Legalities of off-street burnouts

[superyob]

I am so tired of people banging on about their so called loss of freedoms just because it's illegal to do or watch dangerous acts of stupidity that cost the taxpayers billions in medical bills and on going care when the inevitable fatality or maiming happens. When you can pay your own life long medical bills, you can go train surfing or bungee jumping without the cord for all I care. I for one object to the 'I can do anything I want and everyone else has to pay' mentality...

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by superyob

I am so tired of people banging on about their so called loss of freedoms just because it's illegal to do or watch dangerous acts of stupidity that cost the taxpayers billions in medical bills and on going care when the inevitable fatality or maiming happens. When you can pay your own life long medical bills, you can go train surfing or bungee jumping without the cord for all I care. I for one object to the 'I can do anything I want and everyone else has to pay' mentality...

What the **** are you on about, mate? No one here is saying anything about the I want to do anything I want and everyone else gets to foot the bill at all. If that is all you have gotten out of this topic I suggest you walk out the same door you came in through, it's still open. There is a difference between doing a couple skids that have the chance to go wrong and train surfing which has the guarentee that something will go wrong. It's like motorbike riding on your own property, you're hardly allowed to do that anymore which is a loss of freedom as you mostly don't get facilities to ride your off road bikes on anymore that isn't a track instead of a field where you can fang it around as fast as your bike can go. You're talking extremes here that natural selection will take its course for instead of sport.

[poppa smurf]

daniel_rosie (OP) have you spoken to the police sergeant to see what is needed to bring this pad up to scratch to allow the activity or what the problem is with it?

possibly council as well.......if these requirements could be met (whatever they are) then there should be no problem apart from a few extra safety measures needed which would be outlined by council or Police.

far better to have this activity under controlled conditions rather than a spur of the moment thing

[BadMax]

Tex has surmised it perfectly. Things do and will go wrong, many of them are nothing more than wrong place at the wrong time. Bit like all the nanna's lately in Victoria ploughing through shop fronts.

If you want to to start banning risky behaviour lets start with a few activities;
Sky diving
Rock climbing
Cycling
Scuba diving
Horse riding...

Yeah, pretty silly isn't it? Freedom of choice is being eroded in Australia, we are being conditioned to having someone look after us just in case. Have a look at the many OH&S laws, they've been put into action to save idiots from themselves, well maybe they should be saved?

Life must be pretty boring for those who don't take any risks. On the same subject, those non risk taker shouldn't dictate to others what 'their norm' is.

[superyob]

These activities are not illegal acts...

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by superyob

These activities are not illegal acts...

Neither are burnouts unless they're on public roads.

[tankclare]

Bottom line is you can either talk with the authorities etc to see how they want you to run it and cover your *** so everyone is happy. Or you can continue to do burnouts as you are knowing full right there are possible chances you could get in trouble. It may happen, it may not. Thats up to you guys.

The idea of a private burnout pad away from public roads is a top idea and more people should do it.

[FGII-XR6]

these work really well in the US but in Australia they aren't worth the paper they are written on the same as pre nups. I'\n Australia you can't sign away rights you are legally entitled to. sure they exist here but they are a bluff at best. if you had signed one then were injured it would be ignored in court if you (or your family if you were dead) were to sue

Originally Posted by Fireblade

I'd get a legally binding indemnity form written up by your solicitor and have everybody (and I mean everybody) sign it before they get to participate (I would include all spectators in this too), this just covers your **** in the event of the unimaginable. And I would also limit the use for people that you know rather than allowing just anybody to come and chuck a skid.

I would also include an age limit in allowing people in, remember kids can't make their own choices in being there with their parents.

[FGII-XR6]

Originally Posted by Kable72

Neither are burnouts unless they're on public roads.

That's the whole point of this thread, it has well and truly established that burnouts are illegal unless they are carried out at a legally sanctioned event

[tex]

No point.

[PG2]

To the OP.

Has the solicitor got back to you with an answer? I was just wondering what their interpretation of the whole matter was?

[Spurious]

Originally Posted by PG2

So if I commit a break and enter and an officer of the law does not "witness" it (by your definition, see it) I can get away with it?

