Traffic Fine - No Stopping Sign - Medical Reason but No Documents to Prove - Whether to Go to Court or Not?

sachyn on 03/02/2018 - 20:01
Last edited 03/02/2018 - 20:58 by 1 other user

Received a no stopping sign traffic fine, as unlucky as it could get. Had to pull over to get some water or food as one of the friend was feeling dizzy. Did not see the sign as had no time to think what to do.

Within minutes the traffic officer had printed ticket and taken photos as am still on the other side of the road. Spoke to the person and he was not ready to withdraw though he understood our situation.

I do not have any documents to prove that I did it because my friend was unwell.

He asked to try sending for review which I had always known will be hard to win.

Now, I am confused whether to go to court as the review came back negative or pay it off? As a family with single income earner the fine of $250 is a dent in my budget.

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Automotive

Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 03/02/2018 - 20:01
    +39

    Get better friends.

    • sachyn on 03/02/2018 - 20:03
      +3

      By no means they did anything wrong except did not take proper care of their food since morning.

      • [Deactivated] on 04/02/2018 - 22:16
        +7

        I've just reported your friend.

      • aussie-bargainer on 04/02/2018 - 23:14
        -7

        Sachin, @sachyn Are you lying?
        You have deliberately selected a reason so that you don't need to prove it?

        And here in Oz bargain, (and also in other forums) you are just exploring possible reasons to escape from the fine.

  • bobbified on 03/02/2018 - 20:06
    +85

    Don't bother - save your time and just pay the fine.

    If I was in bad shape and my mate got a ticket for doing something like that for me, I'd be feeling grateful and I'd take care of that fine without even being asked.

    • htc on 04/02/2018 - 16:55
      +9

      that is the least the friend could do, as the driver may lose points.

      • dlakers3peat on 04/02/2018 - 21:03
        +22

        They expect 99% of people will move on and just pay the fine.

        I on the other have a different view.

        Go to court and take your friend as a witness.

        Magistrate will likely give you the benefit of the doubt if you are sincere and honest.

        Plead guilty but explain why you stopped.

        I have been to court 5 times and had 4 of them dismissed(made up of 3 driving offences and 1 parking infringement).

        The 5th one a parking fine, had the fine reduced by half with no court costs.

        So do not listen to all the lazy people out there that cannot be bothered to go to court.

        If there are legitimate circumstances fight it.

        • bobbified on 04/02/2018 - 23:23
          +13

          If there are legitimate circumstances fight it.

          This is part of what we're all discussing. A medical emergency is an acceptable reason, but the circumstances OP has mentioned doesn't fit the definition of an "emergency".

          So do not listen to all the lazy people out there that cannot be bothered to go to court

          This one is a parking fine that's got no demerit points attached to it.

          Taking it to court means taking a day off work - which makes it not worthwhile for most employed people. And in this particular case, the friend also needs to attend court. The total wages for two people would easily add up to over the fine amount of $250.

        • cameldownunder on 05/02/2018 - 17:39

          Would you be classified as repeated offender, even if you managed to evade the offences?
          Are you a lawyer by chance, or how do you get your neck out of the rope so well?

        • bobbified on 05/02/2018 - 17:49

          @cameldownunder:

          Are you a lawyer by chance, or how do you get your neck out of the rope so well?

          If you go to spend a day at the local court, parking and minor offences are like child's play compared to lots of other the offences that come up.

          Most people would find court intimidating, so once you get over that, you're laughing.

        • dlakers3peat on 05/02/2018 - 18:31
          +3

          @cameldownunder:
          I am not a lawyer but every fine I had was issued unfairly.

          E.g. I was fined for turning left during period where no left turn was permitted during 7am-9am M-F.

          There was a police blitz that day targetting this offence and countless people got fined.

          I never realised this was offence as i had been doing this left turn for 18 months.

          So after I received the fine i went back to check the signs later in the day.

          First sign on the road indicating no left turn was blocked by a truck so I took a photo of it clearly showing how the sign could not been seen when driving.

          Second sign indicating not left turn was placed on the right hand side of the road.

          There is no conceievable reason why somebody who is about to turn left would look at sign placed on the other side of the road.

          Took a photo of that too.

          Wrote a letter pleading but I explained about the obscurity of the signs with photos attached and I won the case.

          This letter was to the local court not the as to the sdro.

        • jjjaar on 06/02/2018 - 08:15

          @dlakers3peat: did they fix the locations of the sign as a result?

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 06/02/2018 - 12:48
          +3

          @bobbified:

          A medical emergency is an acceptable reason, but the circumstances OP has mentioned doesn't fit the definition of an "emergency".

          But your honour, my friend was like really, really hungry!

        • jdr on 07/02/2018 - 19:35
          +1

          @dlakers3peat:

          First sign on the road indicating no left turn was blocked by a truck so I took a photo of it clearly showing how the sign could not been seen when driving.

          That's terribly unlucky that trucks were blocking the No Left Turn sign for 18 months.

    • DarkOz on 05/02/2018 - 07:10
      +1

      But his friend will get sick again paying the fine. OP drives him to the hospital, parks at the No Parking sign and gets another fine.

  • chumlee on 03/02/2018 - 20:08
    +6

    Paying the fine is the easiest route

    • MetaphorOZB on 05/02/2018 - 11:54
      +2

      Agreed. And the friend should chip in at least 50%.

      • Gauntlet on 06/02/2018 - 14:00
        +2

        I believe the proper reimbursement percentage is 10%… Wait, wrong thread.

  • grog on 03/02/2018 - 20:15
    -8

    Was it a real [state] cop or local council ranger?

    If council ranger, maybe write to council and explain the situation of a sick friend.

    A workmate of mine lost his license for 3 months and got big fine because he drove another workmate who was really crook as a dog back to motel they were staying at [bush work trip]

    The problem was they had been at the local town pub for a few hours and he was drunk while driving.

    Poor bastard was stuck in head office for 3 months and was very unhappy about that.

    • sachyn on 03/02/2018 - 20:22

      it was the local council ranger without even any ranger uniform or any sign. The sad part is I am just on the other side of the road. had this guy been like any other parking rangers I would have just crossed road and may not been in this situation.

      But am not sure what to do in the council to prove this?

      • misterpotatomato on 04/02/2018 - 22:19
        +2

        Wait a minute, since when does the council have the power to enforce road rules? I thought only the police did.

        • jjjaar on 04/02/2018 - 22:58
          +4

          Council enforce all parking rules.

        • [Deactivated] on 05/02/2018 - 07:12
          +1

          @jjjaar:

          Wait isn’t this about a stop sign?

        • DarkOz on 05/02/2018 - 07:29
          +4

          @LoopyLou: It's a No Stopping area and the OP parked there to get some water or food.

        • cameldownunder on 05/02/2018 - 17:40

          @DarkOz: Did he park, or stop?

        • GregRust on 05/02/2018 - 23:03

          @LoopyLou:

          Yep that was how I read it too. Apparently not.

        • DarkOz on 06/02/2018 - 07:02

          @cameldownunder: Well, he went for some water or food for minutes so he had to park the car to do that. Can't possibly sit in the car for a few minutes and do that, right?

          Even if he had stopped at the No Stopping area it's still a breach and he would have received the same fine anyway.

    • vinni9284 on 03/02/2018 - 21:05

      Councils are worse.

      If it was from the council, you will get a fine on top of the fine.

      At least they take my rubbish though!

      I look forward paying the rates! I get excited of where my money goes! … where ever that is ..

      • EightImmortals on 04/02/2018 - 07:47
        +1

        Usually to pay interest on their debt, a trickle of it gets back to keep minimum services flowing so the peasants don't revolt.

    • ThithLord on 05/02/2018 - 08:22
      +10

      … got a big fine because he drove another workmate who was really crook as a dog back to motel they were staying at [bush work trip]
      The problem was they had been at the local town pub for a few hours and he was drunk while driving.

      What the hell - I hope he lost his damned license. That's no excuse!

      • DarthPyro on 14/02/2018 - 20:28
        +1

        His friend was crook from binge drinking.

    • Praeto on 05/02/2018 - 09:48
      +5

      It's a shame your idiot workmate didn't lose his license completely. No one has any sympathy for someone who gets done for drink driving.

  • altomic on 03/02/2018 - 20:20
    +106

    "friend was feeling dizzy" is not a reason.

    "friend had been stabbed" is a reason

    pay the fine.

    Source : I work for a government legal department and deal with these sorts of requests regularly. no magistrate is going to dismiss a fine for that.

