NSW/SYD: banning colours
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: New mid-week ambiguious jokes and if you don't like them, fuckoff
Next: No helmet legal for Unicycle rider?
From: Simone on 17 Jan 2008 08:11 >>>> they deserve all they get ..... >>> Who deserves it? The completely innocent law-abiding motorcycle rider >>> who gets mistaken for a member of a patch club? As a decent law abiding motorcyclist turning up at a pub on my 250 Honda I strongly suspect I'll get a lot less grief from an over zealous bouncer than I would at a pub full of inebriated 1%ers. As for banning "certain colours" if it looks like a duck & quacks like a duck...then expect to get shot at! Sim.
From: JL on 17 Jan 2008 09:08 CrazyCam wrote: > JL wrote: >>> One wonders if the H.O.G. riders will be upset if the are banned or >>> upset if they aren't banned. ;-) >> >> Well they're not banned (it's just 1%ers - Rebels, Gypsy Jokers, >> Commies etc) >> > > But some of the HOG lot go to such extremes to try and look like 1%ers. Yes, yes they do :-) >> ..snip >>> N.B. I am slightly concerned that such action has been made illegal. >>> GB, JL? > > > No, John, it was organising a commercial boycott, as in a web page with > the names of pubs not to go to. > > I have a sort of feeling that doing that has actually been made illegal. OH ! Missed your point. Errm, actually you may be right, I'll have to check. JL (you could always just ask the better half)
From: JL on 17 Jan 2008 09:12 Zebee Johnstone wrote: > In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:24:19 -0800 (PST) > intact.kneeslider(a)start.com.au <intact.kneeslider(a)start.com.au> wrote: >> Or, if they want to say you can't go in wearing patch club colours, >> they can already do so. No need to codify it, as such. > > The difference here is that they can call the cops. Previously they > had to do it with their own security. Now they can call the cops who > you can bet will respond with great joy to bang people up. > > Having it as part of the licence gives the publican much more backup. Mmm but also the flip side applies, the publican can't choose to allow OMCGs in - and I suspect yu'll find that's why its being done this way - cos not all publicans don't want em. JL
From: corks on 17 Jan 2008 09:27 "G-S" <geoff(a)castbus.com.au> wrote in message news:13ouaprfb5onf16(a)corp.supernews.com... > corks wrote: >> "G-S" <geoff(a)castbus.com.au> wrote in message >> news:13otvesn43sb161(a)corp.supernews.com... >>> corks wrote: >>>> bullshit , i think most people would be more intimidatd by a big arsed >>>> '1%�r , than prince harry on a night out ...... >>> Intimidated by? Maybe... >>> >>> Offended by? No way *frown*. [1] >>> >>> >>> G-S >>> >>> [1] Of course a 1%er wearing Nazi logos is likely to tick both boxes. >>> [2] Wearing a swatstika crosses the line. >>> >> >> well then plenty of patch d wear the swatstika in their ''uniform''.... > And plenty of them offend me because they do wear them, if you wanted to > ban people wearing swastikas from pubs I'd support you. > > But this isn't about something offensive like the swastika, it's about > 'colors' (which aren't in and of themselves offensive... although the > actions of some people wearing them are). [1] > > > G-S > > [1] Or are you trying to say that the actions of patch clubs are so > offensive that their actions have permanently tainted the 'colour' emblem > concept? Because that's a *big* stretch. ummm can you name or tell me of a patch club that hasnt lived up to their ''colours''
From: Damien on 17 Jan 2008 10:22
corks wrote: > hello pot kettle , but by all means keep twisting your arguement to suit > yourself I didn't think I'd get an honest answer. |