NSW/SYD: banning colours

On Jan 17, 5:59 pm, G-S <ge....RemoveThis@castbus.com.au> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> You and I would realise that there are no rockers, but would the average
> publican?
>
> I suspect not...
>
> Also what about prospects?  They don't have the logo so they'd be let in
> by the same uninformed publican...

I think you'll find many/most of the clubs use a small logo on the
front panel of the vest to identify the club as well the large logo on
the back, Noms get that small logo to identify what club they are
nominated for before they get their colours.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 10:48 am, Damien <al.qa....RemoveThis@asio.gov.au> wrote:
> I just think of some of the look I've had myself, just walking through a
> shopping centre with nothing more intimidating than a dri-rider jacket!

Errm Damien, what makes you think that the Dri Rider had anything to
do with it ?

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 3:54 am, Iain Chalmers <bigi... RemoveThis @mightymedia.com.au> wrote:
> The thing that's intriguing  me about it is that it's getting written
> into their licence conditions.
>
> I wonder who's behind _that_ and why?
>
> Is it the cops leaning on the publicans via the liquor licencing court
> (and if so is "giving the bikies a hard time when we've got nothing to
> charge them with but know where they're drinking" within the remit of
> either the cops doing the leaning or the liquor licencing court? It does
> seem likely to be an abuse of power to me...
>
> Is it the publicans looking to give themselves an excuse to not let the
> bike clubs in? If so, I'm with whoever suggested they read the fine
> print in their fire insurance policies, 'cause I'm sure the bike gangs
> wouldn't see right through _that_... "I'm _terribly_ sorry Mr
> Seargent-at-arms, but you lads can't come in here any more 'cause
> they've changed my licence conditions and I'll be out of business if I
> let you in! It's _tragic_, _really!_ We _so_ much enjoy your
> comapany..." Yep, they'll fall for that for _sure!_

Yeah I'd be very curious to know that one too. If it's the former then
it's a bigger issue, because then pubs who ARE willing to have OMCGs
as customer may be prevented from doing so if the cops attempt to push
this out across the entire state's licencing laws. I have a real issue
with that. If it's the latter then I can't see any real issue (aside
from the likelihood of my insurance premiums going up to pay for the 4
new pubs that will need to be built in Parramatta.

It must be almost time for an Ausmoto dinner, and Parramatta is the
geographic centre of Sydney, how about dinner at the Royal Oak guys ?

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 1:00 pm, G-S <ge....DeleteThis@castbus.com.au> wrote:
> JL wrote:
>
> > Because the licencing as written doesn't ban those people, and if a
> > brain dead bouncer fails to apply his rules correctly, you have a
> > comeback, two in fact, the licencing courts, and the fair trading
> > commission. 2 of 3 of those organisations are more than capable of
> > dragging a recalcitrant publican into court if they wished to.
>
> So legislation that brings unintended consequences down upon the heads
> of innocent people, that requires people to spend small fortunes in
> court to get justice that previously was theirs by right is ok with you?
>
> Sounds more like something John Howard would have pushed than you...

Yeah, you have a point, it's certainly unusual for me to be sitting on
the same side of the fence as Boxer...

I guess because I can't see the potential as a real issue. It's
certainly not *impossible* that every pub in NSW will suddenly refuse
to serve anyone in bike gear; but I just can't see it happening
anywhere other than a handful of pubs who have a jumped up idea of
their own status.

I also can't see how it actually changes anything. There are already
pubs today that will prevent people entering based on what they wear.

The only thing that worries me is the possibility that it is being
forced on the pubs - if that's so, I have a real issue with it.

I have no issue with any pub trying to choose who their patrons are.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 12:57 pm, G-S <ge....RemoveThis@castbus.com.au> wrote:
> JL wrote:
>
> > JL
> > (1) except when accountant OMCG wannabes wear something that's
> > indistinguishable and bring down the inevitable consequences - if it
> > walks like a duck and quacks like a duck be prepared to be treated
> > like a duck.
>
> And you think that's ok?
>
> Because I don't...

I think I was a bit obscure with the reference - I was referring to
the Ulysses incidents, not the remote possibility that a Ulysses or
HOG member might be barred from entering a pub.

But as far as it goes, to the extent that a wannabe makes himself
indistinguishable from the real thing TM then he can't complain if he
is treated like a 1%er too loudly. He's obviously getting some
personal benefit from attempting to appear to be a 1%er, you have to
take the good with the bad.

> Are you going to generalize on religion next?
>
> That muslim looks like a terrorist... let's restrict him from going here
> or there because he's a security risk.
>
> Is that ok with you too?

No but if he's a muslim who goes around telling everyone that Al Qaeda
are going to soft on Australia and that it's about time that someone
bombed parliament then he can't complain that he then gets treated as
a (potential) terrorist by the Feds.

Which would be a far closer analogy to the above. Walking like a
duck, quacking like a duck, then you're getting treated like a duck.

You have done the same thing Damien keeps doing - you're generalising
the particular to the wider group without much basis. There's no
reason that any old muslim should be treated as a terrorist any more
than any old biker will be treated as a 1%er. I object strongly to the
move from the particular to the general (as you well know). But unlike
our terrorist laws these don't give general powers to deal with a
particular issue. They give particular powers to deal with a
particular issue, which is how laws should be drafted.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 1:52 pm, "George W. Frost" <fro... DeleteThis @iceworks.org> wrote:
> "JL" <jlitt... DeleteThis @my-deja.com> wrote in message
> It's just as plausible a scenario as the Damien "the world is caving
> in every biker will be banned from every pub in Australia" version.
>
> I don't know which will happen, but I'm betting on the latter.
>
> The HA could also turn up with their red "81" shirt
> which knuckle dragging bouncer would know what that meant?

It's scary that I'm agreeing with you on something, but yes, I suspect
the key knowledge gap isn't going to be who *isn't* someone on the
banned list, I suspect it's going to be who SHOULD be refused and
isn't going to be.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 1:55 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:20:08 +1100
>
> G-S <ge....DeleteThis@castbus.com.au> wrote:
>
> > The fact that it's plausible that the bouncer will refuse admission in
> > the first place is reason enough to oppose this legislation.
>
> Well...  
>
> There was always the chance they would refuse admission.
>
> There are 2 differences here.
>
> 1) they can now call the police if you refuse to go.

Actually they can already do that too, the difference is they
currently need two of them to lie that you were being violent (and no
other witnesses...)

Now you don't have to get stroppy for them to call the cops.

> 2) It is *possible* that other pubs will have the same licence
> conditions.  It is unknown if this will be forced on them or not.

That's the worry for me.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 1:21 pm, G-S <ge... DeleteThis @castbus.com.au> wrote:
> JL wrote:
> > On Jan 18, 9:03 am, G-S <ge... DeleteThis @castbus.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> [1] Anybody else noticing how this world is slipping from offence
> >> committed and action is taken to 'oh we don't have proof, but lets take
> >> action anyway'.
>
> > Just because Australia and the US are, doesn't mean all of the world
> > are. Some countries still care about the rule of law (that's places
> > like the "cheese eating surrender monkeys" who revived modern
> > democracy).
>
> OK... I'll admit Australia and the US (I'd add the UK though).

Yeah, i thought about putting UK on the list, but I'm less clear about
their current legal status (I"m aware of two dodgy areas but haven't
had time to read up on it)

> Having said that... why not try and slow the slide by opposing laws and
> regulations that encourage this slide in 'our world' (where we live).

I am, actively.
I just don't see the point fighting something that is semi-
justifiable(1), when there are any number of current laws that are
absolutely horrificly (sp?) anti-freedom of movement, speech and
association. Rule one of problem resolution knock over the big issues
first and tidy up the loose ends afterwards.

JL
(1) if the best argument that can be raised against it is it MAY have
unforeseen consequences then we should remove pretty near all laws - I
don't have a problem with that but i suspect there are a few who would
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 1:23 pm, G-S <ge....RemoveThis@castbus.com.au> wrote:
> > It must be almost time for an Ausmoto dinner, and Parramatta is the
> > geographic centre of Sydney, how about dinner at the Royal Oak guys ?
>
> If I was in Sydney I'd pike now... given I'm not I'll just think
> insulting comments about the choice of venue.

