Discussion:
Passengers in bed of Pickup Truck
(too old to reply)
Sal's Dad
2005-05-18 11:23:20 UTC
Permalink
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.

I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?

What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would I
find it?

Thanks -
Sal's Dad
RobR
2005-05-18 11:34:13 UTC
Permalink
Well, for one thing you'd be breaking the seatbelt law in MA
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-13a.htm

Feel free to browse the rest of the code here:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/gl-90-toc.htm

Every state has their own set of laws, and not all of them are online.
You'll
have to do some googling to find those answers.
Post by Sal's Dad
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.
I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?
What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would
I find it?
Thanks -
Sal's Dad
Sal's Dad
2005-05-18 14:05:13 UTC
Permalink
To quote from the Mass. seatbelt law:

"The provisions of this section shall be enforced by law enforcement
agencies only when an operator of a motor vehicle has been stopped for a
violation of the motor vehicle laws or some other offense."

So I guess this means I should make sure my registration and inspection
stickers are current!
Post by RobR
Well, for one thing you'd be breaking the seatbelt law in MA
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-13a.htm
Sal's Dad
2005-05-18 11:43:03 UTC
Permalink
OK, I know... Google first, ask if you can't find...

http://www.ncsl.org/print/transportation/1202safesmapd.pdf has a state-by
state summary of the laws on this, and Massachusetts General Laws
(http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-13.htm) include the following:

"No person shall operate a motor vehicle, commonly known as a pick-up truck,
nor shall the owner permit it to be operated, for a distance more than
five-miles, in excess of five-miles per hour, with persons under twelve
years of age in the body of such truck, unless such truck is part of an
official parade, or has affixed to it a legal ""Owner Repair'' or ""Farm''
license plate or a pick-up truck engaged in farming activities. "


Any other comments or insights? What is the best way to argue with an
overzealous cop on an issue like this?
Post by Sal's Dad
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.
I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?
What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would
I find it?
Thanks -
Sal's Dad
k***@jersey.net
2005-05-18 13:09:29 UTC
Permalink
"Damn Fast Parade, huh officer?"
Howard Ford
2005-05-18 13:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
Any other comments or insights? What is the best way to argue with
an
Post by Sal's Dad
overzealous cop on an issue like this?
Simple. Just get out on the road and drive 4 1/2 miles an hour. You
won't be breaking any laws that way (minimum speed laws not
withstanding).

For a bonus kick, have the kids in the back make faces at the people
behind you.
David Chesler
2005-05-18 14:37:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
No person shall operate a motor vehicle, commonly known as a pick-up
truck,
Post by Sal's Dad
nor shall the owner permit it to be operated, for a distance more
than
Post by Sal's Dad
five-miles, in excess of five-miles per hour, with persons under
twelve
Post by Sal's Dad
years of age in the body of such truck
OK, it's clearly legal to drive a pickup at full speed for long
distances if
there is nobody in the bed (body?) of the truck. Therefore we can
conclude
that the missing conjunction is "And". Therefore it is not made
illegal
by this statute to drive with persons in the bed faster than 5 mph for
less
than 5 miles, and similarly to drive further than 5 miles at less than
5 mph.
I'd go for the shortness loophole. And if necessary, stop every 4.5
miles
to get out and shift.

But be careful of the bus regulations. One set comes in at 8 people,
and
another at 15 people. But maybe only if you're getting paid.
Post by Sal's Dad
Any other comments or insights? What is the best way to argue with
an
Post by Sal's Dad
overzealous cop on an issue like this?
I would never press it with an overzealous cop. If pleading ignorance
doesn't work (and he'll probably order all the passengers out), you'll
have better luck with the judge.
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
william lynch
2005-05-18 15:06:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
Post by Sal's Dad
No person shall operate a motor vehicle, commonly known as a pick-up
truck,
Post by Sal's Dad
nor shall the owner permit it to be operated, for a distance more
than
Post by Sal's Dad
five-miles, in excess of five-miles per hour, with persons under
twelve
Post by Sal's Dad
years of age in the body of such truck
OK, it's clearly legal to drive a pickup at full speed for long
distances if
there is nobody in the bed (body?) of the truck. Therefore we can
conclude
that the missing conjunction is "And". Therefore it is not made
illegal
by this statute to drive with persons in the bed faster than 5 mph for
less
than 5 miles, and similarly to drive further than 5 miles at less than
5 mph.
I'd go for the shortness loophole. And if necessary, stop every 4.5
miles
to get out and shift.
But be careful of the bus regulations. One set comes in at 8 people,
and
another at 15 people. But maybe only if you're getting paid.
Post by Sal's Dad
Any other comments or insights? What is the best way to argue with
an overzealous cop on an issue like this?
I would never press it with an overzealous cop. If pleading ignorance
doesn't work (and he'll probably order all the passengers out), you'll
have better luck with the judge.
And pray that nothing bad happens, like an accident. If that
occurs then you are facing multiple felonies.
Sal's Dad
2005-05-18 18:55:23 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by william lynch
And pray that nothing bad happens, like an accident. If that
occurs then you are facing multiple felonies.
_Felonies_?? Am I missing something? The applicable law appears to be only
for "persons under twelve". In the original post, I referred to "young
adults".

The only violation I can find is the seatbelt law. Even that -

"No person shall ... ride in a private passenger motor vehicle, a vanpool
vehicle or truck under eighteen thousand pounds on any way unless such
person is wearing a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened; "

- suggests that seatbelts in the bed would solve the problem.

Anyway, thanks to all for your help!
David Chesler
2005-05-18 19:11:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
"persons under twelve". In the original post, I referred to "young
adults".
How young are these young adults?

There are a lot of exceptions in MGL C. 90 § 13A. Personally I make
use of
"(e) anyone involved in the operation of taxis, liveries, tractors,
trucks with gross weight of eighteen thousand pounds or over, buses,
and passengers of authorized emergency vehicles", but if you can find
an old enough truck you could use
"(b) any person riding in a motor vehicle manufactured before July
first, nineteen hundred and sixty-six"
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
Sal's Dad
2005-05-19 10:23:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Post by Sal's Dad
"persons under twelve". In the original post, I referred to "young
adults".
How young are these young adults?
Over 21 - celebrating a college graduation. I don't think many have cars;
the guest of honor doesn't have a license...

Proposed travel is from the train station to a party, about a 40 minute 10
mile round trip, through an "inner suburb".
william lynch
2005-05-19 01:57:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
<snip>
Post by william lynch
And pray that nothing bad happens, like an accident. If that
occurs then you are facing multiple felonies.
_Felonies_?? Am I missing something? The applicable law appears to be only
for "persons under twelve". In the original post, I referred to "young
adults".
The only violation I can find is the seatbelt law. Even that -
"No person shall ... ride in a private passenger motor vehicle, a vanpool
vehicle or truck under eighteen thousand pounds on any way unless such
person is wearing a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened; "
- suggests that seatbelts in the bed would solve the problem.
Anyway, thanks to all for your help!
Without seat belts, an accident is guaranteed to have injuries,
and here that would be felony negligence for each injury.
John S
2005-05-19 03:03:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by william lynch
Post by Sal's Dad
<snip>
Post by william lynch
And pray that nothing bad happens, like an accident. If that
occurs then you are facing multiple felonies.
_Felonies_?? Am I missing something? The applicable law appears to be only
for "persons under twelve". In the original post, I referred to "young
adults".
The only violation I can find is the seatbelt law. Even that -
"No person shall ... ride in a private passenger motor vehicle, a vanpool
vehicle or truck under eighteen thousand pounds on any way unless such
person is wearing a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened; "
- suggests that seatbelts in the bed would solve the problem.
Anyway, thanks to all for your help!
Without seat belts, an accident is guaranteed to have injuries,
and here that would be felony negligence for each injury.
That is certainly not true. I have witnessed an auto accident where the party not
wearing their seatbelt did not have injuries. At any rate, buses certainly don't
mind people not wearing their seatbelts.
David Chesler
2005-05-19 15:17:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by william lynch
Without seat belts, an accident is guaranteed to have injuries,
I've been in loads of accidents without seatbelts without injury.
There are plenty of accidents with seatbelts with injury or even
death.
While seatbelt-wearing probably reduces the probability of injuries of
a given severity for a given collision, there are no guarantees.
Post by william lynch
and here that would be felony negligence for each injury.
Has that ever been successfully prosecuted?

Most of the adult seatbelt statutes I've seen put it on the adult
passenger.
(The words of the Mass statute seem to put the responsibility on the
minor passengers too.) Why would the negligence go on the driver?

Criminal negligence in auto accidents is limited to impairment or
recklessness, for a fairly narrow definition of recklessness.

--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Who once used the occasion of riding in the back of his own
pickup, from the Berkshires to Waltham, to tally seatbelt use by other
travellers. The back of the truck is absolutely the best place to be
during nice weather, and also with a bunch of friends on New Year's
morning who are trying to shake the cobwebs from staying up at a party
until midnight and then sleeping on the floor.
RoadRunner
2005-05-19 18:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
I've been in loads of accidents without seatbelts without injury.
There are plenty of accidents with seatbelts with injury or even
death.
If the above statement is true (that you have been in loads of
accidents) I am surprised you can can anyone to insure you. You may
want to consider public transportation.
David Chesler
2005-05-19 21:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by RoadRunner
If the above statement is true (that you have been in loads of
accidents) I am surprised you can can anyone to insure you.
I'm Step 9.

They happen less frequently than they used to, but they happen.
Since they're matters of public record:

==> c. 1966, I was in the front seat of my father's Monterey, in one of
those booster seats with a steering wheel (like Maggie Simpson's). He
hit something or someone's car or something. That booster wouldn't
count today.
==> c. 1977, I was in the front passenger seat of my father's car
(probably the New Yorker, could have been the LeSabre) northbound on
I-684 in a snowstorm, he rear-ended a car that was stalled in the left
lane, which somehow got that car started, which was a good thing.
==> c. 1981, I rear-ended someone with my father's car in Westchester
Square, in the northeast Bronx.
==> c. 1982, I met someone by accident in the middle of the
intersection of Winthrop Street and Dunster Street, Harvard Sq, which
was then uncontrolled, since then it has a stop sign, again my father's
New Yorker
==> Dumped a motorcycle about 3 times, but seatbelts aren't an issue;
same thing with two significant bike-car incidents (illegal left turn,
my bad; door prize, his bad), and rear-ended without damage once each
bicycle and motorcycle, early 1980s.
==> c. 1982 I clipped a parked vehicle with the back of a shuttle bus
==> Another shuttle bus accident I think - I remember filling out the
form
==> (Plus the time I totally screwed up and followed too closely some
guy with lumber out the back of his truck, and touched it, right after
he'd told me I was following too closely. Whoops.)
==> c. 1983 I clipped another car at the Whitestone Drive-in, again
with my father's car. We pooled our cash and gave the guy like $50. I
also got my father's car stuck in the mud at Ferry Point Park (under
development) and had to get towed out. Thereafter I had my own car :-S
==> c. 1983 I drove a Buick Electra into the backseat of a Toyota whose
operator assumed she had a protected left turn. Arguably I had last
clear chance to avoid it. This was Bartow Avenue, heading eastbound
under I-95 in the Bronx. A little baling wire and my grille was back
like new.
==> c. 1983 I spun the Electra on the highway from Boston to New York
in a blizzard, and bounced off a handy snow bank
==> I've spun the Firebird twice I think, around 1985, once
single-vehicle, once on I-84 or so when just as I was passing a truck
the guy drafting the truck, who was operating on a learner's permit,
decided it would be a good time to pass it.
==> c. 1985 I was getting on I-95 NB at Connors St, in the Bronx, and
somebody getting off went through his stop sign and
clipped my left quarter, again the Firebird
==> December 23, 1985 on Northern Boulevard in Nassau County in the
Firebird, my version: the car in front of me rear-ended the car in
front of it which had stopped to make a left turn; her version: the car
in front of me stopped suddenly and would have avoided hitting the car
in front of it but that I came along and hit it
==> 1987, Lexington St, Waltham, at Trapelo Road, once again the
Firebird, I collided with with a car that was being driven from the
strip mall across Lexington St to the liquor store
==> 1998, I-84, Boston to New York, I was in the #3 (left) lane, a car
in the #3 lane was stopped, the car behind that car swerved into the #2
(middle) lane, I slowed down, a car that had been in the #2 lane
swerved into the #3 lane to avoid that car and rear-ended me (Firebird)
==> c. 1989 I backed into the grille of my wife's Escort while parking.

I can't recall any other reportable accidents (not counting the
time the UPS truck clipped my pickup which was parked, or the time
someone backed a pickup into the Firebird at the Thunderbird Motel in
Yarmouth) until 1998, but I'm probably forgetting something. That
means the other pickup, the DeVille, the CJ-5, the Delta 88 were all
unscathed. That doesn't seem right.

==> c. 1998, on Mall Road, Burlington, the operator of the car behind
me honked, so I slowed down to avoid whatever hazard she saw that I
hadn't, and she rear-ended me. I was in my wife's car, but we didn't
bother reporting the accident.
==>1999, Arlington, Mystic St was detoured onto Old Mystic St for
paving. Coming southbound I stopped at the stop sign for re-entering
new Mystic St, the operator behind me expected that I wouldn't stop,
and rear-ended me. I got a whiplash out of that one, but I don't think
a seatbelt would have helped, it was about getting slammed while I was
looking over my left shoulder for merging traffic.
==> February 2002, I was a passenger in the Escort, my wife clipped
another vehicle's quarter panel pulling into a parking space. She
avoided a surcharge because the damage was just under $500.
==> October 2003. I was on the Leverett downramp to Storrow in the left
lane, about to enter the little tunnel after inching forward for about
10 minutes, a much more important person came down the right lane, and
instead of using the surface connection, crossed the right branch of
the left lane, and attempted to drive through my front right fender. I
was going to let it go, but she telephoned the cops who pulled me over
10 minutes and a 1/4 mile later, so we exchanged papers, and I
collected a settlement.
==> November 8, 2004, a wheel chock fell off the back of a truck on
Washington St, Woburn (at the Winchester line.) The SUV in front of me
drove over it, my Fiero has a lot less ground clearance and I hit it.

I'd say that counts as "loads".

I'd love to use public transportation, but there isn't any (at all
usually, reliably the other times) between where I live and where I
work.

--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
Steve
2005-05-20 04:52:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
I'd say that counts as "loads".
Bad luck + early driver error, seems like. Plus snow. I've had a
couple of gentle snowbank encounters, but never tapped anyone's property
while driving. I have ridden into the occasional curb though.
--
Steve Alpert
MIT - Civil Engineering '05, MST '07 (Transportation)
David Chesler
2005-05-20 06:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Five more:
==> 1981, driving a van as a mesenger, I attempted to squeeze by a
truck and misjudged. Paint transfer, but not enough to report
==> 1982, lost a side view mirror off a shuttle bus to the back of a
parked truck, kept driving, filed a slip
==> As a passenger, Princeton NJ, c. 1983. We got hit in the back by a
cab hard enough that we got out to see if there was any damage
==> Twice in one day in Manhattan, in the pickup truck, c. 1991, people
drove into me. The first is a complete blur, the second time, getting
onto what served as the West Side Highway then, they guy was surprised
that I got out to check. I think I only remember because it was twice
in one day. Boston or New York there is a lot to be said for a vehicle
so big it doesn't hurt and so old it doesn't matter
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
John F. Carr
2005-05-20 12:38:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Post by RoadRunner
If the above statement is true (that you have been in loads of
accidents) I am surprised you can can anyone to insure you.
I'm Step 9.
They happen less frequently than they used to, but they happen.
Didn't you also have a collision in one of the Alewife rotaries?

I've been thinking I want a big old American car with the guts
replaced by modern equipment but retaining the toughness and
lack of gadets.
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
RoadRunner
2005-05-20 14:05:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
I'd say that counts as "loads".
Okay. I'll concur.
Post by David Chesler
==> 1987, Lexington St, Waltham, at Trapelo Road, once again the
Firebird, I collided with with a car that was being driven from the
strip mall across Lexington St to the liquor store
Terrible traffic here. Going straight across the street should be
illegal. (Turning left from the strip mall ought to be illegal for
that matter. The Waltham City Council was recently asked to install a
traffic signal out of there for left-turning traffic and the best
alternative was determined to be near the north end of the mall at the
McDonald's. BUT, that is actually in Lexington, so there will be no
light.) Of course, getting a Waltham Police Officer to actually write
a ticket would be too much to ask.
Post by David Chesler
I'd love to use public transportation, but there isn't any (at all
usually, reliably the other times) between where I live and where I
work.
Don't you live and work in Massachusetts? There isn't reliable public
transportation in Massachusetts?
David Chesler
2005-05-20 14:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Turning left from the strip mall...
Some accidents aren't your fault, some that aren't your fault might
still be avoidable. I've avoided accidents (and others have avoided
accidents that I almost caused.) It's possible that now if I were
there I might have seen that car sooner and avoided the accident. I'm
trying to focus on a bigger picture. Operating a bus (which must be
navigated or piloted, not merely pointed) helped my training, I think.
Post by David Chesler
I'd love to use public transportation, but there isn't any (at all
usually, reliably the other times) between where I live and where I
work.
Don't you live and work in Massachusetts? There isn't reliable public
transportation in Massachusetts?
I suppose if being able to get off the bus somewhere in the same state
as where I want to go is good enough, then I could take the bus to
work. But the state is pretty big.

I'm reasonably close to the 354 Express bus, which would be good if I
wanted to go to Haymarket or Park Street. It used to work for Crosby
Drive (by Mitre, Bedford/Burlington) but it doesn't go there any more
and I don't work there any more. I used it for a bit when I worked in
East Cambridge, but I got tired of walking to Kendall, waiting,
transferring to the Green Line, waiting some more, and coming out of
Haymarket just in time to see the bus pull away. Now I work in South
Billerica.

The Lechmere B&M stop is close to my house, but the train doesn't stop
there any more. It doesn't even stop at Mishawum any more. Walking to
Anderson isn't attractive, and if I'm going to drive there I might as
well drive where I'm going. (Bicycling to Anderson could be more
practical than bicycling to where I'm going.) Where I work now is
about 4 miles from the North Billerica station, so it's not practical
that way either. (If the Narrow Gauge branch hadn't been torn up 40
years ago it would give me door-to-door, 2-seat service.)

And John, I don't _think_ I've ever been in an accident in a rotary,
Alewife or not. Not that I find them pleasant, and I was once the
sponsor for a road test that finished up at the Cambridge Concord
Rotary. The student driver then pulled over at the armory, a little
shaken, and the inspector said "Please drive off the curb" -- but
having survived the rotary, he got his license anyway.
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
John F. Carr
2005-05-20 11:14:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by RoadRunner
Post by David Chesler
I've been in loads of accidents without seatbelts without injury.
There are plenty of accidents with seatbelts with injury or even
death.
If the above statement is true (that you have been in loads of
accidents) I am surprised you can can anyone to insure you.
As long as you have a license, pay your bills, and don't commit
insurance fraud you can get car insurance. As a last resort
you end up in the "assigned risk pool" by which the state compels
insurers to cover high-risk drivers.
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
John F. Carr
2005-05-19 20:25:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Criminal negligence in auto accidents is limited to impairment or
recklessness, for a fairly narrow definition of recklessness.
In Massachusetts ordinary negligence is criminalized.
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
David Chesler
2005-05-19 21:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by John F. Carr
In Massachusetts ordinary negligence is criminalized.
What's it called if a driver misjudges his speed and the conditions
and collides with something and is determined to be at fault and
responsible for the damages? Is such a driver, if sober, ever
prosecuted here?

American Motorcyclist discussed in the latest issue some more
egregious car vs. motorcycle accidents, resulting in death or permanent
injury, which were not prosecuted, such as an unlicensed driver
crossing the center line.
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
John F. Carr
2005-05-20 11:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Post by John F. Carr
In Massachusetts ordinary negligence is criminalized.
What's it called if a driver misjudges his speed and the conditions
and collides with something and is determined to be at fault and
responsible for the damages? Is such a driver, if sober, ever
prosecuted here?
There are about 400 fatal accidents and 200 motor vehicle homicide
charges per year in Massachusetts. If the driver survives it is
more likely than not that a homicide charge will follow. See:
<http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/districtcourt/allstats2004.html>
<http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/districtcourt/crimstats2004_page2.html>
I'm suspicious of the 2004 figure due to the anomalous count from
Lowell but the ten year average is over 150. That count is of
misdemeanors because felonies -- where the driver is both legally
drunk and driving dangerously -- are tried in Superiour Court.

In one case a guy was driving a truck with a door or gate open
on the right side. The open door hit a jogger, killing her.
The driver was convicted of motor vehicle homicide.

In another state, we have this case where a driver was convicted
of misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter for "inattentive driving":
http://www.kvpress.com/news/articles05/0519marek.htm
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
David Chesler
2005-05-20 15:22:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by John F. Carr
There are about 400 fatal accidents and 200 motor vehicle homicide
charges per year in Massachusetts. If the driver survives it is
<http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/districtcourt/allst...>

Motor Vehicle Homicide seems to be C. 90 § 24G. ¶ (a) is drunk etc.
AND reckless, ¶ (b) is drunk etc. OR reckless. (Both also require
driving and a death occurs.)

The URL you list doesn't give enough details, but I'm not convinced
that an accident due to simple negligence (short of gross, or reckless,
or drunk) is criminal, even if injury or death results.

40% of all their cases are motor vehicle, not homicide nor serious.
Although listed under criminal, those are civil cases in Massachusetts.

The KVpress article is pretty much on point: although death resulted,
the worst the driver did was inattention or slow reaction. (In the
best light, he crested a hill at below the speed limit to find a car
stopped in the travel lane.)

Some American Motorcyclist Association pointers, including their
"Justice For All" campaign, which they say has led to legislation in
Massachusetts. Their premise is that motorists are getting away with
killing motorcyclists:
http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2004/mddeath.asp
http://www.ama-cycle.org/news/2004/three_killed.asp
http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2004/IowaJustice.asp
http://www.amadirectlink.com/justice/injustice.asp
http://www.amadirectlink.com/justice/
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
John F. Carr
2005-05-20 17:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Some American Motorcyclist Association pointers, including their
"Justice For All" campaign, which they say has led to legislation in
Massachusetts. Their premise is that motorists are getting away with
http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2004/mddeath.asp
The prosecutor wanted to charge motor vehicle homicide
but was out-lawyered.
Post by David Chesler
http://www.ama-cycle.org/news/2004/three_killed.asp
http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2004/IowaJustice.asp
The driver was charged with homicide but acquitted.
Post by David Chesler
http://www.amadirectlink.com/justice/injustice.asp
Top link on the page is a 20 year sentence for a drunk
driver who killed a couple on a motorcycle.
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
John F. Carr
2005-05-20 18:06:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Post by John F. Carr
There are about 400 fatal accidents and 200 motor vehicle homicide
charges per year in Massachusetts. If the driver survives it is
<http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/districtcourt/allst...>
Motor Vehicle Homicide seems to be C. 90 =A7 24G. =B6 (a) is drunk etc.
AND reckless, =B6 (b) is drunk etc. OR reckless. (Both also require
driving and a death occurs.)
The URL you list doesn't give enough details, but I'm not convinced
that an accident due to simple negligence (short of gross, or reckless,
or drunk) is criminal, even if injury or death results.
Massachusetts statutes prohibit not only reckless driving,
but also driving "negligently so that the lives or safety
of the public might be endangered." Negligent does not
mean "criminally negligent," just plain negligent. See
_Commonwealth vs. Angelo Todesca Corporation_,
<http://www.socialaw.com/slip.htm?cid=14174&sid=119>.
The court wrote:
In the circumstances of G. L. c. 90, § 24G, negligence
is determined by the same standard that is employed in
tort law. (There are, of course, important differences,
including the heightened burden of proof in criminal
cases and the unavailability of the comparative
negligence statute.)

(Courts have observed that this interpretation makes the word
"reckless" in sections 24 and 24G redundant.)
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
David Chesler
2005-05-21 01:11:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John F. Carr
Massachusetts statutes prohibit not only reckless driving,
but also driving "negligently so that the lives or safety
of the public might be endangered."
Is that C. 90 § 24L ? It seems to prohibit that kind of
operation (reckless or negligent) if also intoxicated.
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
John F. Carr
2005-05-21 18:13:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chesler
Post by John F. Carr
Massachusetts statutes prohibit not only reckless driving,
but also driving "negligently so that the lives or safety
of the public might be endangered."
Is that C. 90 § 24L ? It seems to prohibit that kind of
operation (reckless or negligent) if also intoxicated.
Section 24(2)(a), buried below the long subsection on drunk driving.
--
John Carr (***@mit.edu)
Joe Fineman
2005-05-20 13:18:02 UTC
Permalink
The back of the truck is absolutely the best place to be during nice
weather, and also with a bunch of friends on New Year's morning who
are trying to shake the cobwebs from staying up at a party until
midnight and then sleeping on the floor.
Also an excellent venue for group singing, tho I dare say
opportunities for that are few these days.
--
--- Joe Fineman ***@verizon.net

||: Men are luckier than women: they marry later & die sooner. :||
Gabby
2005-05-18 15:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
OK, I know... Google first, ask if you can't find...
http://www.ncsl.org/print/transportation/1202safesmapd.pdf has a state-by
state summary of the laws on this, and Massachusetts General Laws
"No person shall operate a motor vehicle, commonly known as a pick-up
truck, nor shall the owner permit it to be operated, for a distance more
than five-miles, in excess of five-miles per hour, with persons under
twelve years of age in the body of such truck, unless such truck is part
of an official parade, or has affixed to it a legal ""Owner Repair'' or
""Farm'' license plate or a pick-up truck engaged in farming activities. "
Any other comments or insights? What is the best way to argue with an
overzealous cop on an issue like this?
It's all interpretation. The way I read it, it's legal to operate the
pick-up truck at normal speed for as far as you want as long as those in the
back of the truck are over the age of 12.

Gabby
US 71
2005-05-18 17:13:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.
I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?
What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would
I find it?
In Arkansas, it's totally illegal.... but often ignored.
william lynch
2005-05-18 18:34:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by US 71
Post by Sal's Dad
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.
I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?
What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would
I find it?
In Arkansas, it's totally illegal.... but often ignored.
In California it is highly illegal and *heavily* enforced.
There was a bit in the paper a while back where a farmer had
a flatbed filled with migrant workers driving on US-101. CHP
pulled it over, arrested the farmer, towed the truck (minimum
30 days in impound) and borrowed a schoolbus to give the
workers a ride back to their homes. The crop was ruined, and
the ongoing conniption fit by both the farmer and his lawyer
has resulted in more jail time for both, and some nicely
impressive fines (getting close to six figures).
Dick Boyd
2005-05-18 21:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sal's Dad
I need to transport a number of young adults a short distance, in a snooty
suburb of Boston. The simplest solution would be to pile a bunch in the
back of a pick-up truck.
I understand the issues of safety, and public policy. But what about the
law? Is there anything illegal about riding in the back of an open truck
in Massachusetts?
What about other states? If there is an applicable statute, where would I
find it?
Thanks -
Sal's Dad
Have you considered renting a 12 or 15 passenger van? Or contacting
VPSI to see if they have a van pool operating in your area? Any Church
groups or travelling soccer teams? Public Citizen and NHTSA are more
persnickety about 15 passenger vans for some reason. Even though 15
passenger vans have a better safety record (0.25% of the vehicles, less
than 0.18% of the fatalities, when adjusted for number of passengers,
this is about 0.04% of the fatalaties).

If you do use a 15 passenger van, check tire pressure and ignore the
hang tag advice about trying to drive back on to a road from the
shoulder.
David Chesler
2005-05-19 15:22:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dick Boyd
Have you considered renting a 12 or 15 passenger van?
I've had 9 people in a big sedan. (Heck, I've had 6 or 7 in a
Firebird cabriolet, which might have been 5-passenger legally, but was
essentially a 2+2.) You can get lots more in a station wagon, with the
same seatbelt issues, worse air, but less likelihood of getting
stopped.
Or you could make two trips.

But if you've got the truck, and no sedan and no wagon, and it's a
nice day, it sounds like a great way for them to experience the wind in
their hair etc.
--
- David Chesler <***@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
r***@yahoo.com
2005-05-25 20:16:39 UTC
Permalink
I've dispatched a New Jersey police department for 30 years. Over
those decades our cops have stopped and warned a number of drivers
about doing something like that and a few times have issued tickets.

However this reminds me of a story last summer told by my North
Carolina cousin. He was travelling I-81 from Bristol VA to the
Scranton PA area. Along the trip he kept coming in contact with a
pick up truck carrying what he first thought was a huge statue, but at
a rest area he found it was an older woman who stood up at almost 7
feet and had to weigh over 800 pounds. The family said they were
moving her to another family member's home in Pennsylvania.

Rich Dean
Butler NJ

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...