madness, page-35

"...Common sense would hopefully dictate that the law will not touch that club, to do so would be ridiculous...farmboy"

In most situation you would expect that to be true, but the danger is when you get someone enforcing the letter of the law instead of the intent of the law.

Which why it is important how the distinction is made and who makes the distinction in defining which is an OMCG.


Here is one example of how laws could have implications outside their intended purpose.

In Victoria we have anti hoon laws to obviously discourage hoons, recently a couple of hundred drivers were caught speeding at the one location due to poorly signposted roadworks.

Technically those 200 drivers who maintained their 100km speed through the poorly posted roadworks area could have had their cars impounded immediately for 30 days.

Using the letter of the law, the police would have been within their rights to impound 200 cars immediately for 30 days.

Mothers, fathers, grandparents, business operators, truck drivers, medical and carer vehicles, etc. could have been the unintended victims of the anti hoon laws.

Fortunately the letter of the law wasn't followed in this instance, but without any clear distinction on the application of the law, the potential for unintended victims of the law in similar situations is still a high risk.