I'd have thought you and Damien would be aching to test your thesis
about how non OMCG'ers are going to get banned.

JL
(it's why I suggested it)
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

On Jan 18, 12:48 pm, G-S <ge... RemoveThis @castbus.com.au> wrote:
> JL wrote:
> > On Jan 17, 5:59 pm, G-S <ge... RemoveThis @castbus.com.au> wrote:
> >> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> >> You and I would realise that there are no rockers, but would the average
> >> publican?
>
> >> I suspect not...
>
> >> Also what about prospects?  They don't have the logo so they'd be let in
> >> by the same uninformed publican...
>
> > I think you'll find many/most of the clubs use a small logo on the
> > front panel of the vest to identify the club as well the large logo on
> > the back, Noms get that small logo to identify what club they are
> > nominated for before they get their colours.
>
> > JL
>
> Oh they often do...
>
> but those small logos are not 'colours', and they are banning 'colours'
> aren't they? [1]

No, they are banning all logos and regalia (which raises George W's
point about the non direct logos of the Hells Angels which it is
unlikely the bouncers will be aware of - see further up thread and the
original url)

> [1] My point was that in addition to effecting people not involved with
> the patch clubs it will also not effect some people involved with them

Agreed, see earlier post, I think this is far more likely.

JL
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> There's a move afoot in Sydney to ban people from entering pubs if they
> are wearing outlaw club colours or otherwise displaying club logos. (And
>
> So tell me aus.moto, what do you want the MCC to do in this? Oppose the
> ban or not? If the MCC should support the UMC in opposition to the ban,
> what form should that support take?

It seems to me, that this is not a case of some discrimination against
motorcyclists, or anything to do with motorcycles, so there's really
little need for the MCC to get involved or represent the issue on behalf
of the patch clubs in this case.

This is about where people can wear their club colours, and if I recall
correctly, the wearing of club colours is/was self-policed by the outlaw
motorcycle clubs (google for the threats/actions the Rebels MCC made
against Ulysses members at the Canberra AGM a few years ago regarding
the wearing of coloured patches and rockers), and not the MCC.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

"Zebee Johnstone" <zebeej DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:slrnfot880.1i8.zebeej@gmail.com...

> Is this something we should be concerned about as citizens, that you
> get banned because of what you wear or who you choose to associate with,
> even though you personally have done nothing wrong?
> but I believe other state groups are doing the same, in SA they are
> talking about making it law.
>
> So tell me aus.moto, what do you want the MCC to do in this? Oppose the
> ban or not?

On principle I have never agreed with the "convenient" dictum of the Ulysses
group to ban the wearing of colours because of threats from the patch
groups; introduced by a serving policeman too.
If clubs and or pubs are able by law to vet their cliental using a dress
code, then that is their business.
Don't see how the ban can be opposed if it is legally supported.
Regularly I hear of Ulyssians refused entry \service because they wear the
logo, so this is not a new issue.
It should be opposed if it is to be made law; other than that, it is best to
remain neutral as it is an issue only between the parties involved, for
reasons known to them.
Rockit
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours 

"Nev.." <idiot.RemoveThis@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:478f348f$0$30855$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> There's a move afoot in Sydney to ban people from entering pubs if they
>> are wearing outlaw club colours or otherwise displaying club logos. (And
>>
>> So tell me aus.moto, what do you want the MCC to do in this? Oppose the
>> ban or not? If the MCC should support the UMC in opposition to the ban,
>> what form should that support take?
>
> It seems to me, that this is not a case of some discrimination against
> motorcyclists, or anything to do with motorcycles, so there's really
> little need for the MCC to get involved or represent the issue on behalf
> of the patch clubs in this case.
>
> This is about where people can wear their club colours, and if I recall
> correctly, the wearing of club colours is/was self-policed by the outlaw
> motorcycle clubs (google for the threats/actions the Rebels MCC made
> against Ulysses members at the Canberra AGM a few years ago regarding the
> wearing of coloured patches and rockers), and not the MCC.
>
> Nev..
> '07 XB12X


Agreed.

Boxer
 >> Stay informed about: NSW/SYD: banning colours