This Gold Coast couple are going to fight the fine on indecency grounds.
As a matter of fact, I think having your feet on the dashboard should be fined as it is dangerous if you crash.
What are your views on this situation?
Couple demand apology after traffic camera takes photo up wife’s skirt
@Brian McGee: I can only assume you would be pleased with having a device installed in your car that automatically fines you each time you broke any road rule in even the slightest way.
You wouldn't want to be endangering people unneccessarily would you.
@trapper: I’m not going to say I’ve never sped or drove a bit tipsy, but if I am/was caught then that is my punishment. I’ve u-turned at lights(NSW) and gone past a truck conga line at 140kph(110 zone), and been dealt with by the police. The one difference is I didn’t complain to newspapers or ACA saying that unmarked police cars are perverts or it was the fault of the gummint, I took my medicine and paid my fines.
And it’s not like you can miss those cameras, they’re bright yellow FFS. If you do something stupid within eyeshot of them you deserve what you’re given.
And there’s a big difference between looking into a car from 20m away and having the device installed inside the car.
@Brian McGee: Oh ok, so endangering people unnecessarily is ok as long as you don't get caught. Got it.
@Brian McGee: For starters, the ones you listed yes they are totally fine and in fact none of those would get you any sort of consequence say for example in the US - so crazy that your bar for "crimes" is just completely not crimes across the pond.
There is no justice in the unreasonable enforcement of minor and unintended legal violations, and it serves no practical purpose.
Oh, well in that case I guess we'll all go back to our knitting and let you get on with being The Decider.
Don't forget to use the special intercom on your desk to tell the various legal departments they're wrong and to stop it.
This is always the sh*ttest reply - "YEAH BUT IT'S ILLEGAL"
Like yeah, water is wet. We are saying it's bad law.
Bad law to wear a seatbelt correctly?
@Scantu: At a purely practical level, safety legislation is one of the realities of living in a country with a quality public healthcare system.
@sobes: "Public healthcare system" isn't a reason to force others to do what you want.
Either we have universal healthcare as a right (which means you don't get to dictate the terms), or we don't.
@Ughhh: I don't want my ability to choose for myself to be hindered by others so they can go ahead and go through the window - other's choices aren't my business
@Scantu: Pretty narrow minded to think your actions (or lack of) can not affect others. If you live in a society/community, you're bound by rules. If you want your own rules, go live in the bushes.
@Ughhh: Nah that's not really the principle free nations are founded on. Randomly deciding if other people can/can't do something based on your own emotions isn't how we should make rules, it should be purely based on your impact on others.
Someone not wearing a seatbelt doesn't concern you in any way shape or form. This attitude that everything someone does somehow effects you is unique to Australia, so drop the holier than thou society stuff, plenty of other societies where people don't nitpick eachother to make sure they stay in line.
Randomly deciding if other people can/can't do something based on your own emotions isn't how we should make rules,
I agree. Except the law re seatbelts isn't based on emotions, it's based on safety studies. Your opinion however, seems to based on emotions and lack of understanding /education.
it should be purely based on your impact on others
And that relies heavily on that person having good judgement. If everyone had good judgement, there wouldn't be any accidents on the road. I guess Bob driving down your street at 90kmph is "safe", doesn't impact you and is none of your business. …until it does. .
I assume you're against any rules and laws, not just re seatbelts?
You should practice what your preach. Stop wearing seat belts, drive with no lights on at night, drive up side down.
@Scantu: And what is private about driving on a public road?
There is no expectation of privacy in a public space.
@Brian McGee: 1, That isn't a fact, some jurisdictions your car is considered your private space
2, That isn't what that means - privacy in this context mean, not to the concern of others
just about every person ever caught claims their indiscretion was "momentary" and really they are honest law abiding citizens and you just happened to catch them in that one second they were breaking the law.
Yep, the magistrate is going to have heard this spiel a thousand times before. He/she won't be impressed.