    • original15 on 03/02/2018 - 20:59
      +22

      “Friend was feeling dizzy BECAUSE he got stabbed” would also be an acceptable reason 😂 lol

      • D C on 03/02/2018 - 22:12
        +20

        Ah, so I need to stab the friend if they're feeling dizzy. Got it.

        • sridhar on 05/02/2018 - 23:32

          I am NOT going to hire you to teach reasoning and analytical ability to my kid, ever.

        • D C on 07/02/2018 - 18:51

          @sridhar: Well, don't come complaining to me when your kid gets a ticket because their friend was only a little bit dizzy…

    • [Deactivated] on 03/02/2018 - 23:46
      -6

      i like stabbing people that are dizzy

      • D C on 04/02/2018 - 17:59
        +2

        Y'know, maybe the 'friend' was dizzy because @OP stabbed him.

        The plot thickens, like the pool of blood in the passenger seat… Next post from @OP - "How do I get blood out of a car seat?" followed by "Should I represent myself?"

        • cameldownunder on 06/02/2018 - 10:18

          Should I buy a new car, or try to get the stain of blood out of the car seat?

    • syousef on 04/02/2018 - 20:04
      +15

      Depends on why he was dizzy. Diabetic with hypoglycemia is a medical emergency. I hope you don't make these decisions given your response.

      • Gravy on 04/02/2018 - 21:00
        +4

        Was going to say the same thing. From the lack of info about the friend's condition though I am thinking this was not the case.

      • macrocephalic on 05/02/2018 - 10:33
        +3

        It can be, but 'feeling a bit dizzy' when the affected person is already sitting down and strapped into a seat, is not really an emergency - not so much that they have to park in a no parking zone.

        • syousef on 05/02/2018 - 11:14
          +2

          "If hypoglycemia isn't treated right away, low blood sugar may result in life-threatening complications such as seizure or coma, or even death."

          https://www.everydayhealth.com/hypoglycemia/guide/

        • macrocephalic on 05/02/2018 - 11:44
          -1

          @syousef: To be less hyberbolic: "Untreated, diabetic hypoglycemia can lead to seizures and loss of consciousness — a medical emergency." — https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetic-hypo…

        • syousef on 05/02/2018 - 12:38
          +2

          @macrocephalic:

          Hyberbolic? Really? Type 1 diabetics have been known to be found dead in their sleep. Very low blood sugar does kill. Do you want me to dig out examples from the literature? Or would that be too "Hyperbolic" for you?

        • cameldownunder on 06/02/2018 - 10:20

          "We were both dizzy from a huge night out, and both over the limit, but I did draw the short straw and had to drive. My friend was dizzy and sick, so I had to stop, to let him throw on the road, with the door open"

      • OzBrogains on 05/02/2018 - 20:41
        +2

        People who end their comments in "Source:" are lying keyboard warriors trying to put weight into their comments because their comments has the weight of a feather.

        Source: Lying keyboard warrior

    • Chridim on 04/02/2018 - 21:59

      Friends was feeling dizzy and threatened to vomit in OP car is also a good reason

      • Jikx on 05/02/2018 - 17:57
        +3

        I would rather pay $250 fine than have another friend vomit in the car for sure.. that smell never really goes away. 4am in the morning with a butter knife scraping vomiting from the door trimming…… gahhhh….. DAMN YOU KEVIN YOU POS - THE WINDOW WAS OPEN TOO!

    • Godric on 05/02/2018 - 17:35
      -1

      Is this now an AMA thread?

  • JimmyF on 03/02/2018 - 20:55
    +15

    Had to pull over to get some water or food as one of the friend was feeling dizzy. Did not see the sign as had no time to think what to do

    This is not a valid reason to break the law. Pay the fine, learn your lesson.

  • Baysew on 03/02/2018 - 21:01
    +16

    Under the circumstances you have outlined, a friend would be very happy to pay the fine for you.

    • Aneurism on 04/02/2018 - 21:33
      -3

      I doubt that. If I told my friend that we needed to hurry home because I needed to pinch a loaf..and that friend decided to 'speed' which results in a traffic fine.

      If they tried to handball the fine to me I'd tell them no way because even though I asked them to hurry, that in no way implies they should break the law. In the same way if I said to someone I was feeling dizzy and to pull over..I am really asking them to pull over according to the rules. This is entirely the driver's sole responsibility.

      • Baysew on 05/02/2018 - 01:18
        +6

        Under the circumstances you have outlined, you are your friends seem self centered and aren't looking out for each other as friends.

        Mates look after mates, because that's what mates do.

        • Aneurism on 05/02/2018 - 12:44
          -2

          That is your interpretation.

          My interpretation is a true mate would have paid the fine without a second thought (and without asking on a forum).. because they would know that bringing it up might make the other friend who nearly fainted feel partially responsible for the fine (when in fact they weren't at all).

          You should self reflect carefully before throwing stones in glass houses. To me the OP sounds like he is attempting to shift responsibility of his poor driving/parking judgement onto his "friend"… In my eyes, a true friend wouldn't try to pass the fine that was an outcome of their own mistake.

          If you think that is the right thing to do, then that might be a reflection of your own nature. However, I prefer to take responsibility for my own mistakes.

        • Baysew on 05/02/2018 - 14:40

          @Aneurism:

          To me the OP sounds like he is attempting to shift responsibility of his poor driving/parking judgement onto his "friend"…

          Could you quote the text were the OP said that?

        • Aneurism on 05/02/2018 - 15:07

          @Baysew:

          Sure, when you quote the text in which I explicitly stated that the OP said that. Learn what implied means.

        • Baysew on 05/02/2018 - 17:05

          @Aneurism: Could you quote the text were the OP implied that?

        • Aneurism on 05/02/2018 - 17:45
          -1

          @Baysew:

          "Had to pull over to get some water or food as one of the friend was feeling dizzy. Did not see the sign as had no time to think what to do."

  • vinni9284 on 03/02/2018 - 21:03
    +1

    Pay the fine as the officer was waiting at the back of the bushes for his catch of the day :-)

  • smuggler on 03/02/2018 - 21:38

    lololol

    Friend felt dizzy. Should've told him to stop being a (profanity).
    What kind of person doesn't have water in his car? Buy a metal bottle and fill it with water every day.

  • Cheeper on 03/02/2018 - 22:37
    +11

    Feeling faint or dizzy is not a dangerous situation for a passenger. You had time to find a more suitable parking spot.
    You have admitted you knew it was a no parking area and still parked there.
    Take it as a tax donation for the lesson learnt and if that lesson is remembered then you will save on parking fines in the future.
    Pay it and move on.
    Been there & paid that :-(

    • momov3 on 04/02/2018 - 01:39
      +2

      'Take it as a tax donation' can be interpreted literally to mean he could even include that fine amount in his tax return as a donation to charity. I am sure people have done that :) :) :)

  • citygal on 03/02/2018 - 23:11
    +2

    Just pay the fine and move on. Without any medical evidence, it is very unlikely that your fine will be waived. If you lose in the court, you will also have to pay the court fee. Not worth it.

  • pegaxs on 03/02/2018 - 23:19
    +5

    Yay! This has all the makings of a new OzB meme. Much better troll than the “one way street on ramp” post…

    Passenger was feeling dizzy… I hope you got them a nice big cup of cement so they could harden the (profanity) up.

    Judge_Judy_meme.jpg

    • PissLUR on 04/02/2018 - 01:38
      +13

      Dying..

      • pegaxs on 04/02/2018 - 09:00

        Upvote for you!

        This is how stupid English is…

        Die. Died. Dies…

        Dying.

        TIL. :D

      • dfaktz on 05/02/2018 - 20:51

        he dyed now, rip in peace

    • No ONE on 05/02/2018 - 13:49

      I first read that as dieting

      • pegaxs on 05/02/2018 - 16:38

        Seriously, I put “dying” in first and changed it after it sounded like he was in the car with his friend making hippie t-shirts or changing their hair colour.

        Then I put “dieing” and it looked like a ‘Murcia spelling. I thought I would go with that one and think no one would notice…

        And apparently OP’s friend was dieting. That’s what got them into this predicament in the first place! :D

  • [Deactivated] on 03/02/2018 - 23:46
    +9

    ask your dizzy friend to pay the fine

    • Aneurism on 04/02/2018 - 21:36
      +3

      The dizzy friend wasn't the one driving the car nor were they the one who chose to make a poor parking choose and ignore road signs.

  • Almost Banned on 04/02/2018 - 01:16
    +1

    Google 'defence of necessity'

    • Baysew on 04/02/2018 - 15:31

      The common law defence of necessity operates where circumstances (natural or human threats) bear upon the accused, inducing the accused to break the law to avoid even more dire consequences. There is, thus, some overlapping with the defence of duress. In R v Loughnan [1981] VR 443 at [448] it was held that the elements of the defence were that —

      (i) the criminal act must have been done in order to avoid certain consequences which would have inflicted irreparable evil upon the accused or upon others whom he or she was bound to protect;

      (ii) the accused must honestly have believed on reasonable grounds that he or she was placed in a situation of imminent peril; and

      (iii) the acts done to avoid the imminent peril must not be out of proportion to the peril to be avoided.

      Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book — Defences

      • Aneurism on 05/02/2018 - 15:42

        If the OP were to attempt to use necessity as a defence, they would need to prove that there was no place nearby that they could have legally stopped.

        Situations where they might have a case to use necessity would be to administer CPR due to the passenger being unconscious, to call emergency services (in which they would have evidence of a call, and possibly access to the recording). Neither of these seemed to have occurred.

        A normal reasonable person would have found a safe and legal place to stop.

        • Baysew on 05/02/2018 - 17:00
          -1

          Perhaps you should reply to blaircam, with your insight, not to me.

  • CLoSeR on 04/02/2018 - 07:32
    +3

    Unless it was an emergency, which by what you have described does not sound like one then you'll have to pay the fine.

    You should have drove for an extra minute and turn off road or find suitable place to pull over.

    • EightImmortals on 04/02/2018 - 07:51
      -5

      Having someone about to spew in my car would definitely be an emergency in my books. And what kind of council 'ranger' (i.e. tax collector) gets around without a uniform and is such a **** they wouldn't give a break to a sick person for a couple of minutes. These tin pot tyrannies are getting way out of hand.

      • CLoSeR on 04/02/2018 - 07:55
        +7

        They are just enforcing the law, no stopping signs are there for a reason.

        • Odin on 04/02/2018 - 13:11
          +3

          Okay, we should talk about this because it's such a prevalent but terrible attitude in australia.

          You don't just 'enforce the law' for the law's sake

          Police, and anyone else with authority to enforce the law are given powers of discretion because the law isn't meant to be applied to the letter, it's meant to be applied with consideration to the intent of the law.

          If the law says "You must provide water, feed, and a stable to any horse that enters your pub", you don't fine pub owners for not complying with this law. It's stupid. It's outdated. It simply wasn't taken off the books.

        • Aneurism on 04/02/2018 - 21:38
          -2

          @Odin:
          Obviously there would be no need to pay any fines if no horses enter the pub. Even if it is outdated, if the fine is not triggered then it can be ignored. Parking in a no stopping zone is clearly still relevant as it can trigger a penalty. So your example was clearly a bad analogy. But nice try.

        • abb on 07/02/2018 - 09:27
          +1

          @Odin:

          You don't just 'enforce the law' for the law's sake

          Right, there are occasionally reasons where laws are unjust or stupid, but you should enforce public safety laws when appropriate.

          Such as, some dude who feels a bit hungry parking in a (correctly signposted, validly placed) NO STOPPING zone. Obstructing traffic, or drivers sight lines, or whatever reason it was installed for, is more dangerous then telling old mate to wait 30 seconds while you turn into the servo to grab a snack.

        • Odin on 08/02/2018 - 22:41

          @Aneurism:

          No, the example is that today, a horse walks into a pub. Are you expecting a police officer to fine the pub owner for not complying with the law? After all, it's the law.

        • Aneurism on 09/02/2018 - 01:40
          -1

          @Odin:

          If there was a law that existed then obviously yes. But it doesn't exist, so your argument has no valid merit as it is a false analogy.

          I can also make up false analogies that have no useful bearing to the debate too and then end it with a sarcastic assumption based on the false analogy..

          For example if your closest relative or friend happened to die mysteriously with a knife in their neck tomorrow, are you expecting that no one will investigate ? After all, those in authority can apply the law at their discretion and should just assume your friend or relative tripped without even bothering to look. After all, it's the law, which is meant to be ignored on a whim.

        • Odin on 10/02/2018 - 11:07

          @Aneurism: The law does exist (or did up until recently), that's why I used that example. To prove how stupid it is to blindly apply the law without consideration for the intent.

        • Aneurism on 10/02/2018 - 16:21
          -1

          @Odin:

          Laws change with the times and can be updated by society to reflect situational changes.

          If the law does not exist at this point in time then your argument is invalid and also irrelevant.

