Rule 304 requires you to "obey... a police officer... whether or not [you] contravene another provision of the rules"
Role 300(1d) also allows you to use your phone if necessary to obey other laws, but doesn't give examples. But I imagine if there was an emergency situation there might be a law...
You're right, if the vehicle is in a place where parking is allowed.
But if you are stopped by the police on the carriageway or emergency lane of a highway or motorway where parking is not permitted, you are not 'legally' parked... so 300(3A) doesn't apply.
Yes it is different.
In the situations you referred to you not only are you looking at potential dangers on the road, but you are also stopped (or should be) while doing so.
In the circumstances I was referring to, the vehicles were not stopped. As should have been apparent from the incident...
If you adjust your seat so your head is near the roof lining, then it might be.
But for 99.9% of people it wouldn't.
Also it doesn't move about, so your eyes are not distracted by it.
Anything moving within the driver's line of sight of the road is not allowed, but an air freshener out of...
I just wish that they would treat turning your head away from the road to chatter with people in the car with you the same way.
I got T-boned by a driver who was doing that. The idiot only looked after his girlfriend screamed and pointed ahead.
I have also been in cars with passengers, who...
The only time Australia pays any money towards the royal family is when they visit Australia.
Though we do pay for Australian politicians travelling to royal events in the UK, such as the funeral of QEII and the coronation of KCIII, but it is highly unlikely that us becoming a Republic will...
I think that the shopping malls or supermarkets should pay for seniors who take the bus to their premises.
I've seen Asian and European retail outlets running buses for seniors.
I recall the same idea, of banning everyone under 18 from smoking for life, being raised in the 1980s.
But it was 'claimed' at the time that it was unconstitutional to strip any group of people of the right to purchase and use a legal product.
Despite the fact that the 'group' affected didn't...
What a pointless article.
A comparison of only 4 countries out of hundreds of countries in the world is a waste of time.
Plus having the third highest cost is the same thing as being the second cheapest, without need to consider the average wage.