Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!!!!!!!

The "WANNABIES" beat da Sprungbox.

Battle royal next Saturday..........

All Blacks v Wallabies.

You two are rude.

Suiging - it's not the police I'm having a go at, it's the bureaucracy that requires them to take on many tasks other than hunting criminals.

The regular police should be tasked with catching the people who commit felonies against property or persons. Those who infringe on other laws, bylaws, regulations, control measures such as not having a licence for this or that (from dogs and TV to guns and driving licences) could be chased by a separate lot of bureaucrats who are not 'police'. Also other traffic violations.

I know it means that there are more people on the public payroll, but let's just let the police get on with the job of catching crooks.

I never could quite understand people who thought that property damage was a higher priority than the death and carnage created by drunks & reckless drivers on the Australian roads. Perhaps there should be other people patrolling around dealing with Mrs Jones and her broken letterbox whilst more Police are assigned to target drink drivers & other road users who are endangering lives on the roads.

Your argument is flawed Humphrey Bear. Of course, you don't stand alone with this type of opinion and sadly people are only swayed to understanding what I am talking about after they have a love one killed on the roads or witness or are required to help victims of road trauma after one of these incidents.

You two are rude.

No; rude is me dropping my drawers and letting you and neverdie massage the danglies in public.

You tease, neverdie will be hyper for a week..................

NURSE...... the screens!

STANDBY, I will just retrieve the tweezers, peper and magnifying glass.

Suiging - it's not the police I'm having a go at, it's the bureaucracy that requires them to take on many tasks other than hunting criminals.

The regular police should be tasked with catching the people who commit felonies against property or persons. Those who infringe on other laws, bylaws, regulations, control measures such as not having a licence for this or that (from dogs and TV to guns and driving licences) could be chased by a separate lot of bureaucrats who are not 'police'. Also other traffic violations.

I know it means that there are more people on the public payroll, but let's just let the police get on with the job of catching crooks.

just kidding, I agree with you.

sadly traffic policing has become another arm of revenue, which it should never be.

In addition, contrary to popular opinion, SPEED does not kill, poor driving does. A driver who keeps his distance, knows how to drive and obeys the rules of the road with regard to lights and double white lines, will not kill you if he does sixty on a clear road.

Gentleman - NEWS FLASH, killing and injuring people in cars is a Serious Crime & therefore it should be a priorty when it comes to Policing issues.

Speed is acknowledged/recognised as a factor in many fatal and serious injury motor vehicle collisions in Australia. Its commonplace in Oz to hear people saying what you've said above, its also clear that the majority of those people arnt either qualified or experienced in understanding/investigating incidents of Road Truama.

Most serious road accidents occur due to reasons that relate to driver behaviour. That covers such a wide variety of things, anything from, drink/drug driving, driver fatigue, Speeding & other bad driver behaviour's & of course one of the methods for improving this situation is Driver education, but its not the only way to reduce road truama, there are a number of other options available, Engineering, Encouragement, Enforcement and Evaluation. Attacking any one single option will not acheive the desired outcome, its as simple as that.

Of course once one is involved in a collision speed plays a very significant part in determining if one will be injured or killed in the impact or not, actually the risk of being injured increases exponentially with speed, so speeding is a very big issue.

The monetary costs of Road Truama in Australia is huge, I think it was something like 15-20 Billions Australian Dollars per year back in the mid nineties, I can't be assed searching for recent figures, I think you get the idea.

Road Truama is a significant problem in Australian it affects real lives, its costly and should be high on any priority list (and IS) for any of the Australian Police Forces.

Suiging - it's not the police I'm having a go at, it's the bureaucracy that requires them to take on many tasks other than hunting criminals.

The regular police should be tasked with catching the people who commit felonies against property or persons. Those who infringe on other laws, bylaws, regulations, control measures such as not having a licence for this or that (from dogs and TV to guns and driving licences) could be chased by a separate lot of bureaucrats who are not 'police'. Also other traffic violations.

I know it means that there are more people on the public payroll, but let's just let the police get on with the job of catching crooks.

just kidding, I agree with you.

sadly traffic policing has become another arm of revenue, which it should never be.

In addition, contrary to popular opinion, SPEED does not kill, poor driving does. A driver who keeps his distance, knows how to drive and obeys the rules of the road with regard to lights and double white lines, will not kill you if he does sixty on a clear road.

Gentleman - NEWS FLASH, killing and injuring people in cars is a Serious Crime & therefore it should be a priorty when it comes to Policing issues.

Speed is acknowledged/recognised as a factor in many fatal and serious injury motor vehicle collisions in Australia. Its commonplace in Oz to hear people saying what you've said above, its also clear that the majority of those people arnt either qualified or experienced in understanding/investigating incidents of Road Truama.

Most serious road accidents occur due to reasons that relate to driver behaviour. That covers such a wide variety of things, anything from, drink/drug driving, driver fatigue, Speeding & other bad driver behaviour's & of course one of the methods for improving this situation is Driver education, but its not the only way to reduce road truama, there are a number of other options available, Engineering, Encouragement, Enforcement and Evaluation. Attacking any one single option will not acheive the desired outcome, its as simple as that.

Of course once one is involved in a collision speed plays a very significant part in determining if one will be injured or killed in the impact or not, actually the risk of being injured increases exponentially with speed, so speeding is a very big issue.

The monetary costs of Road Truama in Australia is huge, I think it was something like 15-20 Billions Australian Dollars per year back in the mid nineties, I can't be assed searching for recent figures, I think you get the idea.

Road Truama is a significant problem in Australian it affects real lives, its costly and should be high on any priority list (and IS) for any of the Australian Police Forces.

Speed coupled with poor driving is always a killer. Excessive speed is a product of poor driving. Speed at the right time, on it's own is less of a killer than poor/aggressive driving.I have been to the scene of many fatal accidents, all dreadful, all poor driving accept one which was a blow out on a highway. This one no less horrific was caused by speed. The others by poor driving. Accross the world traffic cops waste their time being an arm of revenue pulling over drivers doing 37 in a 30 zone. They should be bagging tail-gaters, red light jumpers and folk switching lanes without care and attention. If they did, less deaths.

No; rude is me dropping my drawers and letting you and neverdie massage the danglies in public.

You tease, neverdie will be hyper for a week..................

NURSE...... the screens!

STANDBY, I will just retrieve the tweezers, peper and magnifying glass.

I can understand the tweezers and the magnifying glass, but wth is the pepper for?

I can understand the tweezers and the magnifying glass, but wth is the pepper for?

He's always been a condiment for a good larf

Speed coupled with poor driving is always a killer. Excessive speed is a product of poor driving. Speed at the right time, on it's own is less of a killer than poor/aggressive driving.I have been to the scene of many fatal accidents, all dreadful, all poor driving accept one which was a blow out on a highway. This one no less horrific was caused by speed. The others by poor driving. Accross the world traffic cops waste their time being an arm of revenue pulling over drivers doing 37 in a 30 zone. They should be bagging tail-gaters, red light jumpers and folk switching lanes without care and attention. If they did, less deaths.

That is true, but dangerous driving is a difficult charge to prove in court unless speeding is also involved. Speeding isn't difficult to prove. Most laws are only there to show there is SOME attempt to maintain safety. It's all just window dressing. In Canada we have hundreds of laws with no real teeth in them. They are just another form of tax and something to keep the Justice department employed. The so called Justice system make all sorts of laws to prevent crime and stupidity but they have no success at doing either. It's like the prohibition laws in the United States in the 1930s. It was a big joke and increased the crime rate. It is the same with the illegal drug trade wars today. It actually promotes crime and increases it. Our jails are not big enough to house all the new, so called criminals. So, the judges have to turn the criminals back out on the streets with a token slap on the wrist. It's good for the judges and lawyers. They have a never ending source of income. There is no law yet that ever prevented stupidity. The Darwin theory is the only one that actually works.

Speed coupled with poor driving is always a killer. Excessive speed is a product of poor driving. Speed at the right time, on it's own is less of a killer than poor/aggressive driving.I have been to the scene of many fatal accidents, all dreadful, all poor driving accept one which was a blow out on a highway. This one no less horrific was caused by speed. The others by poor driving. Accross the world traffic cops waste their time being an arm of revenue pulling over drivers doing 37 in a 30 zone. They should be bagging tail-gaters, red light jumpers and folk switching lanes without care and attention. If they did, less deaths.

That is true, but dangerous driving is a difficult charge to prove in court unless speeding is also involved. Speeding isn't difficult to prove. Most laws are only there to show there is SOME attempt to maintain safety. It's all just window dressing. In Canada we have hundreds of laws with no real teeth in them. They are just another form of tax and something to keep the Justice department employed. The so called Justice system make all sorts of laws to prevent crime and stupidity but they have no success at doing either. It's like the prohibition laws in the United States in the 1930s. It was a big joke and increased the crime rate. It is the same with the illegal drug trade wars today. It actually promotes crime and increases it. Our jails are not big enough to house all the new, so called criminals. So, the judges have to turn the criminals back out on the streets with a token slap on the wrist. It's good for the judges and lawyers. They have a never ending source of income. There is no law yet that ever prevented stupidity. The Darwin theory is the only one that actually works.

Mate cameras on known black spots for " Red Jumpers " and lane/white line cowboys, easy. Camera technology on patrol cars for recording dangerous driving easy. However, time in court and lack of revenue from " easy" speed cameras, not so easy for local authorities more worried about their budget than their people.

Suiging - it's not the police I'm having a go at, it's the bureaucracy that requires them to take on many tasks other than hunting criminals.

The regular police should be tasked with catching the people who commit felonies against property or persons. Those who infringe on other laws, bylaws, regulations, control measures such as not having a licence for this or that (from dogs and TV to guns and driving licences) could be chased by a separate lot of bureaucrats who are not 'police'. Also other traffic violations.

I know it means that there are more people on the public payroll, but let's just let the police get on with the job of catching crooks.

just kidding, I agree with you.

sadly traffic policing has become another arm of revenue, which it should never be.

In addition, contrary to popular opinion, SPEED does not kill, poor driving does. A driver who keeps his distance, knows how to drive and obeys the rules of the road with regard to lights and double white lines, will not kill you if he does sixty on a clear road.

Gentleman - NEWS FLASH, killing and injuring people in cars is a Serious Crime & therefore it should be a priorty when it comes to Policing issues.

Speed is acknowledged/recognised as a factor in many fatal and serious injury motor vehicle collisions in Australia. Its commonplace in Oz to hear people saying what you've said above, its also clear that the majority of those people arnt either qualified or experienced in understanding/investigating incidents of Road Truama.

Most serious road accidents occur due to reasons that relate to driver behaviour. That covers such a wide variety of things, anything from, drink/drug driving, driver fatigue, Speeding & other bad driver behaviour's & of course one of the methods for improving this situation is Driver education, but its not the only way to reduce road truama, there are a number of other options available, Engineering, Encouragement, Enforcement and Evaluation. Attacking any one single option will not acheive the desired outcome, its as simple as that.

Of course once one is involved in a collision speed plays a very significant part in determining if one will be injured or killed in the impact or not, actually the risk of being injured increases exponentially with speed, so speeding is a very big issue.

The monetary costs of Road Truama in Australia is huge, I think it was something like 15-20 Billions Australian Dollars per year back in the mid nineties, I can't be assed searching for recent figures, I think you get the idea.

Road Truama is a significant problem in Australian it affects real lives, its costly and should be high on any priority list (and IS) for any of the Australian Police Forces.

Speed coupled with poor driving is always a killer. Excessive speed is a product of poor driving. Speed at the right time, on it's own is less of a killer than poor/aggressive driving.I have been to the scene of many fatal accidents, all dreadful, all poor driving accept one which was a blow out on a highway. This one no less horrific was caused by speed. The others by poor driving. Accross the world traffic cops waste their time being an arm of revenue pulling over drivers doing 37 in a 30 zone. They should be bagging tail-gaters, red light jumpers and folk switching lanes without care and attention. If they did, less deaths.

You won't get any arguments out of me regarding poor driving, of cause poor driving doesnt always need speed to kill.....further to that, of course one must always understand that its not always the driver thats speeding that is responsible for setting up a collision. For example, you may have a driver speeding in one direction & the idiot driver in the other direction crosses to the speeding drivers side of the road or pulls out in front of him, or jumps out in front of him. Excessive speed reduces reaction time & increase stopping distance.

