Illinois to let truckiers drive 65 on interstates starting Jan 1
in [Drive]
|
From: Brent on 2 Jan 2010 16:56 On 2010-01-02, Rocky <wookiee(a)att.net> wrote: > "shortly after the first of the year?" That is bull because the speed limit > for trucks in Illinois changed at midnight not "shortly after the first of > the year" and all anybody had to do to verify that for themselves was ask a > State Patrol Officer at a truck stop just like I did. The Officer told me > the speed limit was 65 then he asked me if I drive a Truck. I said yes and > then he said they just haven't changed the signs yet. > > http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/96/HB/PDF/09600HB3956lv.pdf Might be a good idea to wait for the signs given the nature of cops and traffic court. Especially in IL where the finer points of the law are ignored in traffic and adminstrative court. Some 'judges' will decide it was speeding because of what the sign read, not what the law is.
From: Rocky on 2 Jan 2010 17:40 "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hhofea$g4f$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On 2010-01-02, Rocky <wookiee(a)att.net> wrote: > > > "shortly after the first of the year?" That is bull because the speed limit > > for trucks in Illinois changed at midnight not "shortly after the first of > > the year" and all anybody had to do to verify that for themselves was ask a > > State Patrol Officer at a truck stop just like I did. The Officer told me > > the speed limit was 65 then he asked me if I drive a Truck. I said yes and > > then he said they just haven't changed the signs yet. > > > > http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/96/HB/PDF/09600HB3956lv.pdf > > Might be a good idea to wait for the signs given the nature of cops and > traffic court. Especially in IL where the finer points of the law are > ignored in traffic and adminstrative court. Some 'judges' will decide it > was speeding because of what the sign read, not what the law is. Given the total lack of speed traps on I80 in Illinois yesterday it looked like the cops didn't want to fight the law vs. signage argument in court. The "urban districts" are the only areas I can see where there could be a dispute on what the speed really is so it might be a good idea to wait for the signs in just those areas. Me? I'm hoping they have all the signs changed on the 4th so we don't have to worry about the law vs. signage much longer. Rocky
From: Free Lunch on 2 Jan 2010 18:09 On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 21:56:26 +0000 (UTC), Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote in misc.transport.road: >On 2010-01-02, Rocky <wookiee(a)att.net> wrote: > >> "shortly after the first of the year?" That is bull because the speed limit >> for trucks in Illinois changed at midnight not "shortly after the first of >> the year" and all anybody had to do to verify that for themselves was ask a >> State Patrol Officer at a truck stop just like I did. The Officer told me >> the speed limit was 65 then he asked me if I drive a Truck. I said yes and >> then he said they just haven't changed the signs yet. >> >> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/96/HB/PDF/09600HB3956lv.pdf > >Might be a good idea to wait for the signs given the nature of cops and >traffic court. Especially in IL where the finer points of the law are >ignored in traffic and adminstrative court. Some 'judges' will decide it >was speeding because of what the sign read, not what the law is. > I was once in traffic court in front of a judge who essentially said that everyone runs stops signs, so if you are here on a ticket for failing to stop for a stop sign, he knows you did it. What a waste of time.
From: realitytrucker on 4 Jan 2010 00:05 On Jan 2, 7:03 am, "Rocky" <wook...(a)att.net> wrote: > > That is a bummer because now I have to be stopped to post a message to a > newsgroup and then indicate a stop on my log book. > Why would anyone in their right mind feel a need to do this in the first place?? Are you so desperate for attention that you can't wait until you go home to force your idiotic posts on the members of a newsgroup?
From: Harry K on 4 Jan 2010 10:01
On Jan 3, 9:05 pm, realitytrucker <timp1...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 2, 7:03 am, "Rocky" <wook...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > That is a bummer because now I have to be stopped to post a message to a > > newsgroup and then indicate a stop on my log book. > > Why would anyone in their right mind feel a need to do this in the > first place?? Are you so desperate for attention that you can't wait > until you go home to force your idiotic posts on the members of a > newsgroup? I was wondering the same and am hoping he was either being sarcastic or joking. Harry K |