Colorado Bill SB19-054 RE: (Former) Military Vehicle Motor Vehicle Regulation

[Reworked LMTV]

Would it be appropriate to start a GO FUND ME campaign for Colorado Military Vehicles to get back on the road ? I guess we would need a group dedicated to the cause first.

I just set up a automatic Legislative Bill search for the words "Military Vehicle" in TN. Any new bills with these words will flag me. Consider this in your own state.

[simp5782]

Our military drives these vehicles on the road. They have to meet DOT standards. I have not heard a single legislative explanation for essentially banning vehicles. Anyone legislative justification this in any state?

Not necessarily. Some wheels read "NOT DOT approved military use only" some oshkosh trucks read the following on their data plate. The safety standard is the argument the states have made in some states.

[cwc]

Rob Pickering and Jay Couch should be part of that meeting. They both build Expedition trucks based at times on ex-military vehicles. Also Awesomeness and BuiltMFG in here whom are both building a personal Expedition trucks based on an LMTV.

If I had a business affected by this, I would explore whether the legislation and/or its application amounts to a Bill of Attainder, or more properly, since it is not a criminal matter, a Bill of Pains and Penalties, as described here:

No Bill of Attainder or Ex Post Facto Law shall be passed.pdf
This is good in the first paragraph, still resonates even though it was written in 1833:

In such cases, the legislature assumes judicial magistracy, pronouncing upon the guilt of the party without any of the common forms and guards of trial, and satisfying itself with proofs, when such proofs are within its reach, whether they are conformable to the rules of evidence, or not. In short, in all such cases, the legislature exercises the highest power of sovereignty, and what may be properly deemed an irresponsible despotic discretion, being governed solely by what it deems political necessity or expediency, and too often under the influence of unreasonable fears, or unfounded suspicions.

Of course this is a State matter, not about limits on the federal legislature. However, in the Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual, it says this on page 1-5 in the discussion of the supremacy clause:

State legislative power is further limited by section 8 of article I of the U.S. Constitution, which reserves certain subject areas to regulation by Congress. Such areas include the regulation of interstate commerce, bankruptcy, and immigration. Section 4 of article I limits state control of elections for U.S. senators and representatives by requiring that state legislation be subject to regulations that are passed by Congress. Section 10 of article I imposes express limitations on state sovereignty by prohibiting activities ranging from entering treaties to passing laws that would have the effect of a bill of attainder, an ex post facto law, or a law impairing the obligation of contracts.

[coachgeo]

Not necessarily. Some wheels read "NOT DOT approved military use only" some oshkosh trucks read the following on their data plate. The safety standard is the argument the states have made in some states.

with today's modern technology all it would take is a technology wiz to add such vehicles as you describe into a states database so they get flagged as not "street" title-able without changes that meet FED standards signed off by xyz agency.

[simp5782]

with today's modern technology all it would take is a technology wiz to add such vehicles as you describe into a states database so they get flagged as not "street" title-able without changes that meet FED standards signed off by xyz agency.

Oshkosh makes vehicles for the commercial market and is an approved manufacturer so it would be harder to do it since the truck can be made for municipal, industrial, or personal use and sold to even an individual right out of oshkosh. That would be a good arguement

[Reworked LMTV]

Not necessarily. Some wheels read "NOT DOT approved military use only" some oshkosh trucks read the following on their data plate. The safety standard is the argument the states have made in some states.

I'm looking for a legal angle, not the exception. There are always exceptions. None of my wheels say this.

[Another Ahab]

Subscribed

[41cl8m5]

I understand the profiling thing but all cops think that all motor vehicles on the road need a license plate posted on them so getting pulled over for not having one in my circumstances and thoughts is not profiling just not knowing all the laws on the books. In Colorado just a couple years back the people voted to remove some laws that are considered obsolete. One that I could not believe was still on the books was in the city of Denver if you had a horseless cairrage you must have a Flagger both in front and behind you waving a red flag for your mode of transportation or you will be fined $5.00 a may spend up to 2 days in jail. Could you see enforcing that one, all "horseless cairrages" are cars and trucks.

I could be wrong on this one but I was taught that either the American Highway Act or the Interstate Highway Act (not sure of the name) was for the need of our military to be able to move effectively and efficiently within this nation. It was sold to the people for the same reason but for us to use freely. The Military has the ability to have primary use of the roads for any reason. As long as it is a mission requirement to use the road and no state can restrict the use. Now the Military has had and still has vehicles that are not up to the DOT safety standards. Most of the safety standard upgrades started around the 70s but the big ones where the steel bars in the doors and airbags those were the 80s and 90s of course there were more, Just making a point that the M998 had canvas doors, aluminum body, and no airbags so it can not be considered within safety specifications of the DOT Highway use. There is the problem, on road or off road with registration and titles with the states. I pointed out one subsect of a vehicle to make the point and that is all. I don't want to open up the full can of worms but it is not a simple answer

[Another Ahab]

I could be wrong on this one but I was taught that either the American Highway Act or the Interstate Highway Act (not sure of the name) was for the need of our military to be able to move effectively and efficiently within this nation.

https://www.history.com/topics/us-st...highway-system

[coachgeo]

... no airbags so it can not be considered within safety specifications of the DOT Highway use. ...

Most trucks the size of military FMTV, Deuces and larger are exempt from safety air bags.

not relevant side note.... but you bring up a good point... I might explore using motorcycle airbag vest. I wear similar on my motorcycle anyway....