Regarding your comment regarding world traffic cops & speeds of 37 in a 30 zone. I understand your comment but in Australia there is a larger proportion of accidents occuring inside built up areas that relate to excessive speed than out in the open zones. It doesnt sound right at first but when you think about it, its where the larger proportion of the population is. Accross Australia there are hundreds of 40 zone (and less) areas, mostly of which are School Zones and those speed limits apply during certain hours....I am sure you are familiar with. Traffic cops work school zones alot, there is alot of data & evidence that supports the lower speed around children & with good reason. Ive never known a Police Officer to write up a 47 in a 40 zone ever, its an urban myth unless you are referring to victoria. In fact depending on the speed detection device being used, 47 in a 40 area would be against the guidelines on which some of the states operate. Most School Zone operations detect plenty of speeds in school zones over 60/70.

dangerous driving is a difficult charge to prove in court unless speeding is also involved.

Ian, since this particular thread is about Australia, I will go as far as saying this part of your statement is completely wrong. As you are aware there are a few states of Australia (nothing like the states of the USA) BUT my point is the law varies across them all, ever so slightly.

There are various types of dangerous driving charges, some of the states have charges of this under their traffic acts of parliment and/or also have charges of dangerous driving under the criminal acts. The proofs to some of these charges can be very easy. There is also extensive Case Law in this area, some of which makes the job of Magistrates and Judges much easier.

Dangerous Driving can be as little as 'inattention' to driving that ends up resulting in an impact, a series injury or a death. Speeding isnt required as a proof to the offence.

I can understand the tweezers and the magnifying glass, but wth is the pepper for?

Ohh dear soundman, I thought you would of heard that one before. The pepper is sprinkled over the area & when 'it' sneezes and moves thus allowing the operator of the tweezer and magnifying glass to take action. It can't remember where that saying originated from, im not sure.

I can understand the tweezers and the magnifying glass, but wth is the pepper for?

Ohh dear soundman, I thought you would of heard that one before. The pepper is sprinkled over the area & when 'it' sneezes and moves thus allowing the operator of the tweezer and magnifying glass to take action. It can't remember where that saying originated from, im not sure.

There used to be a footballer in the UK called Paul Dikov. It probably came from his family...............................

Let's get back to the topic of Australia.

The Wannabees managed a last-kick win over the 'boks this weekend.

I have seen four different news/sports programmes from Oz shouting about the marvelous win. None have pointed out that more than anything else it was the 'boks who LOST the game, rather than the Wannnabees who won.

The Australians dominated the first half, going in with their tails well up. In the second half the 'boks came back hard and took the lead. Then - on the final seconds of the match - the idiots gave away a penalty on the half-way line. Maybe they thought it was far enough away from the posts not to matter, but when you're leading by one point, with one second to play, you do NOT give away a penalty anywhere on the field.

Stupid 'boks.

So which way will the Australian Indepenants go on this political eve of absolute rubbish?

LABOUR or COALITION?

How bout another election, I wonder what would happen with that after the Australia people have witnessed all the rubbish that has gone on in the last 2.5 weeks?

Perhaps Australians should 'shirt up' - Green verses Gold or something

If only Australia wasn't full of Australians............

If only Australia wasn't full of Australians............

It's not. Some of us are over here hiding behind coconut trees !

..and don't blame me for the current impasse, I didn't vote..................again.

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

What difference?

OK, I'm in Vietnam and only get my info from Australia Network and the various newspapers that are available daily in Phatties (a sports bar in Saigon that has Ockers in place of cockroaches).

But neither party seems to have set out a full prospectus - ALP would tax and spend on education, health and broadband network - LD/N coalition would tax less, spend less and but the broadband thingy in to private business. But neither seems to have a vision of the future for Australia - where they would be in the world in ten, twenty years.

All the speeches were sniping at the other side, "I can do this better than you" type of comments.

I wouldn't 've voted for either of them.

Maybe Dane Swan - if he left Collingwood.

Let's get back to the topic of Australia.

