, i totally think is a big no no.
The law is the law, though, and I'm not breaking it so thats why I'm annoyed here.

gregmcc

2173 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 836

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713724 7-Nov-2012 19:17

look at the meaning of the word flow

flow [fləʊ]vb (mainly intr)1. (of liquids) to move or be conveyed as in a stream2. (of blood) to circulate around the body3. to move or progress freely as if in a stream the crowd flowed into the building4. to proceed or be produced continuously and effortlessly ideas flowed from her pen5. to show or be marked by smooth or easy movement6. to hang freely or loosely her hair flowed down her back...edit...n1. the act, rate, or manner of flowing a fast flow2. a continuous stream or discharge3. continuous progression

when the car is stopped like it was in this case there is "no flow".

I agree the cop is wrong.

Beccara

1473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 517

ID Verified

#713725 7-Nov-2012 19:18

The law is the law + precedent, You'd need to get a Judge to confirm you interpretation of the law in this case. I'd honestly think you'd lose in court tho - Whilst the cars around you were specifically still other players will still in motion behind you and possible in front of you. One could argue that a crash behind you could generate enough force to cause it to ripple upto your position when measure could have been taken (I.E handbrake + brakes rather than not in gear on a flat road)

The spirit of the law in this case is against you, Take it on the chin and learn

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713732 7-Nov-2012 19:24

well I'm guessing you just want people to agree with you but in my opinion you were in the flow of traffic. I don't think its subjective just an interpretation and agree you should wait until you get a ticket to see what you are charged with, if anything.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#713733 7-Nov-2012 19:24

Beccara: The law is the law + precedent, You'd need to get a Judge to confirm you interpretation of the law in this case. I'd honestly think you'd lose in court tho - Whilst the cars around you were specifically still other players will still in motion behind you and possible in front of you. One could argue that a crash behind you could generate enough force to cause it to ripple upto your position when measure could have been taken (I.E handbrake + brakes rather than not in gear on a flat road)

The spirit of the law in this case is against you, Take it on the chin and learn

I'm not quite sure how a crash behind me (out of my control) would be affected by me using a mobile or not? If it were behind me, by the time I knew of it, there wouldnt be much I could do anyway. Handbreak wouldnt stop the car sliding across the road into the car infront of me regardless. The only cars moving in the remote area, were those going very slowly on the actual motorway, we were completely separate, on the on ramp, no one was moving. It was backed up to the traffic lights to let people onto the on ramp to start with, (not talking about the ramp lights (1 car per lane per green light etc)

Like gregmcc said before you, flow of traffic implies traffic is actually moving, which this is not.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713736 7-Nov-2012 19:25

gregmcc makes very valid points, although Beccara says something I'd not considered, other cars in the flow. May be in front of you, behind, next lane. Not visible, but unless the officer saw traffic stopped far and wide, 100% of the flow itself is not fully stopped. Perhaps that is where they draw the line, but you would have thought our duly elected representatives would make it a little more clear.

cisconz

cisconz
1348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 179

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713737 7-Nov-2012 19:26

Reading through the clauses the only use of a mobile phone in that instance is to make or recieve phone calls, using any other function on a mobile phone is prohibited.

Hmmmm

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#713739 7-Nov-2012 19:28

gregmcc: look at the meaning of the word flow

flow [fləʊ]vb (mainly intr)1. (of liquids) to move or be conveyed as in a stream2. (of blood) to circulate around the body3. to move or progress freely as if in a stream the crowd flowed into the building4. to proceed or be produced continuously and effortlessly ideas flowed from her pen5. to show or be marked by smooth or easy movement6. to hang freely or loosely her hair flowed down her back...edit...n1. the act, rate, or manner of flowing a fast flow2. a continuous stream or discharge3. continuous progression

when the car is stopped like it was in this case there is "no flow".

I agree the cop is wrong.

Very valid points but then does this allow drivers to use mobile phones while stopped at Red lights?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#713740 7-Nov-2012 19:30

tardtasticx:
Beccara: The law is the law + precedent, You'd need to get a Judge to confirm you interpretation of the law in this case. I'd honestly think you'd lose in court tho - Whilst the cars around you were specifically still other players will still in motion behind you and possible in front of you. One could argue that a crash behind you could generate enough force to cause it to ripple upto your position when measure could have been taken (I.E handbrake + brakes rather than not in gear on a flat road)

The spirit of the law in this case is against you, Take it on the chin and learn

I'm not quite sure how a crash behind me (out of my control) would be affected by me using a mobile or not? If it were behind me, by the time I knew of it, there wouldnt be much I could do anyway. Handbreak wouldnt stop the car sliding across the road into the car infront of me regardless. The only cars moving in the remote area, were those going very slowly on the actual motorway, we were completely separate, on the on ramp, no one was moving. It was backed up to the traffic lights to let people onto the on ramp to start with, (not talking about the ramp lights (1 car per lane per green light etc)

Like gregmcc said before you, flow of traffic implies traffic is actually moving, which this is not.

I'd be looking at the flow of traffc as that the Police are trying to get moving, so while you and others are stopped, it is flowing somewhere or they are trying to flow it.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 15