hey mate love what you did its about time people got their heads out of their asses and read what will eventually effect everyone not just bikers it time people wake up
I am going to have a serious go here and not waste a post. I think we all know that these laws are aimed at outlaw motorcycle clubs, and targeting their illegal activities. I believe that if you encage in illegal crimes, you do the time if you get caught, suck it up and stop complaining. Everyone has a choice. The Bill that the link takes you to, clearly aims at the outlaw motorcycle clubs, and makes every attempt to cover as many loop holes as possible. Even to the point of targeting office bearers, adding longer sentences for their roles in these clubs. The assumption is that they know what is happening in the club.
Now heading in another directions, there has been a huge amount of posts and comments in regards to this law. Most of them were nothing more than stirring up fear and mistruths for the local bloke who wants to ride with a few mates. I have heard all sorts of bullshit like; my best mate can’t come to my wedding, my kids now fear the police because of these laws, and that local motorcycle clubs will be harassed and go will go to gaol without a trial. Seriously!
The part of the Bill that excludes the local riders who are not criminals follows;
5 Meaning of vicious lawless associate
. (1) For this Act, a person is a vicious lawless associate if the person
. (a) commits a declared offence; and
. (b) at the time the offence is committed, or during the course of the commission of the offence, is a participant in the affairs of an association (relevant association); and
. (c) did or omitted to do the act that constitutes the declared offence for the purposes of, or in the course of participating in the affairs of, the relevant association.
. (2) However, a person is not a vicious lawless associate if the person proves that the relevant association is an association whose members do not have as their purpose, or 1 of their purposes, engaging in, or conspiring to engage in, declared offences.
In other words, if you are not part of a criminal syndicate, these laws do not apply to you, and you are FREE to ride with who ever you like. As I mentioned earlier, these laws are designed to combat the illegal activities of identified outlaw motorcycle clubs. One thing that sticks in my mind, the two groups of affected motorcyclists, are the ones who are not making all the fuss. One being, the local Queensland motorcyclist, I know there are a number of members on the forum. It would be interesting to hear from them, since these laws potentially affect them the most, not the people in NSW. The other group is the identified outlaw clubs, I spoke to a couple of them from the local chapter here on the Central Coast NSW, and they really didn’t give a shit. Simply, they roll with the punches and find ways around things.
Now, there was a comment about a bloke was banned from the forum because he was trying to stand up for the little person, and defend us all from these oppressive laws. In relativity, I personal met him, and he was excluded simply because he abused anybody who remotely didn’t share his view, so much for a discussion. If you ever get the chance, verify (check) his posts. You will find that all he did was copy and paste all his posts (except the abusive ones), from other people’s face book pages or websites without referencing the person who wrote it. By the way, that’s plagiarism. It is good to have a passion and bang your drum, but understand the issue and formulate an opinion once you have all the facts. To wrap this up, if you are a criminal, regardless if you ride a bike or not, you will go to gaol due to this law. If you are a half descent human bean (law abiding), you can ride with whomever you like when you like, except how fast.
Well said. Bill. Cops are not going to go for the local footy team!
And Ron, your apsalutly right. The Government past these laws without proper advise from those that know how to make new laws. And that pisses off those in the law, hence some of them putting some arguments out there (that could be put in the vlad act)
well mate show me in the act where it states an M.C or Club NAME I don't see any clubs or M.Cs named or the words biker clubs it very very open
The burden of proof is based on a Latin term translated to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays the charges."
The person who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption of innocence, meaning they need no evidence to prove or disprove their position. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to the accusing. This has been the bases of British (Westminster System) and Australian law for hundreds of years. The police still have to administer the law and work within it, nowhere in the Bill states that police have any extra powers to execute this proposed law. The police can stop you on the road and enquire what you are doing, if there is no real evidence that a crime has been committed, an arrest cannot be made.