The solution is surprisingly to not micromanage people
People unable to follow simple instructions like wearing a seatbelt properly, because it's a safety restraint in your vehicle travelling 100km/h, shows that some people in society require micromanaging.
@SBOB: It doesn't actually and you should mind your own business - It really boggles my mind that Australians are so small minded and concerned with sticking their nose into other's business.
@Scantu: So which country do you believe has no seatbelt laws, that we should be using as our beacon of a better example?
@SBOB: In most US states seatbelts are secondary offences 👍 And furthermore even where it isn't secondary, they certainly don't do this sort of nosey camera inspection and you will not likely get in trouble for it unless you are harming others.
@Scantu: But in most states, seatbelt laws still exist.
So they still have the same micromanaging laws, it's just their enforcement level that differs (and differs widely depending on state)
Damn nanny state Americans with their seatbelt laws.
@SBOB: Definitely I agree but ultimately it is all in the enforcement. Perhaps if it were over enforced then it would change the law!
but ultimately it is all in the enforcement
Nup, nanny state micromanaging laws impinge on our freedoms
As a wise poster once said
Nah that's not really the principle free nations are founded on. Randomly deciding if other people can/can't do something based on your own emotions isn't how we should make rules, it should be purely based on your impact on others.
How you can say that, then use the US as your example of somewhere without seatbelt laws is chefs kiss perfection
chefs kiss perfection
Point to where I said that, I just said it was better :)
Nup, nanny state micromanaging laws impinge on our freedoms
You can sarcastically say it all you want but for me when it comes to rights and freedoms the size and scope doesn't matter, I'll be standing up for all of them, regardless of how it makes you feel!
But yes that is a prime example of why making it a secondary offence is a good idea, achieves the right balance
This.
I think the couple is contesting the fine on disproportionate grounds that serve very little purpose as the passengers all understand the need for seat belt.
If QLD insists on being brutal/iron fist on momentary infraction like this, then they should be held the same degree of accountability of how they conduct themselves as public servants/politicians (eg: Wine/dining on public purse). This alone is the reason why I can't imagine living in QLD with such unforgiving environment.
Legs on the dashboard alone is a huge no no, if you're in an accident the airbag will literally blow your legs 180 degrees and dislocate them from the hip.
The cost to taxpayers in that case will me more than $1000 in medical bills.
The "Cost to taxpayers" Thing is such a BS argument.
1 - if you understand economics, it may actually be a net positive for the economy (Where does that leave your argument then?)
2 - Curtailing people's freedoms in the name of "for the taxpayer" is gross
I'd like to see how extra costs to the health system and lost tax from loss of work and possible paraplegia is a benefit to the taxpayer let alone the lady in the front seat?
Its not curtailing freedoms, its basic risk management. Basiscally The more you fck around the more likely you are to find out.
Economic stimulus, the same reason why giving poor people money is good for the economy.
It is curtailing freedoms though - if it doesn't effect you, you shouldn't have a say in it.
Ready for the negs:
Richard Arnold was issued a $1078 fine after the camera caught his wife Anh Nyugen with her arm outside the seatbelt as she adjusted her sun visor in the passenger seat
This kind of enforcement is awful. A thousand dollars for that? Why? This doesn't help anyone. All this does is instill contempt for the law and rules.
I think the whole problem is they already seem to have contempt for the law, enforcement perhaps might at least make them follow it through fear of fines as they have no fear of the risks.
In free countries you don't punish people for "having contempt for the law" - only breaking the law.
well then all is good as they didn't get punished for having contempt of it, they got punished for breaking it. Having contempt of it seems to be the reason they are in the shit but it is not what they are being punished for.
@gromit: That isn't the conversation being had though is it - your response was that it was good an inane law and proceeding harsh enforcement was to "set them straight" like some sort of gross behavioural training.
@Scantu: not at all, I stated the whole problem seems to be they have contempt of the law which is what leads them to breaking it. So enforcement of the LAW not punishment of contempt, is about they only way to correct it.
@gromit: But that's exactly how you're manipulated by the government into thinking like that. Especially in Australia, we have recently been making a lot of "surface area" laws which can make just about anything you do make you contravene a law. So then if you have an "uncompliant attitude" they can enforce after you - hard, and people like you who think they are doing the right thing will support it. It's a way of reinforcing a strong arm to not have you exercise free will in a way that is inconvenient to control.
@Scantu: WTF are you on about, you sound like one of those moron Sovreign citizen loons. Society works through laws and behaviour we all adhere to otherwise you end up in chaos. If you don't like a law you push through proper channels to get it changed or you get the hell out of our society.
@gromit: See what I mean though? How primally the suggestion that something might be different to the way you expect it to be makes you react? It's the exact same reaction that contemporary government takes advantage of to pass wide-berth laws that makes it easier to control non-compliance.
It's not a conspiracy theory, it's just a mode of governing that I happen to be opposed to. The fact you are incapable of talking about it without believing the ground will shake under you should be proof enough of why it is concerning lol.
Society works through laws and behaviour we all adhere to otherwise you end up in chaos. If you don't like a law you push through proper channels to get it changed or you get the hell out of our society.
It's just sad because well-meaning people like you spout this sort of thing without really knowing how/why legislating processes work certain ways but you'll fight tooth and nail for the wrong version of it whilst being taken advantage of.
@Scantu: you are the one reacting mate, I am stepping out of this one. I really hope you get the help you need before your belief that laws don't need to be followed gets you put away.
@gromit: Again, see what I mean? Any suggestion to you that the system we use may be a bit problematic and you just shut down - it makes people really easy to manage when they think like that.
But hey you do you!
@Scantu: I have no issue with suggestions that the system may be problematic, it absolutely is. I have issue with your moronic suggestions that someone the government is evil for enforcing the rules.
@gromit: Where did I say evil? See how viscerally and emotionally you react? Like it has made you react to the point where you have suggested I'm some sort of lone wolf terrorist.
Think about it. What a crazy thing to say off the back of me commenting that the way our government legislates currently is problematic. And I don't blame you, it's a well designed system to get people to infight and enforce banal laws that advance the objectives of a more executive-style government.
@Scantu: seriously dude, read through your posts on this forum, if you don't see anything wrong with them you need help. You keep twisting peoples words and pretend you are all innocent. You are either a massive troll or have serious problems, please get help.
@gromit: What a nasty thing to say to another human just because they want to improve the system that they live in to maximise people's ability for self-determination. I hope you reflect on this :)
I definitely don't mind having unpopular opinions, I think the system is incorrect, that system is bought about by a majority of people. So yeah by the very nature of that stance lots of people will disagree. Doesn't stop me from being correct though!
This doesn't help anyone
yea it will.. they wont do it again
“Covert photographic surveillance should not be used in such an insensitive and disrespectful manner.”
There is no expectation of privacy in the public domain. They were on a main road/highway with hundreds of others, not in their dining room.
“It’s actually illegal I think to photograph up a skirt.
I think it is perfectly fine to be upskirted if your feet are higher than your hips, especially if you are getting nabbed for incorrect seatbelt placement. You are totally in control of your own modesty within a vehicle.
What's the last thing that went through her mind during the car accident?
Her knees.
Even if u only have a minor accident, it will destroy ur knees or hips or both
Um no? Absolute morons pay the fine and stfu, stop deflecting from you not wearing your seatbelt correctly.
Also, no one would have seen those photos if you didn't share them publicly you absolute tool, so clearly you don't have an issue with the picture.
Literally none of your business if someone else doesn't wear a seatbelt though is it, the collective brain rot in Aus is amazing.
It is if they end up a paraplegic and the taxpayer has to fund their rehab for the rest of their life
Am I the one that shared the picture that was supposedly embarrassing enough to complain about and try to fight a seatbelt fine with national news outlets?
It wasn't anyone else business until they decided it was worth sharing with the entire world in the news.
