Being A Member Of A Motorcycle Club Is Now Illegal

[Gosling1]

.....Back On Topic......

What officially denotes an illegal bikie gang?.......

At the present - immediate - moment, there is *nothing* that denotes a bikie gang as being illegal. Its the activities of some members, which are often not legal, that are the root cause of the problem.

If the SA govt. is succesful with their current application to have the Finks MC a 'declared organisation', then this OMCG will be the first actual gang to be declared 'illegal'.

What strikes me as a bit odd, is that the very definition of a 'gang' relies on the 'gang' being easily identifiable due to their gang colours.

Stop wearing the colours...........and what happens to the 'gang' ?? How does one prove that you are a member of a 'gang' ? What about the HOG owners who ride around on similiar bikes, with similiar looks ?? Whats stopping this group being targeted as a 'declared organisation' ?

(Although the cessation of wearing club colours is highly unlikely for OMCG's......it is one option that will open an entirely new can of worms...)


How long before members of the Canterbury Bankstown NRL Club are targeted ? Ask any club-hopping kid from the inner-west. These heavily-tattooed, muscle-bound thugs create just as much mayhem, fear and loathing amongst members of the public, as 1/2 a dozen local Bandido's wearing black T's. They are loud, obnoxious, drunken louts who thrive on the intimidation, fear and loathing they create.

Its all about the image. Look big and scary with multiple tatts all over, and clearly you must be a drug-running thug who bashes everyone in sight and rapes small children and goats at every opportunity. Some do, but not *all* of them. This legislation targets *all*, not just the criminal elements within...

Try googling 'McCarthyism' for some comparisons.

When similiar legislation to the proposed SA laws was introduced in Canada and Scandanavia some years ago - what do you think was the result ? A break-up of the OMCG's ?? Absolutely nothing like it - the gangs just went further underground, they became much harder, and the criminal activity and lack of visible law-enforcement that followed, just exploded in both regions. It didn't work there, and it won't work here.

Here is an indication of how 'un-enforceable' the proposed laws will be........"....A new offence of criminal association will stop people associating with members of declared groups and people on control orders. It will also stop serious criminals associating with each other....."

Yeh, yeh right. It will stop serious criminals associating with each other..... In the same way the law against speeding ensures that every single biker out there *never* exceeds the speed limit !!!!!

[photomike666]

.... and our once intelligent (ish) debate is again dragged off topic. I love KSRC

Sorry Dave, I asked a question that I thought was on topic, and going by the varied responses does indeed pose a valid debate. Nothing to say both debates can't cohabit this thread, unlike 1% clubs who seem to struggle to cohabit the same vast country

And I was hoping Ardy would drop in the official definition, just so we all know.

[mike-s]

Gos, im insulted, are you insinuating that i EVEr go above the speed limit? *fake shock*
I'm insulted, no no, really i am!

[dave#3]

.... and our once intelligent (ish) debate is again dragged off topic. I love KSRC

Sorry Dave, I asked a question that I thought was on topic, and going by the varied responses does indeed pose a valid debate. Nothing to say both debates can't cohabit this thread, unlike 1% clubs who seem to struggle to cohabit the same vast country

And I was hoping Ardy would drop in the official definition, just so we all know.

Sorry Mike, that wasn't aimed at you - I think the discussion around what constitutes and illegal gang is very much on topic and really strikes to the core of this debate. My comment was directed as Stereo's comment below (and I should have quoted it at the time). Sorry for any confusion or angst .

No, "Illegal Kawasaki Gun Rider Drug Gang" would be.... Big Ups to all my boys in the IKGRDG WOOP!

[rooster]

Essentially the legislation like all current legislation emanating from those arseholes we call our elected representatives is a kneejerk reaction to something that they have ignored for years.

Beginning of rant

There was a time once many years ago when the law had the power to control troublemakers regardless of their ranking in the criminal heirarchy and with this came a certain degree of begrudging respect from the offenders whether they were 1%ers, crim, street gangs whatever. Then the airy fairy do gooders came in with their concept of social engineering and look at what we have today, cops hamstrung from actually enforcing laws because their first priority is to raise revenue and secondly courts that have absolutely no idea of punshment fitting the crime, and wrongdoers who can use any excuse under the sun and get away with it, I came from a broken home, my family were migrants, my religion let's me do it so on so forth etc.

