NSW: 3 strikes and you're out

Yes, that is exactly what it is, and the intent is indeed to punish people who
have not only been convicted of committing a criminal driving offence but have
done so repeatedly. You can still appeal against the convictions which
contribute to the three strikes.

I think you'd have to be very, very unlucky to be convicted of 3 serious
criminal offences in 5 years if you weren't the type of person who this law
specifically seeks out to remove from the roads.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R

 

Well, yes, but _any_ kind of sentence should be appealable.

....and I seriously doubt an extra five years on top of that lot is going
to matter diddlysquat anyway. Unless, of course, they decide to review the
offences that it covers.

Once started where does it stop?

 

Pisshead Pete wrote:

Pete ....farkin country's gone legislation mad!

Yeah, there ought to be a law against it.

regards,
CrazyCam

 

.... but that introduces a human factor, and the chance that some rich
prick with a good lawyer might get off lightly...... [1]

Moike

welcome to the brave new world. It may be unfair, but at least its
equitably unfair.



[1] irony[2] alert for those who may need it.


[2] or is that sarcasm? I get the two confused sometimes. Yes, I think
it's sarcasm.

 

Reminded me of a quote by WInston Churchill:
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings;
the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

The world is going socialist, dammit.

David

 

Although point 3 of section 30 says that a declaration or disqualification
cannot be appealed to any court, point 1 states that declaration of a person
as an habitual traffic offender by section 28 may be quashed by a court that
convicts the person of a relevant offence (at the time of the conviction or at
a later time) if it determines that the disqualification imposed by the
declaration is a disproportionate and unjust consequence having regard to the
total driving record of the person and the special circumstances of the case.

Seems to be contradictory to me. Wonder what it really means.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R

 

It sounds as though if the judge has given you a thorough enough walloping
he/she can rescind the declaration. If that decision is appealable (funny
word that) then it doesn't sound too bad (until they introduce it for
lesser offences!). Buggered if I know, my head still hurts from the
Melbourne Protest thread!

Better get a lawyer, son, better get a real good one!

 

As long as they don't mess with my bail conditions Moike!

 

Exactly!

 

Nah... I drank my last James Squire porter

*goes hunting for a Toohey's old*

G-S

 

A balance in other words... I wouldn't argue with that at all John.


G-S

 

I don't think we fundamentally disagree here, I think we disagree on the
meaning of what you wrote.

Punish people who create a risk heavily yes, but relative to the punishment
they get now.

I do not necessarily believe we need to increase the penalties for causing
the injury or death, the potential exists now in law for serious sentences
under various laws.

We need IMO to create minimum sentences rather than increase maximum
sentences or I suspect light sentences will continue to be handed out.

It may be necessary to create specific offences where there are gaps (like
vehicular manslaughter for example).

The charge of drink driving and the punishment for that offence should
differ little whether someone injures or kills someone.

That person however should be charged with offences related to that injury
or death and I belive appropriately punished for that.

Distinuishing between the two is necessary I believe.


G-S

 

I will see what I can dredge up.

But, that having been said, there is no way they would ban you for 5 years
for 3 <15km/h offences in 5 years, even if you do decide to take them to
court.

 

So only if it's 45km/h over the limit. (Which I think is fairy nuff,
really.)

 

Except that I think I may have strayed that far over on a few occasions
in the last year. (Then again If I'd been pinged for it once I probably
wouldn't do it again... deterrent anyone?)

Moike

 

Zebee said....

Some of them probably need them. That and some prick walking in front of
them waving a red flag.....

 

A $430 fine, 8 demerit points and a 12 month licence suspension for the first
offence isn't already enough of a deterrent ?

Nev..
'03 ZX12R

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:54:30 +1100

Only if you think you will get caught.

Get caught once, then you know you *can* be caught...

I bet most folk who are caught speeding are a bit more careful for a
while. Those caught at the time of the offence anyway.

Zebee

 

Hmmm the JS Porter is damn nice but I'm not a fan of the Old

JL
(still a beer's a beer)

 

That'll teach you ! What made ya do that ?

JL
(there's this hotel on the King St Wharf called the James Squire, it
sells...<insane chuckle>, you'll never guess... JAMES SQUIRE BEER!!
<grin>) HTH.