^^^ unfortunately I haven't been lately P.R but never had agro there previously.
Most of me seeing red and spouting off above was due to the first 8 or so posts here being p!sstakes and oneliners - so I hoped to spark some interest
At least my history lesson may make a few people angry enough to go to the council and complain, instead of dribbling **** about wanking, planking, gays, and what a 35 y/o board may look like. 
The people who have sued the councils because of there own window licking incompetence are to blame.
Man sues council cause there was no signs saying the waves are dangerous.. ....
New fav word!
6. window licker 192 up, 179 down
it can mean many things:
1)someone who rides the big yellow bus to the happy camp.
2)a spaz
Nicola rides the big yellow bus to the happy camp because she is very special. She goes to the happy camp for lessions in window licking.
The window lickers on the short bus have faces pressed against the window with their tongues hanging out.
Not many things can justify the salary and the very existence of a council officer so well, as a well organized ban...
As for City Beach, kiters have been very respectful to the request of the ranger to keep away from that area for a temporary 8 month period last year. It was about "risk assessment". So I don't think kiters caused any problems this time.
To my limited knowledge of law it is un-constitutional for the council to exercise arbitrary power and ban activities without consulting the representatives of all parties. It's a shame that lawyers have no time to kite. Otherwise we may have a legal representative.
As of the fear of litigation: after the insurance crisis around 10 years ago it became much more difficult to sue the council for negligence. I am not sure if their fear is still justified.
It's obvious that we should improve our reputation and be super respectful to other beach goers (and perhaps to each other as well), but we do not need to blame ourselves automatically for everything.
This has now been pulled and usual rules apply for the new year.
Also did you hear about the blind, deaf and mute guy that dove in the shallow waters of a public swimming pool becoming paraplegic?
He just won a 6.5 million dollar law suit against the council TODAY.
That is why they ban things, so Mark maybe gen Y arent so bad after all :) (by the way I am a little older (28) but have seen most of the younger guys at my local show upmost respect to other riders)
^^^ blind, deaf and mute... how did he get to the swimming pool... you must be joking... right?
Thanks Moon Waxing... I hope they appeal to the High Court... the madness has to stop somewhere where people start taking responsibility for their action.... or else!!...
...well.. or else we get to a communistic state where only few things will be free to do, and those things will be compulsory...
... on the other hand, this case just shows a council blinded by fear yet not taking care of the obvious... and now fear can justify other council's unreasonable bans... not great....
Mark there are no blind, deaf and mute kitesurfers that I know of. But this case that happened today simply shows what pressure councils are under and why silly rules are put in place. Sometimes there are individual kitesurfers/surfers/dirt bike riders/jet ski riders etc that cause the band, but a lot of the time it is situations OUT OF OUR CONTROL. Topic locked
How can a council be responsible for a deaf, blind and mute person diving into the shallow end. Where was his minder/carer. Would the council be responsible for injuries or death sustained at traffic light because the council failed to remove the intersection in case a disabled person walked through it?
Sure the council paid lifeguards should have pulled him up but as in any public pool, it is the responsibility of the parent or adult for that child's safety not the lifeguards. They're not a daycare.
These are bad news. I am new to Perth and I kite north of city beach (after asking the life guard to make sure I could as there were no other kiters). So it means that we can no longer launch and kite here starting on the 1st of November, correct?
The owners of the beach are now the people who leave close to the beach (as far as I understood, the council is a local authority) - and it seems that these people are not the most liberal ones. Same thing applies in France with all small towns near the sea installing vertical bars to forbid the entrance of camper vans, although it is illegal according to French national law. Local justice is bad - it decreases freedom and tend to exclude people more than promoting fairness.
Note that Beauduc, one of the last "free place" on the seaside in North of France has been saved from a ban thanks to a group of people, including fellow lawers, which was really active against the local authority.
I think the argument people-being-bad-and-hence-the-ban is misleading, something deeper is going on (see massassuchets seaside for instance).
SL
Everyone has equal right to a public place (beach). Locals or the council do not own it. I found WAKSA to be way too soft in respecting and following the request of one single ranger to keep away from City Beach last year without any official ban by the council.
But now, seeing that we simply walk away from City Beach without any attempt of contest is kind of saddening. City Beach is not my personal playground any more, but I know that a lot of kiters use it as a starting point for their down-winders, and there are some rideable breaks there. Are you guys really that easy about just walk away without a fight? Where is the good old fighting spirit from WAKSA, that we saw at Mullaloo.....?
Whoah! Crazy times! I'm overseas at the mo and was just checking out Seabreeze to see how the start of the season is going and was pretty spun out by this thread, WA is a crazy place and the number and scope of laws that we have is way out of hand.
Can the council make blanket rulings like that? there should definitely be some consultation. Maybe WAKSA could get in touch with members that live in City Beach and provide a draft letter for them to sign and send to the council to complain against the ruling. Theoretically we live in a democracy...
So does this cover the area north of the groyne or just between the groynes? That would really suck as that is te starting point for many a downwinder.