          If it does exist, you should be able to directly cite the exact act/schedule in which it is in effect.

          It is more stupid to blindly spout nonsense without consideration for truth.

        • Odin on 10/02/2018 - 16:23

          @Aneurism:

          You're making yourself look like an ass. I think our previous posts speak for themselves and nothing more needs to be said. Anyone reading this can make up their own mind.

        • Aneurism on 10/02/2018 - 18:20
          -1

          @Odin:

          Did you want to throw some mud before exiting stage left to detract from the fact that you are unable to back up your own claims in a debate?

          Your assumption based on a false premise proved nothing.

      • JimmyF on 04/02/2018 - 08:22

        Having someone about to spew in my car would definitely be an emergency in my books

        In your books, but again not a valid reason to get out of the fine.

        they wouldn't give a break to a sick person for a couple of minutes

        Looking at it from the other side. The officer sees a car pull up in a no stopping area, the driver is looking around inside the car for something. Yep doesn't appear to be a valid reason for stopping to me either.

        • EightImmortals on 04/02/2018 - 12:21
          -7

          Using the phrase 'it's the law' to validate government is a fallacy. As if a codex of pompous and incomprehensible legalese magically validates coercion, theft, intimidation and violence.

          "The fact is there are a hell of a lot of unjust laws on the books nowadays and there always have been. Whether it was laws that made slavery legal, banned women from voting, made alcohol illegal, or kept blacks from sitting in the front of the bus, there have always been immoral laws. There are dozens of examples of freedoms we take for granted now that were once illegal. If people back then had just accepted that status quo then nothing would have ever changed for the better. The phrase “it’s the law” doesn’t mean anything taking that into consideration.

          If people said that gay marriage is illegal, it’s the law, then the courts would never have bothered to take up their case. If people said that marijuana is illegal, it’s the law, then there never would have been referendums to legalize it. Progress is not possible if people accept the status quo, and the illegitimacy of saying it’s the law.

          Furthermore, there are countless examples of horrible things have been legal in the past. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. Those that fought against slavery were disobeying an unjust law because they saw it as their moral responsibility to do so. Morality always trumps legality. Saying that slavery is the law so you have to abide by it is not a valid excuse. It’s the law doesn’t really mean anything."

          Ok so harassing people for pathetically minor parking infringements is not up there with some of those examples, but the principle is exactly the same. If the guy had parked his car and gone shopping for an hour then fair enough, but he didn't, he stopped to take care of a sick friend, the law is an arse.

        • JimmyF on 04/02/2018 - 13:36
          +2

          @EightImmortals:

          Using the phrase 'it's the law' to validate government is a fallacy

          Well I didn't say that phase in my post or even the word 'law' either, should I even keep reading your reply as it sounds like the beginning of a rant that has nothing to do with my post.

        • R3XNebular on 04/02/2018 - 16:15
          +2

          @JimmyF:

          I agree with you. The post above sounds like a lot of nonsense. Generally officers ask if you have any lawful or emergent reason. Emergent is generally life threatening… Feeling "Dizzy" is not life threatening and won't hold up in court. Pay the fine save everybody elses time…

        • JimmyF on 04/02/2018 - 16:19
          +1

          @R3XNebular: Agreed 100%, but EightImmortals has some mega axe to grind on the issue and they're not even the OP!

        • EightImmortals on 04/02/2018 - 18:32
          +1

          @JimmyF: Sorry champ, I meant to reply to the guy who said

          "They are just enforcing the law,….."

          That excuse has been used to justify the most abhorrent human abuses throughout human history.

        • JimmyF on 04/02/2018 - 21:15
          -1

          @EightImmortals: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Oh well, these things happen.

        • Aneurism on 04/02/2018 - 21:47
          +1

          @EightImmortals:

          That is why in a just society there are processes which enable and allow for change should society as a whole decide to enact it. Laws aren't there to decide morality or right or wrong. They are enforced on behalf of society to help manage behaviour. Assuming that it is anything else as a fallacy.

        • OzzyOzbourne on 05/02/2018 - 21:00
          +1

          @EightImmortals: don't think you can compare a no stopping zone to slavery!

        • abb on 07/02/2018 - 09:30

          @OzzyOzbourne: I have a dream! I dream that one day, we will be able to park our cars at any place with impunity! Be it motorway, driveway, or ambulance access to the hospital. The tyranny of no stopping zones MUST END!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join