I can’t believe the number of people commenting here saying …

Comment on Mall skater’s $576 fine: is it fair? by Ray.

I can’t believe the number of people commenting here saying he was fined for skating in the Mall. He was not fined for skating, he was fined for failing to produce ID when told to. Hal, that is worth 4 penalty units.
Let’s turn the offender into a victim once again!
Look up the bylaws. Section 74 states that you must produce ID when asked.
So to set the scene, two uniformed, adult rangers approach this kid to inform him he can’t skate in the Mall. They ask for his ID, as they are entitled to do. Instead of respecting authority and doing what he was told, he begins to argue, and refuses.
Therefore he commits an offence and is fined for it. The ranger simply has to display his badge, which the article says was displayed on his belt. Where does it say the ranger has to produce it for inspection? So to say Marco had to “drop to his knees” to inspect the badge sounds like a bit of “mischief making” from the AS News.
I would imagine if young Marco would have shown a bit of respect to the Rangers, and complied with their direction to produce ID, the rangers would have probably explained to him that skating was illegal in the Mall. As it was they used their discretion and did not even charge him for that offence.
576 reasons to obey a lawful direction without arguing.

Ray Also Commented

Mall skater’s $576 fine: is it fair?
Alice, it is an offence to skate in the mall. Check facts first please.


Mall skater’s $576 fine: is it fair?
Peter, you said I made a lot of assumptions, but only point out one. I make no assumptions about his behaviour, it is in the report “he asked the rangers to show him their id first”. Yes, the by-law is very clear where it states they have the power to request ID be shown.
Maybe this is a common law right, but the bylaw is very clear that the rangers have the right and authority to ask for ID.
The article states that “this went on, backwards and forwards, for some time”. So without making assumptions, and based on the article, the rangers identified themselves, and even after doing so, Marco continued to argue “for some time”, refusing to show ID.
His refusal now has the Police involved. What a waste of resources!
Who said anything about corruption, or absolute power? The rangers are doing their job, within the extent of their powers.
Well done to the Rangers for having the guts to actually do their job, and well said Steve Brown!


Recent Comments by Ray

Taxpayer funded firm sends woman bush, unprepared
Agreed Evelyn, but some of these are. WHS laws have failed this person.
Let’s hope she takes it to Worksafe NT, as there are certainly some breaches here.
Every workplace needs a health and safety rep.


Taxpayer funded firm sends woman bush, unprepared
Wow, so many nasty and uninformed comments here. Even Joel Flemming, one of the most knowledgable people we have has said that Remote 4WD training should be a part of any worker’s training before they go remote.
Ultimately it is the bosses’ responsibility to assess the hazard and manage the risk, and yes, the worker has the right to refuse unsafe work.
Unfortunately it does not always happen in the real world especially the NT, and workers are often victimised when exercising their rights, especially as there has been a substantial review into OHS in the Territory recently.


Taxpayer funded firm sends woman bush, unprepared
She’s not the only one Erwin, you would be amazed at some organisations that do exactly the same thing, except they do have a satellite phone.


Gallery swap: Aborigines second in pecking order
Karen: It is simply using a noun verses an adjective, either is accpeptable, neither is disrespectful. Are there not more important things to worry about?


Government backflip leaves Centre’s youth worst off
Evelyne, you have absolutely nailed it. Sadly the pandering virtue signallers that Matthew refers to will protect them from that and guarantee their spiral into a life of incarceration.


Be Sociable, Share!