 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / February 2006How To Block Traffic (with photo!)
See also: http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg Everybody's friend Scott has documented the 'I B JAM' (I'll Be Just a Minute) phenominon before, but this was just espescially impressive to me. The lazy motherf..ker driving this truck blocked the only lane of traffic in a no passing zone, while ignoring the spot he was blocking. His hazard lights were on though, so it must be okay, right? I saw him park and run inside from two blocks away, walked past, looked back, and realized he still was blocking the road, and had made several vehicles illegally pass him on a public roadway. I'd walked three blocks, but he'd be back soon, I was sure. At that point, I walked back a block, and lined up a picture that clearly showed his plates, the company's name and phone number, and got my a.s moving cause I was in a hurry. (Yet I had time to walk an extra two blocks to get a good shot. I know, I know.) Then I forgot about this picture, taken 1/4/06 @ 10:48 am on B St in San Diego. The part I find most humerous is that there was still time left on the meter this bastard was too f.cking cheap/lazy to use. Way to go Imaging Technologies Driver Man. Dave Hogan > See also: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Dave Hogan Shoulda slashed at least one tire. One reason i always carrry a sharp lock-back knife. > > See also: > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Shoulda slashed at least one tire. One reason i always carrry a sharp > lock-back knife. Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve , <netuser_axel@yahoo.com> was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving on 9 Jan 2006 22:20:15 -0800: > Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; > http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve LADY DRIVEN!! necromancer wrote: <brevity snip> > > Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; > > http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve > LADY DRIVEN!! ----- Classic...! ----- - gpsman >> Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve > > LADY DRIVEN!! Speaking of which, while I know (and know *of*) plenty of highly competent female drivers, I also see a great many really bad ones in day-to-day traffic. I also know several very good female mechanics and engineers, but I also hear, first and secondhand, of a great deal of mechanical mayhem perpetrated actively or passively upon cars by women. That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising used cars as "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in better-than-average condition...? > >> Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in > better-than-average condition...? I think the idea is that traditionally, people don't think of female drivers as being the type to indulge in tire-smoking launches, clutchless speed shifts, high-G cornering, and other forms of automotive "abuse" that are traditionally associated with male drivers. That said, I'd posit that the guys that actually *do* that kind of stuff also check their oil regularly, keep their suspension in top shape, perform required periodic maintenance, etc. etc. etc. so I don't see any real advantage to one or the other. That said, the stereotypes don't always hold true... I've lost track of how many motor mounts the girlie has broken on her Corrado (then again, I broke the driver's side one twice on my '62 Stude before I gave up and made my own, with a through-bolt design...) nate > That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising used cars as > "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in > better-than-average condition...? Because such vehicles are often cosmetically better. Just ingore that you are getting OEM installed engine oil. >> That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising used cars as >> "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in >> better-than-average condition...? > > Because such vehicles are often cosmetically better. Just ingore that > you are getting OEM installed engine oil. Not changing the oil is not just a female thing. Several years after my mother remarried (father is dead), I needed to borrow her car for a short trip. Before I hit the road, I did a quick inspection on it (fluids, tire pressure, etc.) and noticed that the oil was DARK BLACK and literally stuck to the dipstick (like caked on). So basically, the car was being lubricated by black sludge, about the thickness of well-mixed cement before it sets. This car was about 3 years old at the time. Judging by the sticker on the window, the oil hadn't been changed for over 15,000 miles. I asked her why the oil hadn't been changed. She said to ask the FIL (he takes care of such matters). So I asked him. Now this is a guy who does most of his own mechanical work, like changing trannies and stuff in his truck, so you would THINK that he would know better. But his explanation is that he had full synthetic oil put in the car, so it only needed to be changed (according to HIM, anyway) every 15,000 miles, and it was "just a little overdue" at the time that I had checked it. I was quite honestly shocked that the car even started. But the gas mileage sucked rotten eggs. I would have had the oil changed while I was using the car, but I'd learned a long time ago that it wasn't smart to cross the FIL, as he had a hair-trigger temper and was well armed. Better to let it be. Not surprisingly, the car didn't last long. -Dave > Not changing the oil is not just a female thing. Several years after my > mother remarried (father is dead), I needed to borrow her car for a short [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > changed (according to HIM, anyway) every 15,000 miles, and it was "just a > little overdue" at the time that I had checked it. He missed the other portion of the extended drain interval with synthetic oil and that is still changing the filter as per manufacturer reccomendations. > He missed the other portion of the extended drain interval with synthetic > oil and that is still changing the filter as per manufacturer > reccomendations. Yeah, but the way I see it, if you have to go to the trouble of changing the filter, you might as well change the oil while you've got the oil pan under the car and you're getting dirty oil all over yourself anyway. :) Even now, full synthetic is not that expensive. You can easily get 5 quarts of it for what you'd pay somebody to change your oil with non-synthetic. -Dave >>> Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in > better-than-average condition...? Why are insurance rates lower for women? oh yeah, because they get into less accidents... thats right... > >>> Block traffic"? This 'photo' came to mind; http://tinyurl.com/bn4ve > >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Why are insurance rates lower for women? oh yeah, because they get into less > accidents... thats right... Not a good assumption. >> > That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising >> > used cars as "lady owned" as though it'll make me think [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Not a good assumption. First was a false assumption, which is based on wrongful _individual opinion_. But assertion about "women having lower insurance rates" is an _outright lie_, which can't be only proven, but has no grounds whatsoever, to claim this...  