The Wannabees managed a last-kick win over the 'boks this weekend.

I have seen four different news/sports programmes from Oz shouting about the marvelous win. None have pointed out that more than anything else it was the 'boks who LOST the game, rather than the Wannnabees who won.

The Australians dominated the first half, going in with their tails well up. In the second half the 'boks came back hard and took the lead. Then - on the final seconds of the match - the idiots gave away a penalty on the half-way line. Maybe they thought it was far enough away from the posts not to matter, but when you're leading by one point, with one second to play, you do NOT give away a penalty anywhere on the field.

Stupid 'boks.

Yeah, Humph.

Shades of the ABs way back.

John Eales, the master last minute game breaker.

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

No, it's looking like Bob Katter is going to have the final say....................

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

No, it's looking like Bob Katter is going to have the final say....................

No you are absolutely CORRECT, Bob Katter didnt have the final say, it went, KATTER, WINDSOR & finally OAKESHOTT. Looks like the Buzzard Govt is going to retain control, although I am sure there will be a few surprised throughout this next term with Independants bobbing from left to right and back again.....INTERESTING TIMES.

The system is flawed in many ways, more Australians voted for the Coalition than the Goverment, but I know how the arguments go. :crazy:

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

No, it's looking like Bob Katter is going to have the final say....................

No you are absolutely CORRECT, Bob Katter didnt have the final say, it went, KATTER, WINDSOR & finally OAKESHOTT. Looks like the Buzzard Govt is going to retain control, although I am sure there will be a few surprised throughout this next term with Independants bobbing from left to right and back again.....INTERESTING TIMES.

The system is flawed in many ways, more Australians voted for the Coalition than the Goverment, but I know how the arguments go. :crazy:

Yes, there should be some recognition of the number of votes cast - say vote for the person for the constituency, thus the 150 MPs current, then use the votes to determine another 20-25 seats by proportional representation.

This may also result in a hung parliament, but that is one flaw in democracy.

Alternatively, get rid of the 150 and just use the small number elected by PR.

When is the next bi-election ?.......

When is the next bi-election ?.......

Yeah, that would certainly make things interesting, especially if 2 or 3 of them happened in a short period of time.

I am herby calling all political mistresses out of the closet, perhaps we could have a bit of corruption and dirt revealed and we can watch the swing of power really gain momentum.

Sorry, this sort of election result isnt what the Australian people needed, especially during risky times that lay ahead.

uncle ken, your vote may of made the difference

No, it's looking like Bob Katter is going to have the final say....................

No you are absolutely CORRECT, Bob Katter didnt have the final say, it went, KATTER, WINDSOR & finally OAKESHOTT. Looks like the Buzzard Govt is going to retain control, although I am sure there will be a few surprised throughout this next term with Independants bobbing from left to right and back again.....INTERESTING TIMES.

The system is flawed in many ways, more Australians voted for the Coalition than the Goverment, but I know how the arguments go. :crazy:

Yes, there should be some recognition of the number of votes cast - say vote for the person for the constituency, thus the 150 MPs current, then use the votes to determine another 20-25 seats by proportional representation.

This may also result in a hung parliament, but that is one flaw in democracy.

Alternatively, get rid of the 150 and just use the small number elected by PR.

You definately make a few interesting points & I agree this is a perfect example of how democracy is flawed in our system.

A ginger Welsh woman !!! you lot are soooooooo f$%^&ed.

A ginger Welsh woman !!! you lot are soooooooo f$%^&ed.

It's her broad accent that grates on my nerves - i cringe every time I hear it, which I must admit is seldom thanks to the blessed invention that is a remote control.

With the current make up of the parliament I am starting to share a few sympathies with Ayn Rand' belief as to whether we really need politicians at all.

A ginger Welsh woman !!! you lot are soooooooo f$%^&ed.

It's her broad accent that grates on my nerves - i cringe every time I hear it, which I must admit is seldom thanks to the blessed invention that is a remote control.

Me too, I cant stand the sight or sound of her. Wayne Swann is a douchebag as well.

A ginger Welsh woman !!! you lot are soooooooo f$%^&ed.

Yeah, we just have to make do with a load of Smary Old Etonians in the UK.