Reply With QuoteIt was ground breaking. I would classify it as science fantasy. What they (the team behind the movie) set out to do and what they achieved is truly remarkable.Originally Posted by Vern
Swaggie
Are you suggesting I would wear a plastic child's toy on my head? No. Let me assure you my Darth Vader helmet is a valuable collectors item much the same as you would consider your bike not to be a kiddies play thing.
Although, I do like the idea that people should not cycle around me when I am driving.
I don't know whether anybody has noticed. This thread, like many others on this forum, is full of mainly peoples opinion.
Now, people are quite entitled to have an opinion, but not when it comes to the application of rules. When a rule is applied, we must apply it with regards to the meaning of the rule and not with regards to opinion. For example, if I was a copper, I'd be driving around stopping every cyclist and fining them for "obstructing traffic". That is a road rule, but I don't think my opinion is accurately reflected in that road rule. But we can hope it is.
This is why the thread. Maybe people may think a little less of their opinion and think a little more about the rule. After all, our opinions differ but the rule remains the same.
Swaggie
It was ground breaking. I would classify it as science fantasy. What they (the team behind the movie) set out to do and what they achieved is truly remarkable.
Swaggie
You're over thinking it. It's about entertainment.
Stick to watching repeats of "Air Crash Investigation". You'll be much happier.
ChatterBox
Bike helmets are meant to be worn when on a public road, toys aren't.
Yes, even though it's just plastic, I'm sure it is, because people will pay so much for one. (Holy bloody Jesus.) And with that, I shall try and resist this enlightening thread for now. I have to get to my job at a games shop so that I can save up for my genuine Stormtrooper suit so that I can wear it while I ride my Harley to pick up parts for my Dalek to get it ready in time for the next con so that I can try (again) to pick up that Slave Leia chick.
At any given point in time, somewhere in the world someone is working on a Land-Rover.
Swaggie
Even whilst driving your $100,000+ Audi car? (refer to original post)
I drive a $400 Camry. Do I need to wear a bike helmet when I drive it on a public road?
I always thought they did strange things in WA.
Swaggie
Subscriber
being a Camry driver. probably.
Current Cars:
2013 E3 Maloo, 350kw
2008 RRS, TDV8
1995 VS Clubsport
Previous Cars:
2008 ML63, V8
2002 VY SS Ute, 300kw
2002 Disco 2, LS1 conversion
Swaggie
You opinion or the law?
Swaggie
Subscriberhmmm
Current Cars:
2013 E3 Maloo, 350kw
2008 RRS, TDV8
1995 VS Clubsport
Previous Cars:
2008 ML63, V8
2002 VY SS Ute, 300kw
2002 Disco 2, LS1 conversion
ForumSage
SupporterMick, it appears that you want certainty, clarity and predictability.
I'm not sure that is possible.
Laws and regulations may be documented and published, but how a particular police officer and/or magistrate will interpret those regulations is less certain.
The example that began this thread will serve to illustrate that.
There might be the certainty you seek if the regulation said that it is an offence to wear are Darth Vader helmet while driving. However that is not the way the regulation is worded. Even when it is as specific as mentioning the field of view a driver must have, you still don't have certainty.
One of your posts argued that your Darth Vader helmet would not restrict your vision. I would be prepared to bet that there are police officers and magistrates who would disagree with you.
Good luck with trying to establish in court that your interpretation of that regulation is more accurate than theirs.
The regulation may be written down so that everyone knows what it says. That doesn't ensure that there will be universal agreement about what it means and how it will be applied.
In the real world, things are seldom as clear, simple and certain as we might want them to be.
1973 Series III LWB 1983 - 2006
1998 300 Tdi Defender Trayback 2006 - often fitted with a Trayon slide-on camper.
Swaggie
Point taken but I'm sure the written down regulation will have a more accurate meaning than the random opinion of the unqualified.Mick, it appears that you want certainty, clarity and predictability.
I'm not sure that is possible.
Laws and regulations may be documented and published, but how a particular police officer and/or magistrate will interpret those regulations is less certain.
The example that began this thread will serve to illustrate that.
There might be the certainty you seek if the regulation said that it is an offence to wear are Darth Vader helmet while driving. However that is not the way the regulation is worded. Even when it is as specific as mentioning the field of view a driver must have, you still don't have certainty.
One of your posts argued that your Darth Vader helmet would not restrict your vision. I would be prepared to bet that there are police officers and magistrates who would disagree with you.
Good luck with trying to establish in court that your interpretation of that regulation is more accurate than theirs.
The regulation may be written down so that everyone knows what it says. That doesn't ensure that there will be universal agreement about what it means and how it will be applied.
In the real world, things are seldom as clear, simple and certain as we might want them to be.
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks