@vc commodore, social media and security cameras probably have some impact in bringing police assaults to light (which can only be a good thing).
But those over worked police officers that pulled a pensioner out of his home, throwning him to the ground and pepper spraying him. Only to knee him in the back and (i think) kick him a few times while on the ground. Then they sprayed him with a jet stream of water to the face to 'help' him with his pain are not the victims. These police are rightly being charged with assult and are known as the "accused".
Just like the police that went to a depresed man's house after his wife called them out of concern for him, only to see the fragile copper pepper spray and throw her husband to ground because he said "suck my dxxx" to the copper (while he was leaning against his rubbish bin with his leg up on it and his arms crossed in front of his chest). That policeman will also likley be known as the "accused", and rightly so.
Then, lets not forget the policeman that assaulted a 16yo teenager, took the phone off his friend who was videoing the incident and deleted the video proof. He then arrested the 16yo and charged him with assaulting police. Luckily his father was a tech head and paid to have the video recovered from the friends phone which hilighted the polices criminal behaviour. Charges were dropped against the 16yo and laid against the copper (think he got jail time).
Yes, enforcement is haphazard. This is primarily due to large understaffing, over work and lack of effective training in the miriad of police and non police things the police are now doing. It's all been compounded by the unwinding of mental health services around the country resulting in the wrong people being sent to do the work that should be carried by health professionals. But non of this gives plolice the right to assault a member of the public because they didn't like the quip that was uttered back or because they had a tough day. Enforcement is haphazard because many police have a chip on their shoulder and added with stress of the job (blame the government for lack of funding) results in bigotry and sometimes assault.
But all this is no excuse and victim blaming (as you seem to be doing) isn't a good look for anyone.
As for licensing issue, as a driver you should know you are responsible for the condition of the car you drive (even if you don't own it). It's part of the condition of you license, which sadly seems to be not understood by many, though you may have a clearer understanding of your obligations than most (JC member after all).
But there are a lot people that don't understand. There are also a lot of facits to driver standards. Understanding basic roadworthy items being just one part in my view. So yes, improving the drivers knowledge of basic roadworthy checks does improve the driving standard. Doing this doesn't imply that the other issues you mention (distracted drivers through gadget obsessions) shouldn't also be tackled. Improvements happen piecemeal but they are improvements nevertheless.
There is nothing wrong with having high standards (mine may not be as high as you seem to think
) but to aspire for something better can only be a good thing while you make it sound that aiming for improved standards (unless you see a benefit) is a bad thing.
As using a mobile while driving is dangerous can result in $455-$1517 and loss of 4 points while some wrongly argue it's heavey handed and it's safe in many cases. I don;t use a phone while driving and I have no issue with seeing a yellow carary (prohibition to drive vehicle) issues and a forced tow on a vehicle with no brake lamps fuctioning (as it's also unsafe for it to be on the road).
If you think otherwise great, you are free to have your view as i am free to have mine. Time to drop this conversation - really.
