Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pyro

Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party needs your support!

Recommended Posts

To be honest, I think they're still hoping that we'll just go away. I thought that things might change as soon as we had a guy in some spot of importance anywhere, but the bullshit started before Ricky even got his seat. We'll see if anything comes of the majors yet though. Swearing in for the senate isn't until somewhere around the middle of next year.

 

Locally though, I'm not sure what will happen. We have a lot of campaigning to do over the next 6 months and I think we'll launch in a much better position than we did for the senate. There are a couple of background players with a fair bit of swing, so it'll be VERY interesting to see what they do over the coming months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All for the guy. But really needs to push for the modified car/4wd community as a whole. Not just 4wds.

Don't worry, they are :) It's all forms of motoring, so bikes are iincluded as well. One of the angles we're pushing is the right to associate, so bike riders are very interested, considering the bikie laws which governments have tried to pass in the past.

 

I can't say i'm overly enthused by the idea that the AMEP could be associating with bikies.

I'm sure anybody who has been near run off the road by a pack of 20 Rebels would agree with me that those laws were a long time in the making.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is the overflow. They start with bikies which moves to the non-illegal bikies, which moves to the car guys, etc. There's plenty of laws already that bikies can be tried under. The premise is that no government should be able to tell you who you can and can't play with. I mean... Associate with.

 

Also, AMEP isn't really 'associated' with anyone, they just represent people with common interests. They didn't set out to 'represent the bikies', they just have a couple of ideals that align :) That's not really a whole lot different to saying that murderers favour the LDP because of their gun control ideals. The LDP don't want to de-regulate guns because that's what murderers want, they have have an ideal (guns should be de-regulated) that happens to align.

Edited by pyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Chappy here; avoiding the bikies' interests might be a good idea. At the very least, it's bad publicity for AMEP. Just about the only thing we have in common with their interests is the fact that the bikes have motors and use the roads. The anti-association laws that relate to the bikies' situation doesn't really apply to car clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But AMEP doesn't just represent cars, it represents all motoring enthusiasts and bikes are one of that group. The fundamental underpinning of the association laws was that it was based on bikies. It wasn't based on criminals as a whole, just bikies and when there is a typical association like that (cruiser bikes), then there is always going to be bleed into surrounding categories. I know for example, that my uncle rides a Harley and is straight as an arrow, yet he's told me many times about the general second class citizen treatment that he's received.

 

The main point is that the public cannot (currently) discern the difference between the good and the bad in a group. As with cars, they see one guy rip a skid and we're all instantly nutcases who want to cut hoops on your front yard and kill your cat. Bikes are no different. They see one bikie cutting 100km/hr traffic at 200km/hr and all of a sudden all Harley owners are drug taking, gun toting outlaws, who want to steal your microwave and rape your daughter (Chappy: I'm highlighting general public here, not you). The freedom of association should not touch the innocents (which it will) to screw the minority. Those kinds of laws are what got us here in the first place.

 

Don't worry, I don't want to be associated with bikies and I'm sure AMEP don't want to be associated with bikies either, but you cannot argue for liberalism in law for your group on one hand and then take it away from another group with the other. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. There are plenty of other laws that existing criminal bikies can be charged with already. They don't need another that will bleed into the general populace as well.

Edited by pyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine if Loz put his mind, resources and time to it and got HT.net behind the political party (even served up qualified candidates to give a better more professional image), using all the influence HT.net could pull from it's userbase, advertising potential etc to draw attention to the matter... and people wonder why the car scene is all but dead and this website has gone down the crapper, lul.

 

I admire your determination Josh.

Edited by GHOSTY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But AMEP doesn't just represent cars, it represents all motoring enthusiasts and bikes are one of that group. The fundamental underpinning of the association laws was that it was based on bikies. It wasn't based on criminals as a whole, just bikies and when there is a typical association like that (cruiser bikes), then there is always going to be bleed into surrounding categories. I know for example, that my uncle rides a Harley and is straight as an arrow, yet he's told me many times about the general second class citizen treatment that he's received.