Lol you are not smart.
You'd have to be a flog to try and contest this.
Just look at the blokes punchable face
Fine should be increased for displaying that in the photo.
Woman obviously wears the pants in that relationshiop. No way any self respecting man is letting a woman put her dirty feet on the car dash.
Of course… If she really wore pants this wouldn't be such a blow up.
I think the correct term is “(profanity)-whipped.” And yes, I agree that is the case here.
Richard Arnold got a $1078 fine when partner Anh Nyugen briefly slipped her seatbelt […]
I love how it's always "briefly" or "momentarily". Guaranteed she is like that all the time.
Poor old bloke will have a hard …oops heart attack if he ever goes to the nearby Gold Coast beach.
Damn that's a big fine, sound pretty stupid that the person getting the fine is the driver… I mean after the driver is given plenty of time to try to deal with it (to pull over/ask them to fix seatbelt), not within seconds. As for the panties, just an excuse to pretend to be upset about to spice the case up tbh.
(profanity) we live in such a woke world. I shouldn't be surprised considering where I work but (profanity) me.
I love the title: "Couple demand apology after traffic camera takes photo up wife’s skirt"
Sounds like they want the traffic camera to make an apology. Will the robot say its sorry?
There should be a fine, and it should be the passenger who gets fined.
Morons
If she had an accident she would be in hospital and cost the tax payer thousands.
All car offense laws should be 10x more costly to stop all the idiots on the road from doing what they do.
Another example of morons living their life in a car.
Why do potato brained people like you seem to coalesce around some sort of weird heavy handed road rule enforcement, does it make you hard or something?
Basic risk management 101
Would you like to be on the hook for someone else's bad decisions?
Did you help the guy out with the gofundme when he forgot to take out travel insurance.
The couple are just playing the victim
I see this sickness involves some sort of holier-than-thou belief that for some reason peoples actions in their own privacy somehow effects you
Did you help the guy out with the gofundme when he forgot to take out travel insurance.
No, and why would I? Their personal choices, their personal consequences
Most government laws actually make Australia a better place, its only selfish aresholes you think the government is out to harm them.
THe big picture is most laws are actually very fair and help Australia be a better safer place.
Its arsewipes like you that think traffic lights should also be removed, because how dare the government for people to stop at red lights.
Laws give you freedom, they dont take, they enable people to have a safer, sensible life. Sometimes theres an inconvenience or whatever, but the big picture is they help.
Most government laws actually make Australia a better place, its only selfish aresholes you think the government is out to harm them.
THe big picture is most laws are actually very fair and help Australia be a better safer place.
You have no legal background, how would you know? Aligning laws and morals is a bit of a misnomer.
Its arsewipes like you that think traffic lights should also be removed, because how dare the government for people to stop at red lights.
Nice strawman, that would put other people in danger so I don't support it. I do think you should be able to Left-on-red or stop-and-go when rural traffic intersections are deserted though. See how that works? It's called consistency
Laws give you freedom, they dont take, they enable people to have a safer, sensible life. Sometimes theres an inconvenience or whatever, but the big picture is they help.
You don't know what you are talking about and also it seems you don't really know a lot about your history either lol
@Scantu: scan:
cow:
Do you know my passport number or date of birth ?
Do you know my name or address.
How do you know i dont have a legal background ?
So why do you invent total lies that you have no idea about ?
~~
cow: Its arsewipes like you that think traffic lights should also be removed, because how dare the government for people to stop at red lights.
sc: Nice strawman, that would put other people in danger so I don't support it. I do think you should be able to Left-on-red or stop-and-go when rural traffic intersections are deserted though. See how that works? It's called consistency
cow:
See how what works ? ALl you did was make a statement claiming it to be fact without any reason or motivation or foundation.
Learn to write complete sentences.
There is nothing untrue about what i said.
~
cow: Laws give you freedom, they dont take, they enable people to have a safer, sensible life. Sometimes theres an inconvenience or whatever, but the big picture is they help.
sc: You don't know what you are talking about and also it seems you don't really know a lot about your history either lol
cow: So the roads would be better without laws ?
Are you really going to tell me that the road system all over Australia would be better with no laws.
No traffic lights, no laws about drink driving or drugs. Are you also going to tell me that cars would be safer without government laws and regulations about safety requirements ?
It seems the one who doesnt know about history is you, you make silly claims and never consider the consequences. Yet again you make a statement about me (ad hom) without any proof. I know far more history than yourself and as i have shared in this comment, i show deep analysis at the cause and consequences of an observation and laws.
Next time yo umake a statement, provide proofs and example and learn to write like an adult.
@CowFrogHorse: I'm not exactly sure what you've done here, if you format it not-like-a-psychopath I'll be more than happy to mop the floor with you again :)
Just another pair of WMAW… yuck.
Oof… take my upvote anyway.
Ha ha! If she took her feet off the dash she would have been able to lean forward and adjust the visor like normal people do.
Fair cop I reckon.
Incidentally, I’m OK with passenger putting their feet on the dash, no seat belts - any of that. I just pull over, turn engine off and wait until they are seated in a safe and proper manner because slapping their stupid face as I really want to will not go well for me…..
Gross. We need to stop micro-managing people, I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears as it seems to be part of the Aussie tradition to tear eachother down.
No law should interfere with what you are doing unless you are directly or extremely likely to harm someone else who doesn't consent.
Keep your skirt on in public and you won't have any problems.
Comply, one of us, one of us 🤖
Agree. If people have legally opted out of society - they should be free to not have their right to interfere with what they are doing.
eg, opting out of the following at a minimum
- coverage by 3rd party personal insurance taken out by other drivers
- coverage by hospital coverage / medicare for treatment of said obviously personally attributable stupid injuries
I'm happy to not contribute to the societal cost of maintaining people who want to live in their world of personal responsibility etc, provided their mangled bodies are left on the side of the road and they take personal responsibility for their own decisions.
Looking at the age, appearance and dress sense of that … woman….. I'm surprised the government has not sued the couple for lewd and indecent disgusting flashing.
That upskirt is definitely unintentional - if I were the examining officer I'd lose my lunch in an instant!
sigh unzips
Mail order bride?
@Scantu have you setup a GoFundMe so OzBargain can help pay your fine? Also, tell your wife feet on the dash is extremely dangerous in case of an accident.
So strange how people can't separate out principles and their own personal beliefs, perhaps it takes a certain level of intelligence
Seems like it was actually an AI detection?
lol I saw this article too and it reminded me of this post https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/683360
It wouldn’t be up skirt if she was sitting appropriately. But I’ll give them credit for a creative way of trying to contest a fine.
If you have the time and energy, fight every fine possible, regardless of whether you are right or wrong. Nobody actually learns the lesson after paying a fine, and the gubbmint ain't going to miss your money either.
Same with taxes…use every strategy and loophole to minimize tax. It is every citizens obligation to do so.
Requirement that seatbelt etc. be properly adjusted and fastened
(1) In this Part, a requirement that a person wear or be restrained in or by a seatbelt, child restraint or child safety harness is not met unless the seatbelt, child restraint or child safety harness is properly adjusted and fastened.
Where is this proper use defined?
And there is no point for a seatbelt to be used incorrectly, most of the time the 'feet on the dash' and 'underarm seatbelt' are the regular habit/behaviour, not the exception. She wears her seatbelt incorrectly all the time, and she was caught. I feel sorry for the paramedics that have to treat her after an accident and the doctors and rehab staff that attempt to get her back to 'normal' after the trauma.
Thats if she survives.
"I was only going 7kph over the limit"
"I only blew 0.052 at the station"
"I only travelled 50m after the dotted line on the wrong side of the double whites in a 100kph zone"
There are plenty of 'minor and unintended legal violations" that endanger people unneccessarily, which ones are you ok with?