Re: Definition of 'truck' may change for N.Y.

From: Bill Pitz (dakota@billpitz.com)
Date: Sat Jan 31 2004 - 12:23:57 EST


On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:29:31 -0500, 03dakotacc4.7_4x4@comcast.net
(droo) wrote:
>> Read this and it makes you wonder????
>>
>> http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/01/30/whats.a.truck.ap/index.html
>>
>
>Sounds silly to me. SUV's aren't any larger in girth than the vehicles from
>the 60's and 70's. I never knew a hummer weighed 10,000 lbs. Obviously it
>all should go by weight. And restrictions on traveling certain roads is
>done by weight. You can see the signs posted. I think this is a lame idea.
>Prolly won't go far either.

It should all be done by weight. The part that makes this ridiculous
is that they are too late. If they were smart about it, they would
have come up with this idea very early on in the "SUV revolution" and
would have met a lot less resistance.

It sounds to me like this lamer is just mad about someone driving an
SUV who cut him off or something so now he's trying to pass a law.
But from another standpoint, having "cars" that weigh 10,000 pounds
driving on weak/old/whatever roads can cause them to deteriorate much,
much faster.

-Bill



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 16:29:51 EST