The day when a big burly copper booted you up the arse or took you around the back of a ppub for a clip under the ear to set you straight unfortunately are long gone. This law in SA will not do anything, but it makes out that they are doing something and in this day and perception my friends is reality, and whilst it may go against the grain to support idiots who traffuc in drugs and commit violence we may have to, the "publis" thinks anyone on a bike is a bikies, again perception is reality, and like the celebration of motorcycling ride and a few other demonstrations, we need to have a vpoice and have that voice heard, or the pastime we lovingly protect will eventually be legislated away from us.

It is not hypcrtical to have a certain opinion and act sometimes in the opposite, I marched in moratoriums, not against the war in vietnam but against conscription, a law that literally randomly dragged young men off the street to fight a politicians war, I did not and never have demonstrated against the soldiers, conscript or volunteer because they were doing their job, I volunteered for the army and was asked how could I march in a demonstration "against the war", their perception, and willingly join the same organisation whose job it was to fight wars, my answer friends was one word CHOICE, while we live in a democracy and can have CHOICE it up to us to CHOOSE what we want and how we want it. I will defend anyone's right in this country to CHOOSE just do not take away my right to do that also.

End of rant.

[Naked Twin]

Back On Topic

What officially denotes an illegal bikie gang?

A sensible question you do ask, police have to ask the attorney general for a gang to be declared illegal. That I think is what most people are concerned about as there is not a clear definition. Obviously despite what some people say the police are not going to claim every motorcycle group as being outlaws/ illegal. They already know who they are after the problem is the system allows the culprits to conduct illegal business without necessarily being caught as you have to prove without doubt. I accept that it taking away rights, but what rights if you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.

Democracy is meant to work for the majority not the minority, it would appear a minority of people will be affected by this law, but the benefit will be be for the majority or non illicit drug users and honest working people.

How can it be that half the public know the likes of the finks, hells angels, etc are running drugs, standing over people, killing others who get in their way?

We say we have laws that are sufficient, if that was the case would there not be such proliferation of OMC around the country that so brazenly advertise who they are. You don't see the Russian mafia or the triads going around with a big banner on their back. These gangs believe they are above the law as they have continued to be able to flout it, now it catching up to them and they are running a scare campaign.

I will admit I have had a family member (brother) on the wrong side of an OMC, in short he went to the defense of a friend who was being beaten up. A couple of people were taken to hospital including the OMC members. My brother was told no police and the medical bills will be covered, too late someone had already called the cops. So guess what my brother gets informed that they have a couple of addresses, where has been living and where I live. I want to know how the fuck they were able to find out residential addresses within two days! I didn't even know about the incident until a week later when my brother told me. So what do I do? go to the police, nothing they can do as nothing illegal has happened. But we have enough laws to deal with these thugs.

I know of man in 60s who decided to go when the light went green, unfortunately a few OMC's were still leaving the Ettamogah pub in Rouse Hill and weren't observing the red light. In short they took offense to this erratic driving of the 60+ year old so dragged him out of his car beat the shit out him. Police could do nothing as he refused to press charges as he was advised it would be in his best interests not to.

Nick

[Daisy]

I accept that it taking away rights, but what rights if you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.

This sentiment makes me sick! Sure we are doing nothing wrong ... now. but what about in the future? Martin Niemoller had some words to say about this.
When we allow politicians to change definitions at will, nothing and nobody is safe. Hoon laws anyone? Oh, but if you're not a hoon you have nothing to fear. Now speeding is redefined as hooning. Afraid yet?

Democracy is meant to work for the majority not the minority, it would appear a minority of people will be affected by this law, but the benefit will be be for the majority or non illicit drug users and honest working people.

There is no democracy in this country. We have a system where we are led to believe that the leaders we 'elect' are working for us. In fact, they work for themselves and their number one priority is staying in that job. The benefit of this law will be for those in power - to help them stay in power. The police? No matter how much power they have, they will always claim that they need more.

