NSW: bikie bill contents

Here's the text of the legislation
http://tinyurl.com/d7uhak

Haven't looked at it, so have no idea what it contains.

Zebee

 

Hi Zebee - This link is dead now - can`t seem to find a copy anywhere else
either.
Do you have another source I can obtain one from?

regards

 

<http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/nswbills.nsf/V3BillsListCurrent>

Go to "Crimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Bill 2009"


HTH,


GB

 

"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a
democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't
have to waste your time voting.
- Charles Bukowski"

 

the parliamentary counsel's web site is also good - see

http://tinyurl.com/dxty8u

A very interesting history - introduced by Rees on 2 April, passed by both
houses without ANY amendment on same day; given royal assent 3rd April,
first arrest under it same day at 16:30hrs - see -

http://www.smh.com.au/national/first-bikie-arrested-after-change-of-law-2009
0403-9s1j.html

The public hospital system, public education or transport generally does not
seem to be receiving the same level of attention in NSW - but none of that
is a problem right?

Best, Andrew

 

I've just emailed you a PDF copy.


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

I think the arrest was completely unrelated to the new legislation. The
news story said he was stopped and charged with license and firearms
offences. Nothing to do with being a member of any organisation which
is outlawed under the new legislation from what I read.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

U fail! Nev got it write.

 

Ghod this hurts... But you're right this time...


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

On TV it was said that he was stopped because he was wearing colours (which
is apparently illegal now).
I guess that means they're admitting that all the previous times they've
stopped colours-wearers have been unlawful.....

 

That is ur version of the facts. Cos it is on tele don't make it true.

 

One minute we slam the media for doing beat -ups, and in the next we
assume they're not doing a beat up because it suits our agenda...

Bwahahahaha...


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

It's my understanding that it's not illegal yet and only will be for
clubs which are named as proscribed organisations by a judge.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 05 Apr 2009 08:46:00 +1000

I expect he was pulled over on "Reasonable suspicion".

Which does seem to have been reasonable.

What I'm wondering is why someone on L plates is in full colours. (If
he was, news reports are unreliable)

Definite sign the whole thing's going to the dogs, you'd expect that
someone who didn't have a bike licence would have to prospect for at
least the time it would take to get one.

There was something about disqualified from driving, but then that
would stop him getting L plates, so who knows.

Rather frustrating having to rely on newspaper reports.

Zebee

 

When I read the circumstances I thought the club must have set this
bloke up as bait for a test case... Surely...

 

The ABC seemed to say that the bloke had a suspended licence, but even
that was, for motorcycles, a learner permit, so wouldn't have allowed
riding the Harley he was on. <snigger>

regards,
CrazyCam

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 05 Apr 2009 09:22:52 +1000

But a test case for what?

He was riding a bike he wasn't licenced for, not showing L plates,
carrying weapons I bet he had no licence for and were not registered,
and at least one concealed.

I can't see how this could be a test case for the controlled
organisations legislation.

That the Angels will be named a controlled organisation is a given.
They don't need to provide a reason to the AG for that, it's going to
happen on the current evidence anyone's got. I suppose they have provided
a "member" of said organisation to have a control order placed on him,
but the cops have already got a few of those I bet.

So I can't see this as any kind of deliberate thing for the Angels.
It might be some twonk (at nearly 40 you'd think he'd know better, but
at nearly 40 what's he doing on L plates?) out for a bit of standover
which may or may not be anything to do with any other club. But I
can't twist it in any way to be a good thing for the club.

(It might just be I don't have the right mindset. Better to hunker
down and be vewwy vewwy quiet, or to all get dressed up and show you
aren't afraid? )

I've just read the bill, pretty much an organisation can be controlled
if someone gives a selected[1] judge evidence that either a "significant
group" of members or members who "influence" the organisation have been
known to meet together to plot serious crime. Doesn't even have to
have been at an organisation meeting.

What's even better is if the AG says that the group is associated with a
group overseas who does naughty things even if the local group doesn't,
well that's enough.

(Are you now or have you even been a member of the communist party...)

Once an organisation is named, then known members can be subject to
control orders, which restrict them from meeting each other.

I can see this being used to smash railway unions... you can associate
with other members of the controlled organisation at work but not
outside it. And "serious crime" includes things as get you money,
could include the kind of corruption that RailCorp's been known for.

Might be the only way to get the railways back on track. Reckon the Labor
(hah!) party will get that desperate by the next election? (Probably not,
but I'd be willing to bet a beer someone's thought of it...)

I find it interesting that you can associate at work, therapy or training,
but not at a religious meeting.

Be fun for people who are members of a mosque with a ratbag faction.
A few of them having ties to the Indonesian militants or visiting
Afghanistan and bingo! No more worship at that mosque for anyone.
Especially if anyone calling himself an imam is involved. (I dunno
Aussie legal systems quite comprehend a priesthood that isn't heirarchical
or appointed.)

Somehow I think the omission of houses of worship is deliberate.

Zebee

[1] there's a definite smell here. From what I can see, judges have
to nominate themselves as willing to do the work, then the AG gets to
pick which one does it. So you can bet the AG will be only picking
the ones the govt reckons won't be too into this civil liberties
rubbish.

 

So, for conspiracy theory #1. The media reported that he was wearing HA
colours, not that he was a HA. The media reported a week or so back
that members of other clubs have been wearing HA colours when out
causing trouble. So adding 2 and 2 together.. if you were in club XYZ,
and you were warring with HA, what better way of defeating them then
using the new legislation to your own advantage.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

Unless his learner permit was issued in the ACT of course...

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

I know, I just thought a bloke with a target already on his back
would've been a bit smarter perhaps...