Jump to content
SAU Community

Thinking Of Doing A Runner From A Booze Bus?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's a seperate issue Matt given your exemption with the 33 etc brings more attention to you. Never had any.cops so much as take a second glance at my car at a booze bus.

Long story short, he broke the law, cops did their job by following him. It was his own choices that led him to that. It's regrettable but it is not the police officers' fault. Sick of people having a whinge in situations like this where the driver is clearly at fault. Do what you want to your car but you KNOW it is illegal to modify ur car in Victoria and if you do it anyway and get caught take it on the chin like a real man...

In Japan I heard that there is a 0% alchohol limit for every body and if someone is caught everyone in the car and, if they had been at a party, everyone there also gets busted for letting them drive.

Sounds logical to me, and if that's not right maybe it should be.

Probably the driver here will also now agree, assuming that was their reason for running.

Besides I prefer to drink at home where it's not so far to the fridge.

The guy in the car was a friend of my boss and my boss is really shaken up by it. Apparently they had to cut him at the legs in the car to get him out of the car. That's pretty extreme and you can only imagine how bad the crash would have been for the ambos to go to that length.

That's a seperate issue Matt given your exemption with the 33 etc brings more attention to you. Never had any.cops so much as take a second glance at my car at a booze bus.

Long story short, he broke the law, cops did their job by following him. It was his own choices that led him to that. It's regrettable but it is not the police officers' fault. Sick of people having a whinge in situations like this where the driver is clearly at fault. Do what you want to your car but you KNOW it is illegal to modify ur car in Victoria and if you do it anyway and get caught take it on the chin like a real man...

This gal, she knows.......

how to be a man :blink:

And i actually did not add the facts up right, 3 of the fatals were in 2011 so thats 3 out of 716, but 0 out of 658 for 2010!

I wouldn't trust the Vic Pol's 'reported' figures. They ain't worth the paper they are printed on.

That's a seperate issue Matt given your exemption with the 33 etc brings more attention to you. Never had any.cops so much as take a second glance at my car at a booze bus.

Long story short, he broke the law, cops did their job by following him. It was his own choices that led him to that. It's regrettable but it is not the police officers' fault. Sick of people having a whinge in situations like this where the driver is clearly at fault. Do what you want to your car but you KNOW it is illegal to modify ur car in Victoria and if you do it anyway and get caught take it on the chin like a real man...

Not really a seperate issue when my rear P plate had fallen down and wasn't visible but the TMU officer still made the effort to walk from the bus 20m away to my car parked on the side of the road, JUST BECAUSE it was a skyline and told to park and wait.

Regardless this isn't the topic at hand, the whole system needs an overhaul and so do drivers attitudes in regards to breaking the law and its punishment.

retrospectively??

As unfortunate as the end result is, it still comes down to the actions of the driver... there's really no excuse for doing those speeds, let alone not stopping when chased by cops. If you are signalled by police to pull over, you stop, simple. Some of us drive cars that would easily outrun a cop car, but that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do...

5 people have died already from police pursuits in Vic. There was a head on collision in Vic where someone coming the other way was hit head on.

Why don't the police just get the number plate and pay them a visit..... rather than chasing them and putting everyone at risk when there are other cars around?

Lots of motorists drive like twats...but there must be other means than chasing them when that has the potential to FURTHER endanger peoples lives.

I have a different view.

I believe any motorist trying to flee police in a motor vehicle, when safe for the rest of the public, should be stopped immediately by gunfire. Initially at the tyres, if they don't get the message, at the driver. If the driver has passengers, the cops should get closer before opening fire.

Within weeks, police chases would become a thing of the past.

That's a pretty stupid idea, this isn't grand theft auto. What would happen if police shot there left tyre and the driver lost control and went into the window of a house and killed 4 people?

I have a different view.

I believe any motorist trying to flee police in a motor vehicle, when safe for the rest of the public, should be stopped immediately by gunfire. Initially at the tyres, if they don't get the message, at the driver. If the driver has passengers, the cops should get closer before opening fire.

Within weeks, police chases would become a thing of the past.

have you ever fired a weapon? tires are an extremely small target, and dont forget the police will by trying to shoot from a moving car.

Stray bullets in public places arn't fun for anybody.

That's a pretty stupid idea, this isn't grand theft auto. What would happen if police shot there left tyre and the driver lost control and went into the window of a house and killed 4 people?

^also a good point

It's a sad situation for all involved. I know how scrutinised all the police members involved will be. I think pursuits are extremely dangerous and not entered into lightly. I don't know whether or not this was called as a pursuit if not then members could be in even more trouble. Once we call pursuit it gives the opportunity for our sgt, senior sergeant and inspector to call it off. Obviously the members can also call it off at any stage. I have been lucky or unlucky depends on how you see it and been in involved in about 40 pursuits. I have called most of them off myself as too dangerous including one where 10 seconds later they t boned another car at 160 kmh. All pursuits either get called off or end in collision. Not really worth it in my opinion. I have followed stolen cars lately and not even bothered to pursue them. I think we still need to pursue cars initially but some members make poor decisions to continue to go After car once too dangerous. That comes down to inexperience generally. I hope to be sgt soon and I will call off all pursuits immediately with my members involved. I don't think we can ever say no pursuits at all or everyone will run if they think we haven't got their registration. Unfortunately most of the fatal pursuits probably could or should have been called off as high speeds involved but without being involved can't really comment. Most of my pursuits were few years ago where group of teenagers stole cars daily and drove around deliberately getting in pursuits for fun. They were in hundreds and the courts gave them nothing as punishment. They only stopped when they became 18 and the main offenders brother died in a pursuit.

That's a pretty stupid idea, this isn't grand theft auto. What would happen if police shot there left tyre and the driver lost control and went into the window of a house and killed 4 people?

What if the criminal was on an open country road without any approaching motorists or houses?

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/two-drivers-killed-after-police-pursuit-20120121-1qays.html

If a hail of gunfire was opened upon the criminal above as soon as he fled, chances are we'd have another innocent human still alive with us and a strong message that fleeing police isn't the right thing to do.

I'm not suggesting to use it in the suburbs. It wouldn't have been appropriate for the pursuit in the original post. Who cares about the tyre, shoot and shoot to kill, after all, these criminals are running around with what is practically a loaded weapon ready to kill a carload of innocent people.

edit - If shooting isn't appropriate, run the criminal off the road into a tree/power pole/anything as we've seen the American police do. I have no sympathy for anyone trying to run from police because it seriously endangers the public.

This certainly isn't something to do if you've been busted doing a crazy speed, however if you refuse to stop after the bluey's start chasing, it's fair game.

^^^ Agreed, when you know you've done the wrong thing and think you're about to get busted by the police (no matter how basic or severe), you're heart does race a million miles and you do consider all your options, while I don't think this guy made the right choice, I don't really think its fair to say well he's evading a cop because he doesn't want a defect, so shower the car with bullets.

^yeah

and im not sure how the public (and even the media) will receive the thought of police being allowed to shoot at cars practically on sight.

Also, who's gonna make the call when to shoot or not? i'd think such a decision'd be a bit big for individual subjectivity

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...