How can it be that half the public know the likes of the finks, hells angels, etc are running drugs, standing over people, killing others who get in their way?

I suspect that like 'half the public' I know OF these things, because the media tells me so. I don't know it personally.

We say we have laws that are sufficient, if that was the case would there not be such proliferation of OMC around the country that so brazenly advertise who they are.

We do have laws that are sufficient - for the majority. A proliferation of 1%? OMC = OUTLAW Motorcycle Club. You can pass all the laws you want and take away the rights of people who are currently law abiding citizens - but the 1%ers will still be OUTSIDE the law.

I will admit I have had a family member (brother) on the wrong side of an OMC, in short he went to the defense of a friend who was being beaten up. A couple of people were taken to hospital including the OMC members. My brother was told no police and the medical bills will be covered, too late someone had already called the cops. So guess what my brother gets informed that they have a couple of addresses, where has been living and where I live. I want to know how the fuck they were able to find out residential addresses within two days! I didn't even know about the incident until a week later when my brother told me. So what do I do? go to the police, nothing they can do as nothing illegal has happened. But we have enough laws to deal with these thugs.

This explains why you personally believe that these laws are a good idea. You do realise that all kinds of people and groups can do this sort of shit? Somebody who knows somebody ...who knows something. Already illegal. Do we need draconian new laws for them too?

I know of man in 60s who decided to go when the light went green, unfortunately a few OMC's were still leaving the Ettamogah pub in Rouse Hill and weren't observing the red light. In short they took offense to this erratic driving of the 60+ year old so dragged him out of his car beat the shit out him. Police could do nothing as he refused to press charges as he was advised it would be in his best interests not to.

People decide not to press charges in a whole range of circumstances. Do we need draconian laws for them too? Remember that they are a minority - and laws are supposed to be for the majority.
Once the laws are in place, where the accused has no right to see the evidence against them, do you seriously think that the police and our so called leaders will stop at just terrorists and outlaw bikies? Oh, that's right, they're already likening bikies to terrorists. That's how the redefinition starts.
What will you be redefined as? Collaborator?

[the kid]

Bravo Daisy Not agreeing or disagreeing , just that you always put in your 2 bobs worth with thought and passion . Assures me that the world is not full of lemmings .
Yet

[Naked Twin]

No Daisy I am not worried about these laws as though won't take away any of my rights, hoon laws also don't affect me as the only ones I know who have been busted under similar laws were an accident looking for a place to happen.

We do live in a democracy, it allows people like you and me to have an opinion.

The fact is these laws are not aimed up any old gathering of motorcyclist, though those against it claim it is. Typical of people who don't want to read up on the actual law police can not use the power when it doesn't exist. By that I mean they have to apply for a motorcycle gang to be deemed illegal, not a simple process.

Its funny on the one hand you here people saying the governments are not doing enough, the police aren't doing enough to stop these 1% but when a new idea to target comes out when hell my civil liberties are being taken from me, well tell that to the people who have had to deal with these thugs then you will know when your civil liberties have been taken from you.
Before shit canning this idea lets see how it works in SA first

Nick

[robracer]

Before shit canning this idea lets see how it works in SA firstNick

Yep.... with the Finks nominated in Dec 08 to be the first club to be pursued it seems to have come to a head in the court system

[dave#3]

It's already started:

Following Sunday's airport killing, NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione told bikies that if they "want to act like terrorists, we'll deal with them like they're terrorists".

[Cath]

Ok, so I’ve now read the act in question. This is my take on the act, though of course it’s only my non-legal, uninformed opinion, so read it yourself if you’re interested.

My summary:
The Act in question appears to be the “Serious and Organised Crime Act (2008)” (you can search for it [url="http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/index.aspx"]here[/url] if interested). The Act only applies to “declared organisations”. To become a “declared organisation” the police need to submit a request to the Attorney-General, including the Commissioners support. The Attorney-General must then publish a notice in the Gazette and in a newspaper circulating throughout the state. That cracks me up – who reads messages from the Attorney-General!?!?!?!

