Pull Over twice!!!

[Freddo]

Great week,
pull over twice for speeding.. -3pts + -2pts + yellow stickers for my mirrors and no mud guards...
I'm not crying but does anyone know a "nice" looking mudguard?

Cheers..

[_M_]

Damn mate that sucks, twice in a week and done each time,

A month ago i got pulled over 3 times in 4 days (sunday, monday, and wednesday) and only got done once on the wednesday for riding a defective vehicle $75 no points, and lets just say that on each time they could of done me for a bible worth of defects, infringments, illegal riding, so i guess i got off a little easy then :P.

[scrotary]

a few hints when dealing with police, try them if your game:
first question you ask is "is your gun loaded?"
when they say yes, cause they always are, is "i will co-operate under protest and duress"
haven't tried this one yet but from what i'm being taught the whole legal system is based on 'contract law', your license isn't permission to drive a vehicle it is a contract to drive in a certain manner, you are actually getting fined for breach of contract, when you are handed a fine you are offered a contract from the officer, a police officer is actually a security gaurd hired to protect the states interest's, after all, they are a corporation, ass well as the commonwealth from what some friends in sydney are telling me all they do is refuse to contract with the officer, try it if you want and let me know how you go, it's not like they're going to arrest you for it.
the following is from the criminal proceedures act:
"341 Powers relating to identity
(1) A police officer who [u]intends to issue a penalty notice</u>, under this Part, to a person whose name or address is, or name and address are, unknown to the officer [u]may</u> request the person to state his or her name or address (or both).
(2) A police officer [u]may make a request</u> under subsection (1) only if at the time of making the request the police officer:
(a) provides evidence to the person that he or she is a police officer (unless the police officer is in uniform), and
(b) provides his or her name and place of duty, and
(c) informs the person of the reason for the request, and
(d) warns the person that failure to comply with the request may be an offence.
(3) A person must not, [u]without reasonable excuse, (proof of which lies on the person),</u> in response to a request made by a police officer in accordance with subsections (1) and (2):
(a) fail or refuse to comply with the request, or
(b) state a name that is false in a material particular, or
(c) state an address other than the full and correct address of his or her residence.
Maximum penalty: 2 penalty units.
(4) A police officer may request a person to provide proof of the person's name and address.
(5) Nothing in this section limits any functions that police officers may have apart from this section."
i underlined the interesting parts, i've also got a document i've served to the court along with some other people called a 'notice of want of jurisdiction', two of my mates have had the judge step off the bench saying "i have no jurisdiction to hear this case". mine is coming up on the 29th, we'll see what happens then.
have heaps of laws and acts, along with some interesting documents and dvd's about the truth of australia and law at large if anyone wants them email me.

[xb9r]

Great insight but how the fuck am I spossed to remember that :)
I'd rather keep going

[Jockney Rebel]

scrotary u r up on local law ..a question for ya .....
isnt the police officer a servant of the state for which he works ? which is a part of a commonwealth of states of a country which is part of a commonwealth of countries whose head of state is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 2?
point being that H.M.lizzy s house of lords pass down laws to the "united kingdom and all its territories" undersigned by her so laws have to be ok d by lizzies representatives here ie the governor which would make any laws that are significantly differing to the legal system in the UK,,illegal
further to this since the european unions [of which the UK is a founder member ]laws on civil rights take precedence over any one member states laws, shouldnt thay come into play here also?
just interested if this would upset the apple cart as far as civil rights were concerned

[scrotary]

the nsw police is a subsidary corporation to the corporation of the state of nsw, it is actually owned by an american arms company named tennex. as for the queen of australia, she was only invented in the royal style and titles act 1973 when they substituted 'the queen of the united kingdom in australia' to the 'queen of australia', also the govener generals(gg) are appointed by the monarch through the arch bishop of canturbery, the then monarch is supposed to do 'letters patent' to officially appoint authority. i have evidence that the last five govenor generals did not have letters patent issued. the gg then issues 'writ's of commission' to appoint authority to those under him, i.e. govenors, commissionor of police, cheif magistrate, etc. so the last five gg did not have authority and therefore could not appoint authority to any purported authority figures in australia. so i ask you if they were illegally excersising authority in australia then what of the new gg who was appointed by john howard doing. also we have seen an amazing precedence set by the european union when, they took a supreme court ruling, when mcdonalds sued those people that made those negative movies against them, nd overturned it, therefore proving that the eu owns all of u.k's laws. maybe i should start a seperate topic on aussie law, it could help a lot of people out, i've got some amazing movies, if you want them email me and i'll send them to you, i'll email you my 'want of jurisdiction' it says a shitload in it about this stuff

[scrotary]

something else that might interest you about the queen is that her position as 'the lord high admiral' of the united kingdom is a position of a public servant, i have been meeting regularly with the true monarch of uk, his name is jeffrey ross foley, he has done a blood claim for the throne that has been recognised back to 1354 but his families history goes back a lot further, and is actually mentioned in the bible, his official title is 'the lord high constable' and 'h.r.h prince regent', and 'constable and magistrate of llawhaden st. davids cathedral pembroke'. not only is his claim recognised, he has discredited lizzy's claim in 20 different positions. being an australian himself his aim is to free us from the illegal and unlawful rulers of australia and all pacific islands. note: the queen is admiral which gives her rule over the sea, that is why all courts are 'dry docked vessels'.

[Azrael]

You guys stop for them?? Im too scared of getting told off..

[jakam04]

This thread is so full of techernickal information that its so much like a great Indian Curry.... "It gives ya the shits"....

J