The driver suffered minor injuries but was able to exit the vehicle on his own. Luckily, no one else was hurt, considering the area is popular with swimmers and kayakers
Would this be a criminal offense? As much as it’s annoying that his car is so massive, he drove a street legal vehicle in the wrong place. Paying for the damages seems like a sufficient consequence.
Not a lawyer, but I would assume that reckless driving would apply here. If nothing else, he should be liable for the damages financially due to negligence
It was overweight for the bridge, not the road. It was from a commercial trucking company, so likely a dump truck. The first clue should be that it was a F-750. There are pickup beds for them, but they’re almost always a flatbed or dump bed.
Street-legal, bridge-legal, who gives a shit. The point is, they drove it illegally and should be able to be punished accordingly. The make and model are irrelevant.
I don’t care either way, I was responding to a different person who said they couldn’t be punished because it was street-legal but in “the wrong place.” I was simply pointing out that street-legal-but-in-the-wrong-place is the same as not-street-legal.
If the bridge had been just a bit sturdier, it could have been damaged jut to the point where the truck could have passed, but the next person driving over would have fell in and risked their lives.
The driver suffered minor injuries but was able to exit the vehicle on his own. Luckily, no one else was hurt, considering the area is popular with swimmers and kayakers
The driver deserves criminal punishment in addition to the punishment of ignoring physics.
Would this be a criminal offense? As much as it’s annoying that his car is so massive, he drove a street legal vehicle in the wrong place. Paying for the damages seems like a sufficient consequence.
Not a lawyer, but I would assume that reckless driving would apply here. If nothing else, he should be liable for the damages financially due to negligence
If it’s overweight, it’s not street legal.
Street legal*
*not legal on all streets
It was overweight for the bridge, not the road. It was from a commercial trucking company, so likely a dump truck. The first clue should be that it was a F-750. There are pickup beds for them, but they’re almost always a flatbed or dump bed.
Street-legal, bridge-legal, who gives a shit. The point is, they drove it illegally and should be able to be punished accordingly. The make and model are irrelevant.
Do you think they wont be if not for this internet rage?
I don’t care either way, I was responding to a different person who said they couldn’t be punished because it was street-legal but in “the wrong place.” I was simply pointing out that street-legal-but-in-the-wrong-place is the same as not-street-legal.
Why do you have such a hard on for punishment? Isn’t restitution enough?
He failed to observe a traffic control device. There’s at least a ticket in there somewhere for him.
If the bridge had been just a bit sturdier, it could have been damaged jut to the point where the truck could have passed, but the next person driving over would have fell in and risked their lives.
Perhaps the cost of the damage would add up to something they could try to make felonious
but getting into a car accident while kayaking is an interesting bragging right lol
That is in no way related to the question asked. Are you a career politician by chance?
Sorry, I was quoting the article in attempted response to another commenter saying the driver was dead :0
Nice save.