Police not knowing the rules

Forums › Off topic › Police not knowing the rules

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

BDFL - Memuneh
76388 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#722988 26-Nov-2012 12:30

In which case it was really jumping the gun - I mean, if the OP hasn't received the ticket, can we hear the trees falling in the forest? Or something like that.

Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Dosh referral: 00001283 | Sharesies | Goodsync | Mighty Ape | Backblaze

freitasm on Keybase | My technology disclosure

Mighty Ape

Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more (affiliate link).

old3eyes

8996 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#722990 26-Nov-2012 12:32

gzt:
old3eyes: It's been done and eather the person taking the pix has been pulled over and their car gone over with a fine tooth come or the Police have said "We were on police business" ot denied it was a cop using the fone...

Really? References?

Been in the papers over the past year..

Regards,

Old3eyes

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#722996 26-Nov-2012 12:47

freitasm: In which case it was really jumping the gun - I mean, if the OP hasn't received the ticket, can we hear the trees falling in the forest? Or something like that.

Naa, not a waste of time at all for me. All read with interest.

I just want to be sure that I can read my ebook on my phone next time I am stuck for 2 hours waiting for the wreckage and bodies to be cleared away, and the forensics done, without the coppers abandoning those efforts and rushing to issue me with a ticket

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#723011 26-Nov-2012 13:16

John2010:
freitasm: In which case it was really jumping the gun - I mean, if the OP hasn't received the ticket, can we hear the trees falling in the forest? Or something like that.

Naa, not a waste of time at all for me. All read with interest.

I just want to be sure that I can read my ebook on my phone next time I am stuck for 2 hours waiting for the wreckage and bodies to be cleared away, and the forensics done, without the coppers abandoning those efforts and rushing to issue me with a ticket .

To be safe you could try and pull off the road, as a bonus it would make is easier for emergency services to get to the scene.

BlueShift

1688 posts

Uber Geek

#723034 26-Nov-2012 13:27

John2010:
freitasm: In which case it was really jumping the gun - I mean, if the OP hasn't received the ticket, can we hear the trees falling in the forest? Or something like that.

Naa, not a waste of time at all for me. All read with interest.

I just want to be sure that I can read my ebook on my phone next time I am stuck for 2 hours waiting for the wreckage and bodies to be cleared away, and the forensics done, without the coppers abandoning those efforts and rushing to issue me with a ticket .

That's why you need a Kindle ;-)
They aren't specifically illegal, but there's always the catch all crime of "driving while being an idiot".

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#723123 26-Nov-2012 15:53

dickytim:
...To be safe you could try and pull off the road...

I wouldn't be so sure about that unless you pulled into private land to which the public did not have access.

The Land Transport Act interprets a "road" as being "a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not" so even if you pull off the road and that place you pull off onto is not a designated car parking area (and which strictly speaking may still be a road, so there!

?), such as would likely be the case on a non-urban road, then if you remain in the driver's seat you must be still driving on a road, not parked

.

I am quite certain that is the law, as it is written in "black and white" and so therefore completely beyond dispute

and must be applied; good sense must be thrown away in its interpretation and application. And the law is never an asss (extra "s" to get around the forum's naughty word filter filtering out the name of an animal

) is it?

Kyanar

3877 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#723380 27-Nov-2012 08:14

John2010:

What you are saying is that this law is according to YOUR interpretation black and white. You are therefore claiming that everything to do with the law, either directly or indirectly, is contained within your knowledge with no matter whatsoever that may need consideration in its application being at large, including what the original intentions of parliament were and how accurately they were interpreted by the administering Govenrment department, and that you are therefore right.

Now you're just being silly. Go actually read the legislation as it is written - there is zero room for interpretation in the wording. It clearly enumerates the very specific things you can do with a phone while behind the wheel of a car. Taking pictures is NOT one of them. Text messaging is NOT one of them. In fact, the only thing that is one of them is making or receiving phone calls.

It is not possible to interpret what is written in any other way, short of having a very impressive ability to deny reality.

tonyhughes

Hawkes Bay
8476 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#723384 27-Nov-2012 08:25

joker97: You can eat a triplecheese burger with both hands while playing with a nintendo, thats probably ok if you dont cause a crash

Notice i use the word probably even though IANAL

I would expect you to be charged with careless driving if this was the case, as well as careless and/or dangerous driving (and several other charges based around endangering others) for several other activities described in this thread depending on the driving happening at the time.

Bung

5443 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#723393 27-Nov-2012 08:42

Kyanar:Now you're just being silly. Go actually read the legislation as it is written - there is zero room for interpretation in the wording. It clearly enumerates the very specific things you can do with a phone while behind the wheel of a car. Taking pictures is NOT one of them. Text messaging is NOT one of them. In fact, the only thing that is one of them is making or receiving phone calls.

It is not possible to interpret what is written in any other way, short of having a very impressive ability to deny reality.

The legislation was probably originally written by somebody with an analogue AMPS phone that could only be used as a telephone. When reality was pointed out to the Minister of Transport Clause 7 was added to allow the GPS functions to be used.

"(7) A driver may, while driving a vehicle, use a mobile phone in a way described in subclause (1)(a) or (f), if both the following apply:

(a) the phone is secured in a mounting fixed to the vehicle; and

(b) if the driver manipulates or looks at the phone, he or she does so infrequently and briefly."

subclause (f) was " use a mobile phone in a way other than a way described in any of paragraphs (a) to (e)"

The only functions explicitly prohibited are txt messaging, email, video messaging or communicating in a similar way to those functions.

Maybe a lawyer could comment on whether taking photos from a mounted phone is "communicating".

gzt

15223 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#723399 27-Nov-2012 08:52

Kind of off topic because the OP was not using a fixed mount phone to take the photo, and was stationary.

IANAL but if you took a photo from a fixed mount phone and do not intend to send it to anyone then it is not 'communicating'.

keewee01

1730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#723547 27-Nov-2012 11:54

gzt: Kind of off topic because the OP was not using a fixed mount phone to take the photo, and was stationary.

IANAL but if you took a photo from a fixed mount phone and do not intend to send it to anyone then it is not 'communicating'.

+1 - phone was not mounted so that there is your black and white!

nate

6469 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#723613 27-Nov-2012 13:23

richms: Wanna know whats hard to eat while driving? chicken nuggets. There is no receptacle in the car to hold the dipping sauces.

Richard wins. We should vote this the answer to the topic.

gzt

15223 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#723654 27-Nov-2012 14:35

I agree, but only if he starts a thread on how to sue the manufacturer of the vehicle - for causing an accident.. : )

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#723670 27-Nov-2012 15:03

gzt: Kind of off topic because the OP was not using a fixed mount phone to take the photo, and was stationary.

Yeah, but if discussing specific details of a hypothetical ticket is not off topic then discussing the "what if's" in relation to law that may give rise to the hypothetical ticket is not off topic either.

Bung

5443 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#723695 27-Nov-2012 15:30

I had a look at how Australian States handled the same situation and they look even more inflexible. IIRC in NSW it is an offence to even be holding the phone unless you are in the process of handing it to a passenger.

OTOH Land Transport created a rule limiting the number and type of lights you could have on and it doesn't seem to be enforced at all.

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15