 

The main point is that the public cannot (currently) discern the difference between the good and the bad in a group. As with cars, they see one guy rip a skid and we're all instantly nutcases who want to cut hoops on your front yard and kill your cat. Bikes are no different. They see one bikie cutting 100km/hr traffic at 200km/hr and all of a sudden all Harley owners are drug taking, gun toting outlaws, who want to steal your microwave and rape your daughter (Chappy: I'm highlighting general public here, not you). The freedom of association should not touch the innocents (which it will) to screw the minority. Those kinds of laws are what got us here in the first place.

 

Don't worry, I don't want to be associated with bikies and I'm sure AMEP don't want to be associated with bikies either, but you cannot argue for liberalism in law for your group on one hand and then take it away from another group with the other. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. There are plenty of other laws that existing criminal bikies can be charged with already. They don't need another that will bleed into the general populace as well.

 

I'm sure the anti-bikie laws suffer the same abuses that 'hoon' laws do. My point is we should focus on police accountability and law clarification rather than blocking the law all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine if Loz put his mind, resources and time to it and got HT.net behind the political party (even served up qualified candidates to give a better more professional image), using all the influence HT.net could pull from it's userbase, advertising potential etc to draw attention to the matter... and people wonder why the car scene is all but dead and this website has gone down the crapper, lul.

 

I admire your determination Josh.

Cheers mate :) I'm just one of a many though. We all wanted to start something ourselves, but lacked time/resources/knowledge but now that something has been started everyone else has really got into it with all they have. There's so much enthusiasm going around :D

 

But AMEP doesn't just represent cars, it represents all motoring enthusiasts and bikes are one of that group. The fundamental underpinning of the association laws was that it was based on bikies. It wasn't based on criminals as a whole, just bikies and when there is a typical association like that (cruiser bikes), then there is always going to be bleed into surrounding categories. I know for example, that my uncle rides a Harley and is straight as an arrow, yet he's told me many times about the general second class citizen treatment that he's received.

 

The main point is that the public cannot (currently) discern the difference between the good and the bad in a group. As with cars, they see one guy rip a skid and we're all instantly nutcases who want to cut hoops on your front yard and kill your cat. Bikes are no different. They see one bikie cutting 100km/hr traffic at 200km/hr and all of a sudden all Harley owners are drug taking, gun toting outlaws, who want to steal your microwave and rape your daughter (Chappy: I'm highlighting general public here, not you). The freedom of association should not touch the innocents (which it will) to screw the minority. Those kinds of laws are what got us here in the first place.

 

Don't worry, I don't want to be associated with bikies and I'm sure AMEP don't want to be associated with bikies either, but you cannot argue for liberalism in law for your group on one hand and then take it away from another group with the other. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. There are plenty of other laws that existing criminal bikies can be charged with already. They don't need another that will bleed into the general populace as well.

I'm sure the anti-bikie laws suffer the same abuses that 'hoon' laws do. My point is we should focus on police accountability and law clarification rather than blocking the law all together.

Stay tuned for that one. SA being the first to have a state election, there's going to be quite a few things that we'll need to tick off and we're bound to make some mistakes, but other states will be able to learn from our approaches. Quite a lot of the problem is distinguishing between what is a state issue and what is a federal issue and even then, there is often overlap between the two with what is law as well. I'm not claiming to have the panacea (and I don't think anyone else will either), but the point is that we have to start somewhere. I understand your point about accountability and clarification, but at the same time we don't seem to have the facilities (or the power) to regulate accountability and clarification, whereas we (will) have some power in the upper house to block laws like that. I know it's treating the symptoms and not the problem, but it kind of has to be 'best effort' when those are our options :S

 

The more I get into this stuff, the more I understand how complicated it is, but we have some very knowledgeable and dedicated people on our side who are genuinely trying to make a goer of this :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chappy, the association laws are bullshit and have affected many innocent lives for no reason.

 

A friend of mine who's a fitter and turner/boiler maker worked for a company who accepted a contract at a house (not uncommon as they do some houses when things slow down). After the job, my friend got pulled over by the cops, had the work ute pulled to bits, taken to a station and was questioned for 3hrs.

 

He asked what it was all about and they later told him that the house he worked at was a known bikie and they pulled him up because he did work there. They only let him go after they called his boss who confirmed it was all on the books and they didn't know who the guy was, just a job.

