From: Jon Shoop (shoop19@brick.net)
Date: Sun Sep 08 2002 - 04:38:10 PDT
Some people are so nieve.....
jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Polidoro" <willys@vgernet.net>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: [MV] Who's Vehicle is it? (was: Big Brother IS watching for
sure!)
> The answer is pretty simple. Rights are not absloute. We each give up
> rights in exchange for (hopefully) the common good. For example, we give
up
> the right to drive on the left side of the road in exchange for the peace
of
> mind of proceeding without worry in the right lane. We give up the right
to
> go through red lights so we can go through green lights without stopping.
> It's pretty clear that this exchange of rights benefits us all and that it
> breaks down severely when someone insists on absolute rights.
>
> Even less obvious things like seatbelt laws follow the same logic. Think
> you have right to ride around unbelted because it's your life? Think
again.
> Your rights end at my front bumper. If you hit a bump and can't remain
> seated and lose control of your vehicle if could guarantee you will kill
> only yourself you may have a point but if you losing control makes you hit
> me, well that's a violation of my right to proceed umimpeded.
>
> As far as titling a rebuilt M151, fact is M151s were never DOT'ed, meaning
> that unlike MBs and GPWs which predate the requirement and HMMWVs which
were
> DOT'ed as Hummers, they were never evaluated by the DOT for
roadworthiness.
> It is against Federal law to drive a non-DOT compliant vehicle on public
> roads. Same for non-DOT tires like agricultural tires. They have no DOT
> stamps so they are not for on-road use.
>
> No matter how you got your M151, beg, borrow, steal, or weld, unless you
> have it certified by the DOT for crashworthiness-- front impact, rollover,
> side impact, short term emissions, long term emissions and a host of other
> tests it's not legal to drive on-road. The fact that folks have been able
> to register them is a stroke of luck. But if you get in the wrong guy's
> face-- one who knows this-- you may end up with an M151 shaped planter on
> your front lawn.
>
> JP
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jonathon" <jemery@execpc.com>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 11:48 PM
> Subject: [MV] Who's Vehicle is it? (was: Big Brother IS watching for
sure!)
>
>
> > >I think the Bureaucrats have given some of us a break. If not do you
know
> > >what would become of Gama Goats and 151A2's and a few other vehicles
that
> > >were demilled as in cut in half or rendered unoperational or sold with
> paper
> > >stating for off road use only.
> > >Just because its repaired and registered for the highway by an agency
not
> in
> > >the loop doesn't make it legal.
> >
> > I post this to the list in general, I am not being critical at all of
your
> > post Dave, the topic just got me thinking about this subject on a more
> > general level.
> >
> >
> > Since when does a seller of anything have any right, legally, to control
> the
> > use of something they sell to someone else?
> >
> > I have a thought experiment here, perhaps if you believe that property
> > rights are absolute you'd agree with me, perhaps others have differing
or
> > divergent viewpoints.
> >
> > The M151 is a good example as I want one but after collecting this stuff
> for
> > almost 20 years I do not yet have one. Concider that I buy several
> scrapped
> > vehicles which were sold (auctioned) as scrap or residue. Now I spend
much
> > time and effort and perhaps money and I put one good vehicle back
> together.
> > Is it then an M151? If I go to the state to title and license it, is it
an
> > M151 to them? I would have to say no on both question, it is a
> > reconstructed vehicle and perhaps depending on how much work I had to go
> > thru it might even be concidered home built. But to a fellow MV
collector,
> > is it an M151? I'd say yes. I listen to people talk about titling
> problems
> > and I have to wonder what the big deal is with titles. Personally I
think
> > they are useless and should be abandonded all together. But that won't
be
> > happening soon. But what is the big deal about a title being correct
for
> > the vehicle as built? So what if it says a 1996 home built truck (my
> > rewelded M151) or a 1963 Ford M151? So long as the serial number is
> correct
> > who cares? And as to serial numbers, I have talked to people where the
> state
> > refused to use the original number that was on the vehicle and they
issued
> a
> > new VIN of the states choosing along with a small state issued tag and
> > little rivets with a "W" on the head (W for Wisconsin) to attach it
with.
> > Seems to me if I had a choice between fighting them over a title that
> > matched the vehicle as built and having a new VIN with a small id plate
I
> > had to attach somewhere, I guess I'd just as soon go with a new small
> plate
> > and new VIN for the title. What difference is that going to make to any
> > person I would sell it to in the future?
> >
> > Going back to reconstructing an M151, lets take that a step further.
What
> if
> > I was so inclinded to make a body from scratch that was indistiguishable
> > from an original Ford or AMG. Is that then an M151? Having seen the work
> of
> > people such as John Geesink I would say that the right person can do
this.
> > As to this idea of the seller (government) controlling the use of what
> they
> > sell, at what point is the item you posess the same or not at all the
same
> > as the original item? Is the M151 that I got cut and then rewelded an
> M151?
> > What if I put a body together from many cut, crushed, or wrecked bodies,
> > should they be able to lay some claim on that? What then if I make a
body
> > from scratch??? Where is that line, if any?
> >
> > Seem to me this stuff is sold (auctioned) by the government either as a
> > whole operable vehicle, implying a 97 would come with it, or as scrap
> metal.
> > What I do with either is my business.
> >
> > So go another step. M60's, M1's etc. are not supposed to be in private
> hands
> > at all right? So what if I reconstruct one from scraped units? what if I
> > make one from scratch? Can the government then come in and confiscate
it?
> Is
> > either really a tank (of thiers)? Again..... how and where do you make
the
> > distinction?
> >
> >
> > Sorry to ramble on so much, this topic is of some interest to me and it
> has
> > come up before, just looking for any interesting opinions I guess.
> >
> > later,
> >
> > je
> >
> >
> >
> > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
<mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:21:19 PDT