The named organisation then has 28 days to submit an appeal.

The Attorney-General then considers all the police evidence, as well as any appeals submitted by the public. If he considers that the members “associate for the purpose of organising, planning, facilitating, supporting or engaging in serious criminal activity”, they can become a declared organisation. The organisation can become declared even if not all members associate for the above purpose, (i.e. it applies if sufficient numbers do so, or those who do so are of sufficient influence within the organisation) and even if members also meet for other non-criminal purposes as well.

Once the declaration is made, the Attorney-General must again make a public notice in the newspapers.

The police then may serve a person with the control order. The control order basically says they can’t be near certain people, certain places and possess certain things. So you can’t associate with anyone else in the declared organisation (through any means – including electronic, phone, in person, etc) and you can’t have prohibited weapons or dangerous articles (guns, knives, bludgeons, other lethal weapons, lock-picking items, etc)

The control order may be served on the person, or if they think the person is inside the premises which they are unable to gain entry to, they can leave the order with someone over the age of 16, or attach it to/near the front door. Or, if the police officer deems it as urgent, the person may be verbally told the order and told where to go to pick up the actual order paperwork the following day. The person has 14 days within which to object to the control order.

It appears that though the person may object to the order, they do not get access to any of the police information against them. Unless I’m reading it incorrectly, it appears that they must defend themselves without knowing the evidence against them.

If the control order stays in place and the person fails to comply, the penalty is imprisonment for up to 5 years

The control order also seems to act as some sort of quasi-warrant, as it enables police to search the premises specified by the order, or any vehicles that is approaching, is in, or has recently left the premises.

A person who associates with a member of a declared organisation, or with a person who is subject to a control order 6 or more times within a 12 month period can be imprisoned for up to 5 years. To be imprisoned, you need to have known the person was a member of a declared organisation, or subject to a control order (or deemed that you should’ve known). Also if you have a criminal conviction under the regulations (under the explosives act, lottery and gaming act, firearms act, controlled substances act, etc), you may not associate 6 or more times within 12 months with another person who has a criminal conviction under those acts.

There’s a bunch of exceptions for people who are associating due to performing tasks under various acts (education acts, welfare acts, correctional acts, health care acts, etc) or during legal proceedings. It looks like they’ve also beefed up the protections against reprisals on police officers, which I fully support – the cops have a tough enough job already.

So – overall, I think the law will be popular if introduced into NSW. Basically it restricts (or more likely provides an easier way to chuck in jail for 5 years) anyone who is already a criminal and associates with other criminals. I personally don’t think that’s such a terrible thing, as if someone was a criminal and is now trying to go straight, they’ll probably not be hanging around much with other criminals. So they’re only further isolating the criminal from the non-criminal.

There are two parts which concern me. Firstly, it's kinda hard to object to or defend yourself from a control order when you don't know the reasons why it was approved. I guess you're left with general protests if you're innocent and general protests if you're guilty. The other part that concerns me is the lack of controls on becoming a ‘declared organisation’. Any group could theoretically become a ‘declared organisation’. There is nothing in the writing of the law that mentions anything about motorcycles, therefore I don’t believe ksrc is at any more theoretical risk than, say, a knitting club. However, the bit that concerns me (that didn’t even enter my mind until I’d read the act) is how easily certain other groups could be targeted. I’m thinking of quasi-political groups, say for example, pro-euthanasia groups. After all, they've already added euthanasia groups to the banned internet list... I see it as open to abuse - not police abuse as I originally was concerned about, but political abuse.


And as far as the "terrorist" comment goes - the police, politicians and media all need to get a thesaurus. That word is getting overused to the point of becoming a bingo. It has a meaning - don't dilute it by redifining it to include anything you don't like!

[Cath]

Just wanted to emphasise that there is nothing about "banning motorcycle clubs" in the act. The media are collectively, a bunch of morons - I wonder if any f them actually read the Act, or just heard a pollie say "we want to end bikie violence, so are bringing in the bikie laws the SA have" and just made everything up from there.