Think about this even with a fence built around it. So if an officer of the law can hear tyres screeching, can see smoke and can smell the aroma of burnt rubber all coming from the same area he or she can't gain entry and take action?

Correct!. The cops would need to "eyewitness" & ID the driver & issue a summons. In the long run it would most likely end in a court room with a magistrate asking the prosecution (magistrate): "did you personally eye witness the incident"? The obvious answer would have to be (prosecutor): "no, the incident was witnessed indirectly your honour". (magistrate): "what do you mean by indirectly"? (prosecutor): "a fence was obscuring the view but the offence was heard your honour".(magistrate): "can you identify the alleged offender in this court room"? (prosecutor): "no your honour, a fence obscured the view".CASE DISMISSED! If a police officer see's a crime, they are the first person witness, if a police officer is informed by another individual about a crime, it is then classed as an alleged offence & it's up to police & a prosecutor to prove the offence took place & committed by the individual in question. If your house get burgled it's up to you or police to figure out who did it. If you point the finger at someone, the police can arrest them with suspicion but must still prove they were responsible. You can't charge a car for doing a burnout, you must charge the driver.

[GTP-RPD]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

Mate you've just used real life experience to prove my point, I know you put me in the wowser camp and thats not my angle

No one wants to see chained and chocked burn outs (I went to one years ago and it was worse than watching Dalton Abby)

My point is freak accidents can and will happen and we don't know when, if we take a few precautions to stop the **** coming down on us in the unlikely event that an accident happens the fun will last longer

It seems you guys were EXTREAMLY Lucky and it's a shame about the young blokes injuries and I guess had he have been from the handout mentality things could have been very different for all involved (Thank god he wasn't)


All I've been trying to say is look at what your doing, and ask your self

What could go wrong?

What are the Risks to those in attendance?

What can we do to reduce these risks and still have fun?

What can we do to make it easier if something was to go wrong?

I'll sit back now and wait to be ripped apart again for being the fun police

No point in ripping anyone apart it stifles a healthy debate. Allowing everyone to have and express their opinion is a benefit of a democracy. It's your opinion your entitled to it just like everyone else is entitled to theirs. Just like their are risk takers and there are those that aren't.

Someone once said fortune favours the bold. So thats it for me. Cheers and good luck to OP for his next get together.

[daniel_rossy]

Originally Posted by PG2

To the OP.

Has the solicitor got back to you with an answer? I was just wondering what their interpretation of the whole matter was?

Nah haven't heard anything back from the solicitors.
The plan is to hear what they have to say first, and then talk about it to the sergeant of the local police about it and see how we can get around it.

The owners probably should have sort after written legal advice first before putting the concrete down (because it cost a lot) but spoken advice from a lot of people including police officers said that it should be all good so they did it anyway.

Not really in a rush because the paddocks are really wet so would be hard to take cars that aren't 4wds in there anyway.

[danzvtil]

Originally Posted by BadMax

So even if it's run as friendly, not for profit, no money exchanging hands, you need to get work cover etc involved?

Ever seen a car crash at a track day or even roll? They don't have a leg to stand on as they waived all their rights to sue when they signed the entry form.

Entry fees would astronomical just like every other motorsport event. Hence no one will show, owners go bankrupt and the burnouts continue in town.

Calling it a 'nanny state' has nothing to do with anarchists. It's people who are fed up with being what to do and how to live their lives and then have laws enforced that are beyond reasonable.

Dude, thumbs up! Burnouts bore the living daylights out of me, but kudos to you for doing something about it!

Was the entry form sign by attendees written and vetted by a lawyer?
A "waiver" means didley squat when a life is damaged or lost, worksafe will have you in court for years as well as the family of a hurt person.As to whether you believe you are right or wrong, those years in court will potentially bankrupt you and force you to loose everything, even IF you are found not at fault.
It seems we all have differing attitudes to risk.

[wicksy]

I wanna be Mick Brashers Neighbour!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_TtW...iap1sliWlGsREQ

I always thought private property, as long as your neighbours dont care, no one cares,