Signature_____________________________________________________ I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~ ___________________________________________________ -- >>> > That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising >>> > used cars as "lady owned" as though it'll make me think [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > lower insurance rates" is an _outright lie_, which can't be > only proven, but has no grounds whatsoever, to claim this... http://www.insurance.com/Article.aspx/Auto_insurance_for_20-somethings/artid/106 "Women will not save as much as men do when they turn 25, but then again, women generally don't pay as much for their insurance to begin with. Typical savings for women are between 10 and 15 percent after living a quarter-century." >>>> > That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising >>>> > used cars as "lady owned" as though it'll make me think >>>> > the car's in better-than-average condition...? >>>> >>>> Why are insurance rates lower for women? /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ >>> Not a good assumption. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > generally don't pay as much for their insurance to begin with. Typical savings for > women are between 10 and 15 percent after living a quarter-century." You provided link with statistics, which isn't an _assumption_ we were discussing about. Insurance rates are being offered without discrimination on the basis of drivers' gender, as it was suggested in your _assumption_ above. Therefore, just because on average women are paying less insurance than male drivers, doesn't mean "insurance rates lower for them." Signature_____________________________________________________ I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~ ___________________________________________________ -- >> That being the case, *why* do people carry on advertising used cars as >> "lady owned" as though it'll make me think the car's in >> better-than-average condition...? > > Why are insurance rates lower for women? oh yeah, because they get into > less accidents... thats right... No, they get less tickets. There's a HUGE difference there. Most traffic stops are for female drivers, but most traffic tickets related to those traffic stops are written against male drivers. Only a moron would have to ask why. -Dave >Why are insurance rates lower for women? oh yeah, because they get into less >accidents... thats right... Less expensive accidents per year, not less accidents per mile driven, is the difference that would drive rates down. In Massachusetts car insurance costs the same for men and women. SignatureJohn Carr (jfc@mit.edu) > > See also: > > > > http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg > Shoulda slashed at least one tire. One reason i always carrry a sharp > lock-back knife. You should love this guy, nutcase. He's taking your sloth behavoir to it's logical end: It's "safer" to do 55 instead of 65, 45 instead of 55... obviously 0 is safer than any speed. >> > See also: >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >it's logical end: It's "safer" to do 55 instead of 65, 45 instead of >55... obviously 0 is safer than any speed. How many kids did you and your criminal speeding put in wheelchairs last week? > >> > See also: > >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > How many kids did you and your criminal speeding put in wheelchairs > last week? I figured logical thinking would explode your head. > >> > See also: > >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > How many kids did you and your criminal speeding put in wheelchairs > last week? Why don't you address the issue, moron? Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > See also: http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > traffic in a no passing zone, while ignoring the spot he was blocking. > His hazard lights were on though, so it must be okay, right? Everything looks the same to 4-wheel drivers... There's nobody backed up behind him in the photo and he's set plenty to the R to let traffic see and get around him safely. I think you're exagerrating a tad... and... http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22502.htm **See Item B. Curb Parking 22502. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter every vehicle stopped or parked upon a roadway where there are adjacent curbs shall be stopped or parked with the right-hand wheels of such vehicle parallel with and within 18 inches of the right-hand curb, except that motorcycles shall be parked with at least one wheel or fender touching the right-hand curb. Where no curbs or barriers bound any roadway, right-hand parallel parking is required unless otherwise indicated. ** (b) The provisions of subdivision (a) or (e) do not apply to a commercial vehicle if a variation from the requirements of subdivision (a) or (e) is reasonably necessary to accomplish the loading or unloading of merchandise or passengers on, or from, such vehicle and while anything connected with such loading, or unloading, is being executed. > I saw him park and run inside from two blocks away, walked past, looked > back, and realized he still was blocking the road, and had made several > vehicles illegally pass him on a public roadway. I'd walked three > blocks, but he'd be back soon, I was sure. The vehicles did not have to pass him "illegally". He could be delivering a single $50K 2# package that takes 20 minutes get a signature for. And maybe he was taking a leak too, same as you or I would do. You'll rarely see a local delivery driver lallygagging. > The part I find most humerous is that there was still time left on the > meter this bastard was too f.cking cheap/lazy to use. Way to go > Imaging Technologies Driver Man. My POV is... he's legally parked if he's unloading "and while anything connected with such loading, or unloading, is being executed" (I think we can assume such); he isn't blocking traffic (much, if at all), he doesn't pose a safety hazard and he's left open the oh, so precious parking space... that he can't use to unload from the rear of his rig anyway. That driver was *thinking* and being considerate of others when he parked there... possibly, anyway. - gpsman > Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > > See also: http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Everything looks the same to 4-wheel drivers... I've driven larger trucks than the one pictured many times, and in the exact same area. It's a small truck that would easily have fit in any number of commercial parking spots that were very close by. > There's nobody backed up behind him in the photo and he's set plenty to > the R to let traffic see and get around him safely. I think you're > exagerrating a tad... and... I think you accuse people of "exagerrating" a lot. This was a lazy a.shole, who while might have been in compliance with the law, was still a lazy motherf..ker. > ** (b) The provisions of subdivision (a) or (e) do not apply to a > commercial vehicle if a variation from the requirements of subdivision > (a) or (e) is reasonably necessary to accomplish the loading or > unloading of merchandise or passengers on, or from, such vehicle and > while anything connected with such loading, or unloading, is being > executed. > The vehicles did not have to pass him "illegally". He could be > delivering a single $50K 2# package that takes 20 minutes get a > signature for. And maybe he was taking a leak too, same as you or I > would do. You'll rarely see a local delivery driver lallygagging. It's okay to pass around a double yellow? I never knew there were exceptions to that rule. You also left off (c) (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (b), local authorities may, by ordinance, prohibit commercial vehicles from stopping, parking, or standing on one side of a roadway in a business district with the wheels of such vehicle more than 18 inches from the curb. The ordinance shall be effective only if signs are placed in the areas to which it is applicable clearly indicating the prohibition. The curb was painted red, and it was signed no parking anytime. > That driver was *thinking* and being considerate of others when he > parked there... possibly, anyway. If you want to assume anyone driving a truck is a good driver, then sure. Some of us know there's bad car, truck, motorcycle, bus, etc drivers. There's bad walkers and bicyclists too if it makes you feel better. Dave > > Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > > > See also: http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > exact same area. It's a small truck that would easily have fit in any > number of commercial parking spots that were very close by. Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know WTF they're doing... or just think they do. Suddenly... there's "any number" of *available* commercial vehicle parking spaces "close by" on B St. in San Diego at 10:48 am on a weekday?! Um... bullshit? That just an outright lie, far beyond exagerration. > > There's nobody backed up behind him in the photo and he's set plenty to > > the R to let traffic see and get around him safely. I think you're [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a.shole, who while might have been in compliance with the law, was > still a lazy motherf..ker. Oh... > > ** (b) The provisions of subdivision (a) or (e) do not apply to a > > commercial vehicle if a variation from the requirements of subdivision [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > It's okay to pass around a double yellow? I never knew there were > exceptions to that rule. Look it up... if you're not a lazy motherf..ker. > You also left off (c) > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > The curb was painted red, and it was signed no parking anytime. Duh. I didn't leave it "off", it isn't relevant: "The ordinance shall be effective only if signs are placed in the areas to which it is applicable clearly indicating the prohibition." A "No Parking" sign doesn't cover that. Your pic didn't include that. See? You exagerrate. Thanks tho, for not pulling a Brent P. on me and weaseling in a "it's posted no parking for commercial vehicles" late addition. > > That driver was *thinking* and being considerate of others when he > > parked there... possibly, anyway. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > drivers. There's bad walkers and bicyclists too if it makes you feel > better. I always assume *everyone* is a bad driver, especially truck drivers and especially local truck drivers. I don't assume they're "lazy motherf..kers" because I know lazy motherf..kers usually don't last long in the transportation and material handling business. Something you might have learned in your experience driving "larger trucks than the one pictured many times"... had you been paying attention. ----- - gpsman > Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know WTF > they're doing... or just think they do. It's a small box truck. Almost everyone in California with a license and a job has probably driven something that size or larger before. It's not like it was a 40+ foot rig, or even a 20+ foot box truck. > Suddenly... there's "any number" of *available* commercial vehicle > parking spaces "close by" on B St. in San Diego at 10:48 am on a > weekday?! Um... bullshit? That just an outright lie, far beyond > exagerration. So when you have nothing better to say you just make sh.t up, once again. You're definitely talking out your a.s and have never been around B & Columbia, where there are plenty of commercial spots that many truck drivers are just too stupid, lazy, or self-centered to use. The Karl Strauss and W Hotel's guys seem to have found them, but not many others. Hell, there was a wide-open spot with time on the meter right next to him! That means he's a lazy f.ck. But you've shown before if you have nothing useful to say, you just make up insults at the other poster. > I always assume *everyone* is a bad driver, especially truck drivers > and especially local truck drivers. I don't assume they're "lazy > motherf..kers" because I know lazy motherf..kers usually don't last > long in the transportation and material handling business. Something > you might have learned in your experience driving "larger trucks than > the one pictured many times"... had you been paying attention. So throwing a few baseless personal insults is supposed to make me assume he's not a lazy motherf..ker who could have used free commercial spots (or the meter 6 feet away) instead, and chose not to? There's plenty of lazy motherf..kers in the transportation and material handling business. They may not last that long, but they seem to last long enough to block traffic by being self-centered pricks. Dave "Dave in SD" <davidphogan@gmail.com> wrote in message > Hell, there was a wide-open spot with time on the meter right next to > him! That means he's a lazy f.ck. Look at the picture, Dave - you posted it!. If he used the available spot, and backed far enough that he wasn't intruding on the red zone, he'd have no room available to the rear to effect his unloading. Therefore, he reverts to choice B, which is legal, and convenient for him to carry on his business. This is pretty normal stuff in urban areas. God knows, there's plenty of really bizarre stuff for you to get upset about. Don't go shithouse over the routine. > Look at the picture, Dave - you posted it!. If he used the available spot, > and backed far enough that he wasn't intruding on the red zone, he'd have no > room available to the rear to effect his unloading. Therefore, he reverts > to choice B, which is legal, and convenient for him to carry on his > business. So what you are saying is that the law is at fault. That he had the choice of creating a dangerous situation or disobeying the law and not creating a hazard. I really don't think creating a traffic hazard is a lesser evil than parking part-way into a red zone for just-a-minute. But hey, I have this nasty habbit of thinking about causing a problem for other people and then not doing it. Guess I couldn't be a truck driver because I would find a legal place to park and deal with it if I was worried about a parking ticket. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message > So what you are saying is that the law is at fault. That he had the > choice of creating a dangerous situation or disobeying the law and not > creating a hazard. A) not a particularly dangerous situation. Look at the pic. Outboard of the truck there is at least half a lane width available. Besides, this is what cities *want* short term delivery people to do. If they had to parallel park all day, there would be about a 400% increase in fender bender accidents, and productivity of goods distribution would drop by about 70%. Then the economy would go into recession, homeless legions would be roaming the streets, millions would be unemployed, anarchy and crime would be rampant throughout society --- and all because you didn't want to be lightly inconvenienced by having to pay a little bit of attention so you could avoid hitting a delivery truck double parked for a few minutes! Now who's the MFFY??????? > I really don't think creating a traffic hazard is a lesser evil than > parking part-way into a red zone for just-a-minute. A) He's not creating a hazard (ref above). B) if he parked part way into the red zone for just-a-minute, someone like you would come along, take a pic, post a message about it, call him a f.cking a.shole MFFY, and give him no end of sh.t for partially blocking a red zone..... > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > A) not a particularly dangerous situation. Look at the pic. Outboard of > the truck there is at least half a lane width available. One day, some arsehole decided to block half a lane. I had to use the turn lane to get around her. I found that alone to be quite dangerous as I could not see very well behind me because of other traffic jammed up. People were zooming into the turn lane. When I thought it safe I started to slowly move around her to hear the blare of a horn and another driver zooming down the turn lane. > Besides, this is > what cities *want* short term delivery people to do. If they had to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > hitting a delivery truck double parked for a few minutes! Now who's the > MFFY??????? Everything has to be for the trucker. In chicago and most surrounding towns we have these things called ALLEYS! They are very useful for things like deliveries. >> I really don't think creating a traffic hazard is a lesser evil than >> parking part-way into a red zone for just-a-minute. > A) He's not creating a hazard (ref above). B) if he parked part way into > the red zone for just-a-minute, someone like you would come along, take a > pic, post a message about it, call him a f.cking a.shole MFFY, and give him > no end of sh.t for partially blocking a red zone..... And one place I lived cars were ticketed for being a half inch into a yellow zone. And that's dead on accurate. > > Look at the picture, Dave - you posted it!. If he used the available spot, > > and backed far enough that he wasn't intruding on the red zone, he'd have no [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > find a legal place to park and deal with it if I was worried about a > parking ticket. You'd never be able to be a truck driver. If gpsman is any example, you'd have to call everyone a liar first then deny the availability of tons of nearby spots that were available. Any time they say anything that disputes what you say they again are lying. Dave >> Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know WTF >> they're doing... or just think they do. > > It's a small box truck. Almost everyone in California with a license > and a job has probably driven something that size or larger before. > It's not like it was a 40+ foot rig, or even a 20+ foot box truck. It's not that small, greater than 10,000 lbs GVWR. Requires CDL. Specs put it anywhere from 12,000 to 12,500 lbs GVWR. Body length is anywhere fron 12 to 20 feet. If you look at the back of the truck, there is a lift there. It sticks out a good 5 to 8 feet when deployed, and will need another 10 feet of clearance beyond that to use. No way he will fit in that parking space and not be into the red zone. So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did not have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open to hefty fines. Doug >>> Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know >>> WTF they're doing... or just think they do. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It's not that small, greater than 10,000 lbs GVWR. Requires CDL. Specs > put it anywhere from 12,000 to 12,500 lbs GVWR. Body length is Should be 14,500 lbs GVWR. > anywhere fron 12 to 20 feet. If you look at the back of the truck, > there is a lift there. It sticks out a good 5 to 8 feet when deployed, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Doug >>>Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know WTF >>>they're doing... or just think they do. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > put it anywhere from 12,000 to 12,500 lbs GVWR. Body length is anywhere > fron 12 to 20 feet. Per Ryder, Budget, a few government websites, and my own experience, you don't need a CDL for a >26,000lb. box-truck with a body-length of 24', so you wouldn't need a CDL for that bitty delivery truck. Signature~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. ******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant." (pgp@v6stang.com for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) > Per Ryder, Budget, a few government websites, and my own experience, you > don't need a CDL for a >26,000lb. box-truck with a body-length of 24' When I was 18, I remember being *very* amused that Ryder would happily rent me a 24' truck with 19' four-wheel car trailer, but nobody would rent me a K-car. Garth Almgren <nospam@v6stang.com> wrote in news:42j69oF1ir6euU1 @individual.net: >>>>Yeah, everybody's driven a bigger rig on usenet, whether they know WTF >>>>they're doing... or just think they do. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > don't need a CDL for a >26,000lb. box-truck with a body-length of 24', > so you wouldn't need a CDL for that bitty delivery truck. You can rent and drive one yourself. However, if you are employed to drive it, you need a CDL. For example. Those big Class A RV's that you see the snow birds driving. They can drive it them selves with a regular non-commercial license. If said snow bird were to contract you to drive it across country because he didn't feel like driving it, you'd better have a CDL and insurance. Doug > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did not > have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open to hefty > fines. You might want to take that up with U-Haul also, since they'll rent a 24' box truck to anyone with a license. Dave > > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did not > > have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open to hefty [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 24' box truck to anyone with a license. > ----- I was waiting for someone else to mention it... but if the GVWR is less than 26, 001 lbs. no CDL is required. ----- - gpsman > > > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did not > > > have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open to hefty [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I was waiting for someone else to mention it... but if the GVWR is less > than 26, 001 lbs. no CDL is required. Exactly my point. For local deliveries it's rare that a CDL is required in my experiences. I would assume this driver had the minimum required license possible, and just did not give a f.ck about anything other than his minimum wage paycheck. It's very common here. Dave >> > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did >> > not have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > - gpsman gpsman, as I said earlier. The difference is that truck in the picture is a commercial motor vehicle and a Uhaul isn't. Has anyone gone to Uhaul and said, "Can I rent one of your trucks and have one of my employees drive it to make diliveries? For the next six months..." BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? I don't know. Doug > BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? Yep, same exact piece-of-crap trucks they were renting 10, 20, 25 years ago. Anyone who trusts his life to Uhaul's decrepit equipment is a fool. > > BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? > > Yep, same exact piece-of-crap trucks they were renting 10, 20, 25 years > ago. Anyone who trusts his life to Uhaul's decrepit equipment is a fool. They beat the pants off of Ryder trucks, however. Last time I rented a Ryder, I got a 24 foot moving truck with, no lie, a 366 Chevy gas motor and automatic transmission. It also was speed limited at around 65-70 MPH, meaning that it was impossible to build up enough steam to make it up the hills on the PA turnpike without having to resort to hazard flashers. Oh, yeah, and it was 95 degrees out but the A/C was barely functional, and let's not forget that the guy that hooked up the car trailer for me didn't tighten the hitch up enough and the trailer fell off and was dragging on the safety chains as soon as I turned out of the Ryder parking lot. AFAIK, the ancient Uhaul Fords that you are thinking of have been local use only for quite some time now, at least a decade, if there's even any left in their fleet. They won't rent them to you unless you return them to the same location you pick them up at, which pretty much says all you need to know about the confidence they have in them :/ That said, I've had no problems at all renting from Uhaul while my one Ryder experience was so awful I'll never rent from them again unless I have no choice. At least Uhaul uses Diesels in all their new trucks. nate >>> BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > They beat the pants off of Ryder trucks, however. Boy, my experience has been exactly opposite. Every Uhaul I ever rented was a beat-to-hell old piece of garbage. Every Ryder I've ever rented has been at most 5 years old and in good repair. > Last time I rented a Ryder, I got a 24 foot moving truck with, no lie, a > 366 Chevy gas motor and automatic transmission. It also was speed > limited at around 65-70 MPH Yep, I got one of those in '95. Pain in the a.s. Pretty sure they don't do that any more. > let's not forget that the guy that hooked up the car trailer for me > didn't tighten the hitch up enough and the trailer fell off and was > dragging on the safety chains as soon as I turned out of the Ryder > parking lot. You didn't check his work...? > >>> BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > was a beat-to-hell old piece of garbage. Every Ryder I've ever rented has > been at most 5 years old and in good repair. Well, the one I drove didn't have any evident problems, other than the fact that it was dangerously underpowered. Passing was simply out of the question, so I spent a lot of time in 2nd gear with the flashers on (was moving from Pittsburgh to DC, so there's a lot of hills in between....) It was bad enough, though, that I seriously question the wisdom of whoever actually made that drivetrain/chassis combo available. In the truck's defense, there was two people's worth of stuff in the back, including an upright piano, and a VW GTI on a car trailer behind it. Of course, it should have been entirely predictable that a large moving truck would have been used in that manner... Like I said before, I haven't had any issues with UHaul - the trucks I've rented from them have all been fairly similar, in fact, but equipped with a proper Diesel engine with enough torque to make driving them bearable, if not exhilerating. > > Last time I rented a Ryder, I got a 24 foot moving truck with, no lie, a > > 366 Chevy gas motor and automatic transmission. It also was speed [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > You didn't check his work...? At that time, I hadn't actually hooked up a trailer in years; I figured he did it every day. The logical assumption, that he knew what he was doing, was obviously incorrect... The only good thing was that at that point I hadn't loaded the car on the trailer. It's been so long that I don't really remember the logistics of the situation, but I must have had my GF run me to the rental place rather than drive my own car there and load it on the trailer - I had a rare moment of foresight and didn't want to rely on the little jack on the tongue to hold the trailer *and* the car while loading the truck... nate >>>> BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >was a beat-to-hell old piece of garbage. Every Ryder I've ever rented has >been at most 5 years old and in good repair. I've never rented a Screw-Haul truck, primarily because of all the horror stories from people who reserved a truck only to show up on moving day and find out that there was nothing available. Apparently Screw-Haul overbooks even worse than the airlines do. I've never had that problem (or any other, for that matter) with Ryder. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > I've never rented a Screw-Haul truck, primarily because of all the > horror stories from people who reserved a truck only to show up on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I've never had that problem (or any other, for that matter) with > Ryder. I've known people who have had similar experiences with all the majors. >> > BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? >> >> Yep, same exact piece-of-crap trucks they were renting 10, 20, 25 years >> ago. Anyone who trusts his life to Uhaul's decrepit equipment is a fool. > >They beat the pants off of Ryder trucks, however. Last time I rented a That depends. Around here you can't rent a uhaul bigger than about 18feet. If you ask what size they have, they just repeatedly ask you how big your house is. >Ryder, I got a 24 foot moving truck with, no lie, a 366 Chevy gas motor >and automatic transmission. It also was speed limited at around 65-70 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >nate ************************* What the heck, so will I. Dave > > > BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > off and was dragging on the safety chains as soon as I turned out of > the Ryder parking lot. The last Uhaul I was willing to use had no AC, the mirrors would flip into the doors at over 45 mph, and the engine stalled out 10+ times between LA and SF. f.ck Uhaul. Dave > The last Uhaul I was willing to use had no AC, the mirrors would flip > into the doors at over 45 mph, and the engine stalled out 10+ times > between LA and SF. f.ck Uhaul. The last UHaul I used was just fine... I thought the turn signal switch was messed up, but it turned out the hazard switch was just pulled out half way. One my brother had however was very bad. A budget van I rented had a bad wheel bearing that I just hoped would last long enough for me to return it. > BTW, Does Uhaul even rent manual transmission trucks anymore? I don't > know. They didn't have any last time we looked, dammit. The first truck we were offered wouldn't get out of first gear at all. The second made weird noises every time it shifted. I had them call all the other dealers in the Dallas metro area to see if any of them had a manual tranny available. I would've gladly taken a bigger truck at full price to avoid the potential hassle of being stuck with a dead slushie, but we ended up having to settle for one that just had lots of other problems. (No gas cap, no horn, and a battery that died every time the truck sat still for an hour.) >>> > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you >>> > did not have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Doug First off, an apology to Nate, gpsman, and everybody else. I was wrong about the CDL Class C. I don't know what happened because I couldn't have been more wrong. Sorry this took to long to deliver, but I had MB metldown and it took a while to get the scratch together to rebuild. So, sorry to say, the a.shole school bus driver is back. Doug Doug wrote: <brevity snip> > First off, an apology to Nate, gpsman, and everybody else. I was wrong > about the CDL Class C. I don't know what happened because I couldn't have > been more wrong. Sorry this took to long to deliver, but I had MB > metldown and it took a while to get the scratch together to rebuild. > > So, sorry to say, the a.shole school bus driver is back. ----- Fergit it, on my account... no apology necessary... this ng is ruled by emotion as much as logic. People post as much of what they feel as what they think. Hell, I can often tell when a guy has typed faster than he can think. It's easy... when I realize I've been guilty myself. We're all wrong sometimes, it's part of life. So forget it and jump back in if you got the time. I can hardly wait to tell you what a jackass you are... ----- - gpsman >>>> > So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you >>>> > did not have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > >Doug Welcome back dude, thanks for admitting a wrong. It's rare here. ;) Dave >> So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did not >> have atleast a Class C CDL you and your employer would be open to hefty [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Dave You guys don't get it. There is one HELL of a big difference between renting a Uhaul and driving a delivery truck. One is just a truck (Uhaul) the other is a Commercial Motor Vehicle. Go read page 1 of the California Commercial Driver Handbook. It's online here: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/pubs.htm Doug PS. Isn't it interestesting that Gov Arnold is the first thing you read in the drivers manual and he doesn't even have a license. > >> So Dave, if your employer asked you to drive that truck and you did > not [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > PS. Isn't it interestesting that Gov Arnold is the first thing you read > in the drivers manual and he doesn't even have a license. That link you provided says that with a standard CA license you can drive anything 26,000 lbs or less that doesn't have other special circumstances (HazMat, passengers, 3 axels, etc). It doesn't say anything about needing a CDL for commercial use, only if the vehicle meets the legal definition of a commercial vehicle (even if used for non-profit use.) Dave Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > It's a small box truck. Almost everyone in California with a license > and a job has probably driven something that size or larger before. Sounds like exaggeration to me... > > Suddenly... there's "any number" of *available* commercial vehicle > > parking spaces "close by" on B St. in San Diego at 10:48 am on a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > around B & Columbia, where there are plenty of commercial spots that > many truck drivers are just too stupid, lazy, or self-centered to use. Post pictures of some. I've clocked well over 1M miles in 49 states and never seen adequate commercial vehicle street parking ONCE. It's very rare to see adequate commercial vehicle parking in industrial areas. Your assessment of truck parking on SD streets is, quite obviously, bullshit... beyond exaggeration. > Hell, there was a wide-open spot with time on the meter right next to > him! That means he's a lazy f.ck. But perhaps... since he possibly couldn't use that spot, he left it open for you... or it was vacated during your walk and his absence. Also note the tree (that should be trimmed for 13' 6" clearance) overhanging the rear of the empty spot. You don't know *anything* about the delivery; what needs to come out of the box, how heavy or what size it is. And safety... never enters your mind. The driver *may* be inside rounding up 5 other guys to help him unload a 1000# 6x6x8 foot piece that's top-heavy. It's often more safe to block traffic somewhat in a situation like that to slow approaching vehicles that might otherwise go zooming by at the 85th percentile, f.ck any pedestrians. I'd expect someone with your truck driving