When it comes to the definition of “Association”, the all girls school choir will fall into this category. This is to a give a clear definition for the law and courts to tie up the criminal organisations, or clubs. A police officer cannot arrest a person or club unless a crime has been committed or evidence that one has been made. Being arrested on assumption without evidence is a violation of our civil rights, and no government will push that. For a police officer to make an arrest, they need to identify that it in fact is a group that has an association, and a crime has been committed, hence a nice long list of offences have been written down for you to read. For example, if an outlaw motorcycle club goes for a ride on a Sunday afternoon and is stopped by the police. Licences, rego and breathalyser all checks out OK, a police office can search a vehicle if they suspect something. Just like here in NSW, nothing has changed including Queensland. If the police officer finds nothing the club can continue on their way, there is no arrest on assumption. On the other hand, if a firearm is found in one saddlebag, the group has been identified as an association (due to their back patches) the whole group can be arrested and interviewed. Charges will only be laid on the person who has committed the crime, and if the police can prove, anyone else who knew the firearm was in the saddlebag. That is the significant difference with the law, association.
Ron, if I have missed any fundamental facts about Australian Civil and Criminal law, please elaborate further, pinpointing the exact parts that relate to the VLAD Law, and any changes that have been made. A good place to start looking is the Queensland Crimes Act + amendments to validate police powers and what warrants an arrest and holding. On a parting note, I personally don’t favour any side. I am happy to have a beer with members from the local Chapter (I am also associated with a motorcycle club), and happy to have a beer with a police officer.
I am away for the next 4 days, so no chance of further comments in that time.....
I have read and reread the VLAD act, and I can't find any reference to motor cycles, bikie clubs or anything. Did I miss that?
Also it says Under definitions association means "any other group of 3 or more persons by whatever name called, whether associated formally or informally and whether the group is legal or illegal." So when Bill Rollo has argued that it excludes legal riders I disagree. The act says anyone who commits a "proscribed offence" while in company. The way I read it if I king hit some one at my christmas party I could be charged under these laws. Why not? I am an office bearer of a legal organisation and have more than 3 people with me. That's how I read it any way. And I am scared of this act, really badly.
I'll have a closer listen to your link when I get home. I see your point, people on the periphery can get caught up, and the sentencing is stiff. However, it still comes down to if a crime has been committed, and it is part of the organisations activities. The king hit at a Christmas Party, is not part of the organisations activities, its a simple assault charge.
I recognise sarcasm. If it helps you feel better about yourself.
y do you need to keep getting personal Ron?
what dose it matter what someone might do for a living?
My question is that if a organisation is legal, as listed in the Act, none of it's activities should be illegal. So why did they list them? And since none of the Bikie clubs commit crimes as a club, only as individuals it's the same thing. If one of my employees commits a crime (I had a mechanic once who blew up ATM's in his own time using company acetylene) our business can be listed, become a proscribed place etc.
Another question of association, my wifes best friend has married a patch member of a listed bikie club. This is not a hypothetical by the way. So we have BBQ's now when the girls want to get together. His car has broken down at the club house and I went and fixed it. And got photographed by blokes in a Camry. So I guess I am an associate now. Luckily I live in NSW or I couldn't work in the motor trade under the QLD legislation.
This is what I got out of it. It is any group, not bikies. That is just spin, or slight of hand. I studied the Nazi party at Uni (fun first year history subject) and this is exactly the tactic. De-humanise and vilify a minority and erode the rights of the population a little bit at a time. Trot out the old," if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" line. It impregnated the German people so much that they then put up with the Stasi for years. They had the most informants of any police force in the history of the world. Estimated to be one in eight people at their peak.
As an aside, how does a 31yo in a double breasted suit and a Ron Bergundy hair cut end up as the Attorney General? And how did the hippy electorate of Kawana vote for him? I might see if Clive want's to put me in the state election.
good to see all these posts are remaining under the one thread. a great way to nut out what we think these acts may or may not involve, as a,pposed to say 50 million threads that fill the 1st 3 pages of discussion.
Something like the thread "I think the forum needs a smile". you can keep all the info together and easily see a history of it.
Hey bill, thought you'd like this - "Sarcasm is a fools humour" once said by The Joker from the batman series. Also said by many others over the years.
Also "Sarcasm is to a conversation, what stocking fillers are to Christmas"
I got heaps more, I would keep going but it detracts from the subject. FUNNY THAT.
I would love to hear of REAL instances where these laws have affected INNOCENT people or groups. This is the best way to judge if they are being abused or going to affect more people than we think.
Also what were the outcomes in these instances.