[Daisy]

No Daisy I am not worried about these laws as though won't take away any of my rights, hoon laws also don't affect me as the only ones I know who have been busted under similar laws were an accident looking for a place to happen.

At the start they might not take away your rights, but since when did governments and police baulk at using laws for purposes other than the one they were intended for?

We do live in a democracy, it allows people like you and me to have an opinion.

I think I'd like a little more than that.

The fact is these laws are not aimed up any old gathering of motorcyclist, though those against it claim it is. Typical of people who don't want to read up on the actual law police can not use the power when it doesn't exist. By that I mean they have to apply for a motorcycle gang to be deemed illegal, not a simple process.

Thin end of the wedge. Rights are not taken away in large blocks, they are whittled away gradually, and by the time they do start to affect you it will be too late for you to do a damn thing about it.

Its funny on the one hand you here people saying the governments are not doing enough, the police aren't doing enough to stop these 1% but when a new idea to target comes out when hell my civil liberties are being taken from me, well tell that to the people who have had to deal with these thugs then you will know when your civil liberties have been taken from you.
Before shit canning this idea lets see how it works in SA first

No my 3 watt friend, this is far from funny. The police already have enough laws at their disposal. The fact that citizens elect not to 'help the police with their inquiries' is not enough of a reason to give them the power to keep evidence secret. This goes completely against the right to the presumption of innocence - although that, like democracy, is a bit of a myth. Had a speeding ticket lately?
You make your disdain for 'these thugs' quite plain in your posts and that is fair enough. You are entitled to your opinion, no matter how ill informed.
I and some friends have been inside the clubhouse of one of these groups on more than one occasion. We also ride motorcycles. If these laws were enacted nationally, how long do you think it would be before the police started rounding up 'associates' of bikies under any old pretext in the knowledge that they don't have to tell you what - if any - evidence they have of you committing an offence, other than knowing bikies. Of course this will sound far fetched to you, because you want to believe that the laws will only be used against thugs. I know police officers who are just as much a thug as any Hells Angel and I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.
This law is a shit idea and it needs to be shitcanned before it spreads.

So how do you feel about the government's secret blacklist of internet sites? What about police armed with machine guns at airports? More classic kneejerk overreactions to issues that are actually smaller than the community perception of them.
If you are so keen to give up your civil liberties please move to China, where the government will gladly tell you what your opinions are.

There are two parts which concern me. Firstly, it's kinda hard to object to or defend yourself from a control order when you don't know the reasons why it was approved. I guess you're left with general protests if you're innocent and general protests if you're guilty. The other part that concerns me is the lack of controls on becoming a ‘declared organisation’. Any group could theoretically become a ‘declared organisation’. There is nothing in the writing of the law that mentions anything about motorcycles, therefore I don’t believe ksrc is at any more theoretical risk than, say, a knitting club. However, the bit that concerns me (that didn’t even enter my mind until I’d read the act) is how easily certain other groups could be targeted. I’m thinking of quasi-political groups, say for example, pro-euthanasia groups. After all, they've already added euthanasia groups to the banned internet list... I see it as open to abuse - not police abuse as I originally was concerned about, but political abuse.

Egg Zachary! And nobody will know it is being abused because it is all secret.

[Naked Twin]

Daisy no need to lower yourself to name calling, but I guess that reflects the person.

Wow you have been inside a clubhouse and everyone was nice well that must mean the whole world is a peaceful place. If you are stupid enough to believe that they will use this law against all then it is you who is ill informed and I would also say paranoid.

Taking quotes about police being issued machine guns at airports was one person's opinion that is not even part of government or police but an ex employee of the airports corporation, but in typical style of people with hysteria issues that take words out of context and put a spin on it for their own self fulfilled purpose

Yes every barrel has bad apples, it just happens that these OMC barrels are majority bad apples.

Do yourself a favour and read up on the act, then you can say you are informed, secondly read up on the fathers day massacre that happened in Milperra in Sydney nearly 20 years ago, then go and explain to the father of the 15 year old girl (I believe she was that old) that was innocently gunned down, your spin on this I am sure her family would like to know your thoughts about being inside a clubhouse.

Nick