experience to have learned that. > But you've shown before if you have nothing useful to say, you just > make up insults at the other poster. I don't make 'em up, I steal 'em. I don't post a rant with a single picture that doesn't back up my interpretation of the situation by any stretch of the imagination and expect everyone to agree with me. You deserve to be insulted but, f.ck, I sincerely hope you don't take it personally. Isn't insults what usenet is for...? > So throwing a few baseless personal insults is supposed to make me > assume he's not a lazy motherf..ker who could have used free commercial > spots (or the meter 6 feet away) instead, and chose not to? Baseless? I think you're lying about your truck driving experience since you've demonstrated you know nothing of the challenges of operating an oversized vehicle in a city, much less making deliveries. I know you're lying about the ample, available commercial vehicle street parking in the area since it exists nowhere else in the lower 48 states. I suspect you're lying about the truck blocking traffic as there isn't any to be seen in the picture. An excellent example of a baseless insult would be your description of a person you've never met and who didn't inconvenience you one whit as... "lazy motherf..ker", "bastard was too f.cking cheap/lazy" and "lazy a.shole". Surely you've spoken with his company by now. I'm anxious to hear their response to your allegations. ----- - gpsman > Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > > > > It's a small box truck. Almost everyone in California with a license > > and a job has probably driven something that size or larger before. > > Sounds like exaggeration to me... Sounds like you're too stupid to realize how many people move and rent a box truck that's the size of the pictured truck or larger. I expect you to be stupid, blind, or self-centered since that's what you advocate, so I understand. > > > Suddenly... there's "any number" of *available* commercial vehicle > > > parking spaces "close by" on B St. in San Diego at 10:48 am on a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Post pictures of some. I've clocked well over 1M miles in 49 states > and never seen adequate commercial vehicle street parking ONCE. It's You're a stupid/lazy/ignorant trucker, what should I expect? > very rare to see adequate commercial vehicle parking in industrial > areas. Who mentioned an industrial area? This is a commercial downtown district. Oh, you're a trucker, too stupid to figure that out I guess. > Your assessment of truck parking on SD streets is, quite > obviously, bullshit... beyond exaggeration. It's only bullshit if you've never driven here, as a suspect. There's a truck parking spot that regularly takes full-sized semis around one corner, and a block of yellow curb on the other side of the building he was parked at. So, you're obviously full of bullshit, or just have never driven in the area you apparently know so much about. > > Hell, there was a wide-open spot with time on the meter right next to > > him! That means he's a lazy f.ck. > > But perhaps... since he possibly couldn't use that spot, he left it > open for you... Damn you're dumb. I WAS ON FOOT WHEN I SAW THIS. >or it was vacated during your walk and his absence. > Also note the tree (that should be trimmed for 13' 6" clearance) > overhanging the rear of the empty spot. The tree that doesn't go over the street? I just checked 4 hours ago, it still isn't over the street. Nice try dumbass. > You don't know *anything* about the delivery; what needs to come out of > the box, how heavy or what size it is. And safety... never enters your > mind. The safety of making cars enter an intersection out of their lane? I forgot that it's safer to make people leave their lane. > The driver *may* be inside rounding up 5 other guys to help him unload > a 1000# 6x6x8 foot piece that's top-heavy. It's often more safe to > block traffic somewhat in a situation like that to slow approaching > vehicles that might otherwise go zooming by at the 85th percentile, > f.ck any pedestrians. I'd expect someone with your truck driving > experience to have learned that. I'd expect anyone driving a truck with a bigass delivery to use the nearby commercial spots this dumbfuck was too lazy to use, espescially if they need to go assemble a posse to help them move it. > > But you've shown before if you have nothing useful to say, you just > > make up insults at the other poster. > > I don't make 'em up, I steal 'em. I don't post a rant with a single > picture that doesn't back up my interpretation of the situation by any > stretch of the imagination and expect everyone to agree with me. You make wild assumptions and accuse anyone who badmouths any of the lazy, dumb, or self centered truckers of the world. You're too stupid to listen to the details from anyone who's actually seen them, and prefer to make up your own facts. You also seem to be living in your own little self-centered dream world, where only trucks have anything important to do. >You > deserve to be insulted but, f.ck, I sincerely hope you don't take it > personally. Isn't insults what usenet is for...? I'm just glad I have little in common with someone who makes the stupid assumptions you do. > > So throwing a few baseless personal insults is supposed to make me > > assume he's not a lazy motherf..ker who could have used free commercial > > spots (or the meter 6 feet away) instead, and chose not to? > > Baseless? I think you're lying about your truck driving experience Since you're as self-centered as any truck driver I've seen, at least you know I won't accuse you of lying about this. > since you've demonstrated you know nothing of the challenges of > operating an oversized vehicle in a city, much less making deliveries. I've shown I know how to find a parking spot, unlike your lazy (and probably quite fat) a.s. > I know you're lying about the ample, available commercial vehicle > street parking in the area since it exists nowhere else in the lower 48 > states. I suspect you're lying about the truck blocking traffic as > there isn't any to be seen in the picture. Sorry I didn't get a picture when there were cars waiting. > An excellent example of a baseless insult would be your description of > a person you've never met and who didn't inconvenience you one whit > as... "lazy motherf..ker", "bastard was too f.cking cheap/lazy" and > "lazy a.shole". He made it clear by refusing to use the parking spots provided, and instead blocking lanes. Just because you're too stupid, self-centered, or lazy to understand doing something the right way instead of maybe just barely in compliance with the law doesn't mean he's not a lazy motherf..ker. > Surely you've spoken with his company by now. I'm anxious to hear > their response to your allegations. I hadn't bothered, I can guarantee they won't get any of my business though. Like you, they'd probably just defend his being a self centered a.shole so I'll just spend money with their competitors instead. Dave Dave in SD wrote: <brevity snip> > Since you're as self-centered as any truck driver I've seen, at least > you know I won't accuse you of lying about this. We're all self-centered, dumbass. (no offense intended) > I've shown I know how to find a parking spot, unlike your lazy (and > probably quite fat) a.s. I'm 51, 5'10" and 201... getting kinda pudgy in my retirement. And no, you didn't show you know how to find a parking spot... unless that's your Volvo. > > I know you're lying about the ample, available commercial vehicle > > street parking in the area since it exists nowhere else in the lower 48 > > states. I suspect you're lying about the truck blocking traffic as > > there isn't any to be seen in the picture. > > Sorry I didn't get a picture when there were cars waiting. f.ck that... we all know the "holding up traffic" is bullshit... get me one picture each of 2 empty commercial vehicle parking spaces on B Street. > > Surely you've spoken with his company by now. I'm anxious to hear > > their response to your allegations. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > centered a.shole so I'll just spend money with their competitors > instead. You were so outraged... you totally forgot the incident and the picture. If you had any money to take elsewhere the parking situation wouldn't bother you a bit. ----- - gpsman >The part I find most humerous is that there was still time left on the >meter this bastard was too f.cking cheap/lazy to use. Way to go >Imaging Technologies Driver Man. Don't you know? Driving a delivery truck is like having diplomatic license plates - you can park wherever you feel like with complete impunity. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg > Everybody's friend Scott has documented the 'I B JAM' (I'll Be Just a > Minute) phenominon before, but this was just espescially impressive to > me. The lazy motherf..ker driving this truck blocked the only lane of > traffic in a no passing zone, while ignoring the spot he was blocking. I see this sort of thing frequently. Someone blocking traffic when there is a spot just a few feet away that could be used. Another thing, has anyone else noticed that the slightest bit of difficulty with one's vehicle now means one can just drive it until it comes to rest where-ever in the traffic lanes it stops moving? More and more I am seeing where people have made no effort what-so-ever to get their disabled vehicle out of traffic when clearly they should have had some coasting or at least been able to push it a couple feet. > See also: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Dave Hogan If you think this is bad, you should check out Chicago or New York. They block streets both ways here... Dan J.S. wrote: <brevity snip> > If you think this is bad, you should check out Chicago or New York. They > block streets both ways here... ----- Flatbush, Brooklyn. I was amazed to see a parking lane, a double-parking lane and a triple-parking lane, all in use to varying degrees. People seemed to think nothing of blocking traffic by parking in the middle of the street to run into a store for a couple minutes. There was no discernable aversion to triple-parking across from another triple-parker thereby blocking the street completely. I saw a couple double-parkers absolutely livid to find themselves blocked in. The SOP reaction must be to look skyward and throw the hands in the air while performing a piroette or two coupled with an optional smack of the offender's hood... followed by incessant repetitive application of the horn until triple-parker's return. Seemed to work... ----- - gpsman > Dan J.S. wrote: <brevity snip> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > - gpsman They're in a hurry, and you don't know what business they were doing. You have no right to question them blocking a roadway, cause they had their reasons. I'm sure of it. Anyone who disputes me is lying! </gpsman> Dave >See also: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Dave Hogan Nobody posted the 10 minutes later picture. Thats the one where the whole truck is full of bullet holes, windows blown out, and all the tires flat. Or the 20 minutes later shot where the whole truck is in flames, and the fire department can not get to the scene because the road is blocked. Of course the best shot would have been about 4 hours later. The truck is nothing but a charred frame, the same for the cars around it, and several buildings have burned to the ground. However, the parking meter pole still stands there without it's head, which melted during the fire. (Still expired of course). And since this occurred in SanDiego, the driver was probably an illegal mexican immigrant (on drugs) without a drivers license, unable to read English traffic signs, who was told America is the land of the Free, which meant to him he could park anywhere. > See also: > > http://tinypic.com/k0q0z9.jpg > <snip> That's one way to block a road... here's another way: Warning, some of you may find this emotionally disturbing http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg I was upset for moment, but then I saw it wasn't Yuengling Black & Tan. Doug > > See also: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg Hey, some of the bottles are still intact... nate >> See also: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg Looks like free beer to me... looks like more bottles are fine than I could manage to carry away :) > That's one way to block a road... here's another way: Warning, some of > you may find this emotionally disturbing http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg That should be one of the graphics used in the ad campaign for that brand of beer, with the legend "Crasch". Sir Lex, <SL@no-spam.com.au> was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving on Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:21:15 +1100: > > See also: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg Maybe whom ever loaded and/or drove the truck had consumed a little too much of the inventory before going to work? It wasn't Bacardi Rum, so I'm not disturbed... ;-) "Sir Lex" <SL@no-spam.com.au> wrote in message news:43c43533 > That's one way to block a road... here's another way: > > Warning, some of you may find this emotionally disturbing > > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg Oh, the humanity! >> See also: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://tinypic.com/k1colh.jpg LOL. Reminds me of when I was given four beers, as a tip from a customer. I placed two of them in the cupholders and other two on the dash. Had a smile on my face the whole rest of the day. Of course, receiving stuff from customers in exchange for favors, and storing alcoholic beverages inside the cab is both against company policy. Then again, what your boss doesn't know, won't hurt you, right? :-) Ulf |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.