Hard News: A Strange Surprise
131 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I've found that iPod earphones fit neatly into a "Jols" (sugar-free sweets) tin.
-
I wonder how long it will be before Steven Joyce pushes to get this law repealed because of a lack of truck drivers. One of the major causes of vehicle accidents is fatigue, far greater than drugs or alcohol or even speed (as in going too fast). So one way of reducing the road toll would be to make some drugs compulsory.
;-) -
Well done with the Terry Hall segment.
-
the purpose of the campaign is to scare young men, and the fewer of them there are on the road on drugs, the better
Chicks on speed and 40 year olds on acid are fine to drive however. They won't crash....
-
I was searched under misuse of drugs act once - it was only after the cop, who'd stopped me just to ask why I wasn't at school, found out I went to Metro college that he decided he had reason to believe I might have drugs on me. It was about 9:30 in the morning. The search was fruitless.
I've been stopped by any number of cops over the years, often before, after or during doing something dodgy. Never had the least cause for concern, personally. I look far too square, white, old, nerdy, etc. Even when I go out of my way to look dodgy, something about my demeanor or demographic, or smooth talk, or ... something, has always pulled me through with nothing more than 'talk to the hole' breath test.
I'd give advice, there's definitely a method there, but it would seem like encouragement. Actually it was foolish to do what I did, foolish to even need to concern yourself with learning and internalizing such a method. It might also only work for me, and it might not continue to work. So I don't drive like that any more.
-
Perhaps the ad would have been better if the cop sniffed the air or something to indicate the smell of cannabis.
Anyway, here's bullet time in lego.
-
And if you do go down to get tested, what constitutes a failed test? Are there established limits? And, if so, does being below said limit but still guilty of having measureable traces leave me liable for a charge of 'being high at some stage recently'?
There's a good factsheet here about the new law/police powers:
Questions and answers on new law to combat drug impaired drivingThe pity of the ad is its focus on getting busted. There's still a long way to go to inform people about the real risks of drugged driving. Something more targeted to people who use drugs is probably a better option than the current campaign.
-
3410,
I've found that iPod earphones fit neatly into a "Jols" (sugar-free sweets) tin.
I just wrap 'em around the iPod, and have never had any trouble.
Sony headphones give you pretty incredible bang for your buck on a cost/fidelity basis, but the build these days (headphones, as opposed to earphones) is just crap.
Geoff, do the noise-cancelling models have a standard minijack?
-
its the old... " we have reports of a burglary in the area with the suspects car matching a description of yours so we're going to have to ask that you exit the vehicle while we conduct an inspection" that used to fuck me off
...but officer you're hardly likely to find a video recorder in the glove box buried under the cassettes.
end result being, my brother got busted for posession and intention to supply for having about 15 seeds in a matchbox in the glovebox he didnt know was there...the seeds, not the glovebox:)
...funny, but i've also been with a bunch of respectable looking older whitefolk smoking in a carpark and the cops walk by and casually mention if we couldn't have found a better place to do that
dont you just love their wide ranging discretionary powers, perception is reality ?
-
Perhaps the ad would have been better if the cop sniffed the air or something to indicate the smell of cannabis.
I'd say that the "the ad's purpose is to scare" line is highly plausible. The police sometimes do want to convey that they're arbitrary, fickle, clever and devious. That way you aren't tempted to try to ride the system. They're being unclear exactly what they suspect, in order to avoid people going "ok, no dope then, well P is harder to detect, if you keep your cool".
-
Steve - loved pac man.
My first flat in Christchurch we used to have jousting torniments at Wollies. Two shopping Trollies & mops at either ends of an aisle. Also it used to have triangular baskets that you could gain bonus points off. We were sober/straight - but young. -
With regards to compulsory harassment of young drivers.
That is exactly what the Central Christchurch Liquor ban has increased.
It is legal to drive through with alcohol in your car.
