Reply With QuoteI hear ya. We are over regulated in this country.Originally Posted by austastar
Swaggie
Who knows? We can't find the rule to find out what it says.
The road rules must be readily and easily availably to those who must comply to them. That is why I want a link.
There have been so many urban myths posted up here and on other fora. Notable ones being the rated shackle saga and the load restraint saga. There is even the Copper from Windsor that continues to defect roof mounted lights when his interpretation of the ADR is at odds with the interpretation of the RMS.
When people quote rules, I would like a link to the said rule, at least to prove it exists.
Swaggie
I hear ya. We are over regulated in this country.
Swaggie
Good on him for looking like a dick........whether there is a rule or not it has to be impacting on his side vision....poor decision of headwear from the driver
Swaggie
Could you please post up the links to the rules that state "poor decisions" or "looking like a dick" are finable offences. I reckon if they were, the governments could retire national debt within a year.
Wizard
Is this the one you are looking for.....
https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ...014.205.UN.PDF297—Driver to have proper control of a vehicle etc
(1) A driver must not drive a vehicle unless the driver has proper control of the vehicle.
Offence provision.
Australian Road Rules—8.12.2016 Part 18—Miscellaneous road rules Division 1—Miscellaneous rules for drivers 8 This version is not published under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002 [13.12.2016]
(1A) A driver must not drive a vehicle if a person or an animal is in the driver's lap.
Offence provision.
(2) A driver must not drive a motor vehicle unless the driver has a clear view of the road, and traffic, ahead, behind and to each side of the driver.
LordRover
SubscriberPossibly, but to comply with rule 2 you would have to rotate your head to check you have clear vision anyway.
MY08 TDV6 SE D3- permagrin ooh yeah
2004 Jayco Freedom tin tent
1998 Triumph Daytona T595
1974 VW Kombi bus
1958 Holden FC special sedan
Swaggie
Yep but no.
As loanrangie has said, I move my head. To the left and to the right. The only items that obstruct my vision are the a pillars, the rear view mirrors, the b pillars, the c pillars, the front seat head rests and the sat nav. The sun glasses and Darth Vader helmet move with my head as I move my head and do not obstruct vision.
So, are we now going to fine people for having head rests on the seats in their cars? Or even fine people for having pillars holding up the roof on their cars?
Must we all now drive roofless cars?
I think that rule was intended to stop people attaching things to the windscreens and stop people putting those bobbing head Elvis' on the dash of their cars.
Maybe it has something to do with the helmet rules. I know he was in a car, but he was wearing the Darth Vader helmet and it's not Australian Standards approved, so he was wearing something which obstructed his vision.
I looked at the helmet rules for Queensland and they just say not to wear a helmet which obstructs vision. Can that be applied if wearing the helmet in a vehicle?
Choosing accessories (Department of Transport and Main Roads)
LordRover
SupporterThe bottom line there is no rule - if there was the prosecution would have proceeded. The guy should sue.
Swaggie
No, he was wearing a stormtrooper helmet. And he wants it back.
I wear the Darth Vader helmet.
The item you linked to is a guide, not rules. Or are we drivers now meant to wear the recommended apparel, driving knicks with chamois inserts. I can see how this would be handy if you wanted to give the duco a quick clean whilst on the road.
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks