Played in the snow, got a ticket

[jwduke]

Only in Washington State! I love it out there, but hate the cops!

 

[thezentree]

wankers. cops like that give the rest of them a bad name

the wheelin part of that looks like a lot of fun though.

 

[Desert Rat]

Damn cops enforcing the vehicle code that elected legislators voted for....what's the world coming to?

 

[84_Chevy_K10]

Damn cops enforcing the vehicle code that elected legislators voted for....what's the world coming to?

Actually, his ticket was for not having bumpers. Have you seen his truck? It certainly has bumpers. Talk about a nonsense ticket.

have you seen the "scenery" she'd be seeing from the passenger seat looking towards the drivers seat lately?

I try not to look at that, and I'd hope to God she did the same.

 

[84gmcjimmy]

I'm by no means an expert, but the last pic shows that the road slopes downhill.

Locked axle(s) on a road like that with snow, will send you sideways in a hurry.

BTDT.

Okay, I never thought about lockers and snow when I looked at it. Thanks

 

[Desert Rat]

Actually, his ticket was for not having bumpers. Have you seen his truck? It certainly has bumpers. Talk about a nonsense ticket.

So the cops completely fabricated the ticket? The bumpers were legal and in total compliance?

 

[84_Chevy_K10]

So the cops completely fabricated the ticket? The bumpers were legal and in total compliance?

Yep. News flash...not every cop understands the law. It'll get thrown out in court, I'm sure.

 

[white-rhyno]

Yep. News flash...not every cop understands the law. It'll get thrown out in court, I'm sure.

The cop told me about some story of how he went to a scene and a lifted truck had killed a person in a small car because he didnt have bumpers.... And im sure there has never been a time when a lifted vehicle with the appropriate bumpers never killed anyone. GImme a break. THen he went on to tell me that the guy was charged with vehicualar manslaughter..?? Maby neglagent manslaughter. Whatever, i guess he was doing his job, but its not like i cruise my turd down the freeway either, i was only going to get gas.
Its the fact he said he will impound my truck the next time he sees it. FOR WHAT??
He charged me with Washington State RCW 46.37.513
Which states
"When any motor vehicle was originally equipped with bumpers or any other collision energy absorption or attenuation system, that system shall be maintained in good operational condition, and no person shall remove or disconnect, and no owner shall cause or knowingly permit the removal or disconnection of, any part of that system except temporarily in order to make repairs, replacements, or adjustments."

Well i felt that my old bumpers were not in good operational condition, thats why i have the ones i do. Or maby i was going to put new ones on... shouldhave said that.....

Maby Bubba can help me understand that RCW better.

 

[84_Chevy_K10]

Seems to me your bumpers are in good operational condition.......just not OE.

 

[white-rhyno]

Arnt bumpers an option when you buy a new vehicle? Maby mine never had any, so i took it opon myself to construct some.

 

[thezentree]

Damn cops enforcing the vehicle code that elected legislators voted for....what's the world coming to?

enforcing the law is one thing, but taking it to such an extreme is another. im not gonna get into this cause im really too lazy, but it sounds to me like the cop has some sort of vendetta goin on. and the bumper/no bumper part of this has been covered already.

 

[Desert Rat]

Hmmm, the plot thickens. The cop wrote a ticket for an existing section of the vehicle code and backed it up with some anecdotal story just as a bonus. Hey sports fans, guess what court is for? That is the perfect place to go in and tell a judge your side of the story. I'd be curious to hear the outcome on this one. Cops aren't perfect, but they do have a small modicum of understanding of the vehicle code. In fact, I'd venture a guess that they might even know more than Timmay.........nah, never happen......... Did you have those small shock absorber type goodies on the bumpers that you removed or did you just swap out the actual bumper for something else?

I've seen folks cited for a similar Ca. section when they put on a bumper that doesn't have the shock absorbers or they shorten the length of the bumper to just frame width, or therabouts.

Here is another section that applies:

RCW 46.37.010
Scope and effect of regulations -- General penalty.
(1) It is a traffic infraction for any person to drive or move or for the owner to cause or knowingly permit to be driven or moved on any highway any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person, or which does not contain those parts or is not at all times equipped with such lamps and other equipment in proper condition and adjustment as required in this chapter or in regulations issued by the chief of the Washington state patrol, or which is equipped in any manner in violation of this chapter or the state patrol's regulations, or for any person to do any act forbidden or fail to perform any act required under this chapter or the state patrol's regulations.

(2) Nothing contained in this chapter or the state patrol's regulations shall be construed to prohibit the use of additional parts and accessories on any vehicle not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter or the state patrol's regulations.

So basically, the cops argument is that the bumpers are unsafe. But section 2 in essence says you can put different bumpers on as long as they aren't inconsistent with the provisions of the chapter. As said, that is what court is for. The cops argues they are unsafe, you argue they aren't. Post up a pic of the offending bumper if you could.

Also, I don't think getting a cite for an unsafe bumper would be "extreme". Extreme would be getting beat like a Hitler pinata at a Mossad picnic, having your rig towed, ending up in hospital, then jail, and then losing in court. Getting a ticket is small potatoes in the big scheme of things. Sometimes you play, you pay.

 

[84_Chevy_K10]

Just because I don't think there is a violation of code here doesn't mean that I'm a know-it-all.

I've never seen any shock absorbing devices on 30 year old vehicle bumpers. Can you tell me what you're talking about?

 

[white-rhyno]

SO
this is illegal
http://coloradok5.com/photos/data/500/4313000_0406.JPG

THis is legal?
http://coloradok5.com/photos/data/500/4313000_0278.JPG

 

[beater_k20]

I've never seen any shock absorbing devices on 30 year old vehicle bumpers. Can you tell me what you're talking about?

up until at leave 1999 GM trucks didnt have any sort of shock absorbing devices, unless you count the steel brackets that mount them to the frame. no need for any of that. i'd say go to court, fight it. worst thing that'll happen is you'll lose and have to pay the ticket anyways.

 

[Desert Rat]

No clue when they started with the shock absorbers. That is why I asked. Besides, one of them was a Toyota. Didn't they put those absorbers on some of the Toyota trucks at some point?

 

[Desert Rat]

SO
this is illegal
http://coloradok5.com/photos/data/500/4313000_0406.JPG

THis is legal?
http://coloradok5.com/photos/data/500/4313000_0278.JPG

Can't tell from the first pic, too dark. Second one I would say wouldn't fly, but it depends on the state. Sometimes a state's section is like the Washington section where it doesn't get real specific, just that it has to be safe. That leaves some margin for judement which is where you argue your case vs. the officer arguing that it is unsafe. I've wondered whether or not my 4x4Iron front bumper would pass muster. The thing is major heavy duty, but it doesn't have the struts that go from the outside of the back of the bumper to the frame. I've wondered if the argument could be made that it isn't as safe as a stock one. I'm thinking if I hit something head on, I'd be good to go. But, if I hit something at an angle on the far outside of the bumper, who knows?

 

[Poohbair]

Can't tell from the first pic, too dark. Second one I would say wouldn't fly, but it depends on the state. Sometimes a state's section is like the Washington section where it doesn't get real specific, just that it has to be safe. That leaves some margin for judement which is where you argue your case vs. the officer arguing that it is unsafe. I've wondered whether or not my 4x4Iron front bumper would pass muster. The thing is major heavy duty, but it doesn't have the struts that go from the outside of the back of the bumper to the frame. I've wondered if the argument could be made that it isn't as safe as a stock one. I'm thinking if I hit something head on, I'd be good to go. But, if I hit something at an angle on the far outside of the bumper, who knows?

It was always my understanding that a bumper had to me made of metal and go from frame rail to frame rail.

How do hot-rods get away w/ out having bumpers? Or fenders for that matter? Alot of 2wd trucks use a rollpan in the rear... that is not a bumper...? The law on what is legal and illegal seems WAY to vague for me, and is enforced for some people and not for others... i don't get it.

 

[Bubba Ray Boudreaux]

In fact, I'd venture a guess that they might even know more than Timmay.........nah, never happen......... Did you have those small shock absorber type goodies on the bumpers that you removed or did you just swap out the actual bumper for something else?

You know you're pissing in the wind with that since the great fountain of knowledge that is Timmay has stated the written in stone fact that cops don't need to know the law.................................

 

[84_Chevy_K10]

since the great masterbater of all Timmay has stated the written in stone fact that cops don't need to know the law.................................

False. I have stated numerous times that officers DON'T know the law as well as they think in most cases (here's a prime example). That doesn't mean that they don't have a responsibility to know and understand the law so that they can enforce it.