 

He even got followed for about 3 days after that to boot.

 

The anti biki move (in particular in SA as our last premier had a vendetta against them) also affected bike clubs (like car clubs) under the anti-biki law as the law held no distinction between bikies and outlaw clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have AMEP touched base with the Motorsport consortium that were trying to buy AIR/land at garden island? Seems there are some fairly wealthy and powerful individuals amongst them and would be something positive for the party to be behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chappy, the association laws are bullshit and have affected many innocent lives for no reason.

 

A friend of mine who's a fitter and turner/boiler maker worked for a company who accepted a contract at a house (not uncommon as they do some houses when things slow down). After the job, my friend got pulled over by the cops, had the work ute pulled to bits, taken to a station and was questioned for 3hrs.

 

He asked what it was all about and they later told him that the house he worked at was a known bikie and they pulled him up because he did work there. They only let him go after they called his boss who confirmed it was all on the books and they didn't know who the guy was, just a job.

 

He even got followed for about 3 days after that to boot.

 

The anti biki move (in particular in SA as our last premier had a vendetta against them) also affected bike clubs (like car clubs) under the anti-biki law as the law held no distinction between bikies and outlaw clubs.

 

Sounds like a good old case of laws intended for one use being abused for something else.

I wholeheartedly believe bikies need to be reigned in, but i haven't the foggiest idea how best to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But AMEP doesn't just represent cars, it represents all motoring enthusiasts and bikes are one of that group. The fundamental underpinning of the association laws was that it was based on bikies. It wasn't based on criminals as a whole, just bikies and when there is a typical association like that (cruiser bikes), then there is always going to be bleed into surrounding categories. I know for example, that my uncle rides a Harley and is straight as an arrow, yet he's told me many times about the general second class citizen treatment that he's received.

 

The main point is that the public cannot (currently) discern the difference between the good and the bad in a group. As with cars, they see one guy rip a skid and we're all instantly nutcases who want to cut hoops on your front yard and kill your cat. Bikes are no different. They see one bikie cutting 100km/hr traffic at 200km/hr and all of a sudden all Harley owners are drug taking, gun toting outlaws, who want to steal your microwave and rape your daughter (Chappy: I'm highlighting general public here, not you). The freedom of association should not touch the innocents (which it will) to screw the minority. Those kinds of laws are what got us here in the first place.

 

Don't worry, I don't want to be associated with bikies and I'm sure AMEP don't want to be associated with bikies either, but you cannot argue for liberalism in law for your group on one hand and then take it away from another group with the other. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. There are plenty of other laws that existing criminal bikies can be charged with already. They don't need another that will bleed into the general populace as well.

100% on point.

But even general enthusiasts who ride Harley's that have nothing to do with 'bikies' get the same harassment as if they were one.

It is NO different to cars. Drive an import, expect to have a 14" black maglite inserted every few months or less.

Government and police are actually forming laws that affect the general motoring enthusiast, and that's what this party is all about.

My uncle is a Hells Angel. So to ANY law toting authoritative figure, I am guilty by association because I not only know a bikie, but my family is associated with bikies .. therefore my family is involved in criminal activity, therefore I should not be associating with my family? You get the point I'm making. :unsure:

It's just well and truely beyond common sense. And because the majority of people only see "GOOD, THEY ARE FINALLY DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THIS ISSUE," every few months, that's all the government/police care about when it comes to making statements.

Whatever the latest issue is "we're fixing things guys!" *makes new law*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chappy, the association laws are bullshit and have affected many innocent lives for no reason.

 

A friend of mine who's a fitter and turner/boiler maker worked for a company who accepted a contract at a house (not uncommon as they do some houses when things slow down). After the job, my friend got pulled over by the cops, had the work ute pulled to bits, taken to a station and was questioned for 3hrs.

 

He asked what it was all about and they later told him that the house he worked at was a known bikie and they pulled him up because he did work there. They only let him go after they called his boss who confirmed it was all on the books and they didn't know who the guy was, just a job.

 

He even got followed for about 3 days after that to boot.