But cops are stopping kids, searching their cars and pouring the priviously unopened piss into the Avon. They do this because the cops got caught drinking it themselves a few years back. -
If we start seeing cases that look like "We stopped them because drive-thru BK at 3 on a Saturday morning is indicative behaviour", I can see some court rulings to the effect of unlawful detention.
sometimes they have no intention to arrest, its just some power tripping bullshit to inconvenience you, provoke you into doing something justifying an arrest...
i've been pullled over and given the 3rd degree and when its done i asked why me and they said its cos i look shady...heh
and i said 'fair enough, in my ideal world, you clean cut ballhead looking types would be the ones i'd pull over and hassle for no reason'
-
Steve, if you're gonna post a Remi Gaillard video game reinactment stunt, perhaps this one would be more appropriate to the topic at hand:
:-P
-
But Section 58 indicates that actually any indication at all of a controlled substance in your blood test is an offence in itself:
The section 58 offence only related to any class A drug.
The section 11A offence is any drug (including prescription medication), but requires proof of impairment.
-
But cops are stopping kids, searching their cars and pouring the priviously unopened piss into the Avon. They do this because the cops got caught drinking it themselves a few years back.
...they used to make us pour it out ourselves under threat of arrest
-
I'd say that the "the ad's purpose is to scare" line is highly plausible.
Like ALAC's "it's not the drinking, it's the getting trollied, acting like a dirty flirty whore and just asking to get raped' one? I recall that going down around here (and out in the Kiwi femi-sphere) like the proverbial cup of cold sick...
The LTSA hasn't sunk to Lisa-level vileness, of course, but IMO it's still over the line between 'shock and awe' and 'stupid and awful'. Being "provocative and hard-hitting" doesn't give ad industry creatives or their clients a pass for sending out mixed message that are, at best, just incoherent. Or at worse, stunningly offensive and plain dangerous.
-
15 seeds in a matchbox in the glovebox he didnt know was there
A stoner friend of ours in Texas got busted for marijuana in his glovebox, and his indignant defence was 'but officer, it's shitty pot!' He honestly thought the lack of quality would be reason enough to get him off. Heh.
-
A stoner friend of ours in Texas got busted for marijuana in his glovebox, and his indignant defence was 'but officer, it's shitty pot!' He honestly thought the lack of quality would be reason enough to get him off. Heh.
If it had insufficient THC levels, then he might well have had a good argument.
-
Off Topic, but good to see the provocation defense has gone.
Anyone know who/why five MPs voted to keep it? -
If it had insufficient THC levels, then he might well have had a good argument.
That's a point! Although I imagine that the legal system in Texas is a little less amenable to good arguments than the legal system in NZ might be.
ETA: For example, another friend was arrested and locked up for the night merely for saying 'I smell bacon'.
-
Off Topic, but good to see the provocation defense has gone.
Anyone know who/why five MPs voted to keep it?No idea, I agree that it should be disposed of, now that a life sentence for murder is no longer mandatory, it should be considered in mitigation, rather than as a partial defence.
However, I don't like the way laws like this are developed. Usually there's some outcry about something (like Clayton Weatherston being a douchebag), and the government rushes to act by introducing legislation. I know the Law Commission had issued a report on it, but there's loads of reports gathering dust just waiting to be acted on.
Maybe the objecting MPs were reacting to how the process progressed, rather than the policy itself.
-
Geoff, do the noise-cancelling models have a standard minijack
Just yer standard minijack. I am getting sound through the left ear and occasionally through the right, so it obviously something to do with the connection. Do you know if they can be repaired?
Summer is on its way--the birds are perching in the plum tree.
-
But Section 58 indicates that actually any indication at all of a controlled substance in your blood test is an offence in itself:
...
(b) if the person’s blood, as ascertained from an analysis of a blood specimen subsequently taken under section 73, contains evidence of the use of a controlled drug specified in Schedule 1 (except thalidomide) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.The "any indication at all" applies only to those drugs listed in schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs act. Generally these are the big boys of the drug world - LSD, Heroin, PCP, etc:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1975/0116/latest/DLM436576.html#DLM436576
...so cannabis isn't in there. Just having THC in your bloodstream isn't automatically an offense, although before they could test for it the police would have to have reasonable suspicion that you're impaired, and you'd have to have failed the impairment test.
-
A mesmerising film shot from the front of a tram travelling down Market St in San Francisco, in 1905, before the fire. Soundtrack by Air.
Queen St probably wasn't too different back in the day....
Post your response…
This topic is closed.