NSW bikie laws rushed through Lower House

“The legislation will allow police to seek a court order to make membership of a declared bikie gang illegal. Members who continue to associate with each other face jail for two to five years.” – ABC News, Thu Apr 2, 2009.

Remember when the anti-terrorism legislation was introduced with assurances that it was for our own good, would only apply to terrorists, safeguards were in place to protect innocent people and it would never apply to others? Then we had the Haneef debacle? Well now we have something akin called the CRIMES (CRIMINAL ORGANISATIONS CONTROL) BILL 2009!

In what can only be described as the biggest kneejerk (and other parts of the anatomy) reaction of the century, and despite serious concerns raised by the New South Wales Council of Civil Liberties and the Law Society of New South Wales, our politicians have shown their blatant contempt for civil rights and inaptitude to govern! The similar, and now lesser, South Australian laws are yet to be fully exercised and are the subject of a High Court action yet NSW is out to prove itself to be bigger, badder and foolproof… all in the blink of an eye! By their own admission, according to hansard, quite a few of those who supported the bill also had serious reservations about it, but still, there’s obviously no need to contemplate such serious and far reaching legislation because ours is better than the anti-terror and South Australian laws put together!

Which beggars the question – Who is going to enforce these draconian laws? Despite being granted a bigger and bigger stick to wield, via strengthening of new and existing laws over the last decade, the NSW Police Farce can’t keep up? If they fail to keep tabs on outlaw motorcycle clubs while they’re riding around in public with an equivalent of neon lights plastered all over there backs then how the fuck are the coppers going to see them when they turn those lights off? Are they really so naive as to think they’ll go away? Talk about sticking your head in the sand!

This whole exercise is about police and politicians failing to do their respective jobs and trying to save face to a media manipulated general public. There’s already a plethora of laws in place to deal with what the government and law enforcement seems unable to do. There’s absolutely no excuse to penalise the innocent along with the guilty based on purely speculative evidence presented to a supreme court judge.

Far-Kew Rees! Wake up and smell the waratahs! Already innocent bikers are being targeted in the form of road rage and discrimination. We all know it’s only a matter of time until multiple roadside checks are the daily norm and other minority groups are targeted. May you rest in peace, because we’ll still have a beer with whomever we fuckin’ choose!

According to The Sydney Morning Herald’s story Shock alcohol warning from nation’s top health body from June 15…

“DRINKERS who quench their thirst with four or more middies of beer will be defined as binge drinkers under new national guidelines released next month.

The new top limit for safe drinking follows a review by the National Health and Medical Research Council and will apply equally to men and women.”

The National Health and Medical Research Council claims,

“The guidelines do not use the term ‘binge drinking’. However, they do provide guidance on the risks both over a lifetime, and on a single drinking occasion.”

Semantics aside (don’t get me started on journalists) and although the report has still not been published I think we can asume that they are indeed considering to drop the safe drinking level to four standard drinks in a single session.

Hunter S Thompson drank more than that for breakfast!

Then there’s their definition of a standard drink. Granted, my nips of Wild Turkey aren’t standard but why is a standard can of beer or standard glass of wine really one and a half standard drinks? Are they trying to confuse me with maths and get me to miscalculate how many drinks I can consume safely before I drive home?

Speaking of which. if so many drinks are bad for me how come I can go out for a three hour dinner, consuming four standard drinks and legally drive home under the, below standard, 0.05 blood alcohol limit? I can see the look on the coppers face as he gives me a Random Breath Test now…

“Have you been drinking tonight, Sir?”

“Bloody oath, mate, and binge drinking too!”

Of course, it’s all part of a master plot to further lower the drink driving level. It must be too high if binge drinkers are allowed to drive!

Far Kew! …and stop moving the bloody goal posts!

I need a drink or four…

…or is that three?