 

The anti biki move (in particular in SA as our last premier had a vendetta against them) also affected bike clubs (like car clubs) under the anti-biki law as the law held no distinction between bikies and outlaw clubs.

Just read this. Yep. Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On to something more, current, so now the AMEP is pretty much "Palmer United", does that 100% reflect on the policies the AMEP is trying to uphold, or have they changed?

 

Also ,how does everyone who voted AMEP feel that now they pretty much have all their preferences shuffled toward Palmer?

 

not that I'm criticising the Palmer United Party in any way...

Edited by HumanHefner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of the move but I wouldn't resist it either; I can see why it was done. I guess we have to remember that the party was elected by an enormous myriad of voting preferences, many of which were also 'single agenda' parties. Palmer United would have been one of the last parties I voted for.

 

Also, whats going on with all this "defector" AMEP representatives in Victoria calling for unauthorised meetings and such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On to something more, current, so now the AMEP is pretty much "Palmer United", does that 100% reflect on the policies the AMEP is trying to uphold, or have they changed? Also ,how does everyone who voted AMEP feel that now they pretty much have all their preferences shuffled toward Palmer? not that I'm criticising the Palmer United Party in any way...

 

My understanding is they have only agreed to align voting with Palmer United when it meets with AMEP interests and represents their values. Reading between the lines, this is basic political back scratching. Palmer United will (hopefully) return the favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it that Muir met with Palmer without the AMEP leadership knowing about it? So Palmer has bought/stolen (possibly both) another senator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it that Muir met with Palmer without the AMEP leadership knowing about it? So Palmer has bought/stolen (possibly both) another senator.

 

Simply no......

" We have not merged with the Palmer United Party (PUP) and there is no formal alliance between the AMEP and PUP. It is simply an understanding that the four Senators agree to work together, and where practical vote together in the Senate. They do not have to vote together where it goes against the core values of the party. It is as simple as that. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What bothers me much more than the (now debunked) possibility of an alliance with the PUP is the childish over reaction of the Victorian leadership of the AMEP. Almost immediately they were talking with the media about kicking Ricky out of the party.

Really guys? That's all it takes to shatter unity within the party???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Ricky should donate most of his $200k salary to the party for the party to use to hire professionals to get the party moving in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Ricky should donate most of his $200k salary to the party for the party to use to hire professionals to get the party moving in the right direction.

 

If you were unemployed then suddenly on a $200k salary would you donate a dime... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Ricky should donate most of his $200k salary to the party for the party to use to hire professionals to get the party moving in the right direction.

He might donate some cash, but either way, he doesn't come into office until July next year and doesn't get paid until then either.

 

What bothers me much more than the (now debunked) possibility of an alliance with the PUP is the childish over reaction of the Victorian leadership of the AMEP. Almost immediately they were talking with the media about kicking Ricky out of the party.

Really guys? That's all it takes to shatter unity within the party???

From what I can see (which isn't must atm), they're *milkshakes* without a cause. They keep banging on about how they have 'unanimous support' from the last meeting of less than 25 members (of the 200 or so that are in Victoria), so then everyone else says, "Well unanimous support to do what?" and they don't have a reply. Nobody knows (and I don't think they do either) if they're trying to destroy the world or not.

 

Wasn't it that Muir met with Palmer without the AMEP leadership knowing about it? So Palmer has bought/stolen (possibly both) another senator.

As far as I know, the Central Executive knew, but the Victorian Federal State Council did not. The Victorian FSC sits under the CE in the org structure, but I'm pretty sure this was also after or during the Victorian FSC getting the boot.

Edited by pyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Ricky should donate most of his $200k salary to the party for the party to use to hire professionals to get the party moving in the right direction.

 

If you were unemployed then suddenly on a $200k salary would you donate a dime... laugh.png

hehe, I saw an interview where he said he wasn't doing it for the money, should let him put that money where his mouth is and prove it for the good of the party ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't expect to get a seat and was still willing to run and represent the party. I'd say that's proof enough he wasn't in it for the cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't expect to get a seat and was still willing to run and represent the party. I'd say that's proof enough he wasn't in it for the cash.

 

Yep exactly, it take a LOT of work to just campaign and get ready for an election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×