Must Have Been A Beer or 12 Involved

Naio wrote:
... We were young and dumb :).

Although some of us are older, we are not a lot more smarter. Fortunately :R we have more rules and laws to keep is safe.

Sometimes I wonder if there should be a law against hitting our fingers with a hammer. :h

Wagonqueen Truckster wrote:

No body is speaking of actually doing this ( in this day and age of nanny save me from myself)... Just speaking of the idea of doing this back in the day without the " realization of consequences".

Yes, that's it exactly. We were young and dumb :).

twodownzero wrote:

Those of you who advocate completely ignoring door stickers and deliberately overloading trucks far beyond what the people who designed the trucks intended them to carry are reckless, not "free thinkers" who refuse to surrender your liberty to "attorneys literature." Those who support this kind of recklessness are just creating ammo for the future nanny-staters who will, one day, successfully lobby government for severe restrictions on RVs and their drivers--of all kinds--who have for decades lived in a gray area of the law because the use is non-commercial. Openly discussing this sort of dangerous activity and admitting that you're doing it deliberately under the guise of some kind of "personal responsibility" calculus just makes it worse.

I did get that the original posts were kidding about some things and laughing at their own juvenile folly in others. I, too, grew up in a time where cars did not have seatbelts or child seats, and you could jam 5 kids into the back of a vw bug :).

But I also agree that the idea that this is 'personal responsibility' is, as my sainted mother would say, 'a crock of $%#@'

People who take risks with their own lives, and the lives of their kids and the strangers driving down the highway behind them usually drop all talk of 'personal responsibility' once they get hurt. Then they suddenly expect their insurance and social security to pay for their lifelong medical care, even though the expense is far more than they ever paid into the pool. Suddenly WE are all paying for THEM.

Now, I am a liberal hippy treehugger bleeding heart socialist, and I believe in spreading out risk and expense, providing for the common defense, and supporting the general welfare. But I also believe that REAL 'personal responsibility' means making an effort not to be burden on society unnecessarily.

/rant

twodownzero wrote:
3/4 ton trucks from that era often had semi floating rear axles, just like 1/2 tons. They had bigger axle shafts, tubes, and wheel bearings, but they were nothing but glorified 1/2 tons.

Those of you who advocate completely ignoring door stickers and deliberately overloading trucks far beyond what the people who designed the trucks intended them to carry are reckless, not "free thinkers" who refuse to surrender your liberty to "attorneys literature." Those who support this kind of recklessness are just creating ammo for the future nanny-staters who will, one day, successfully lobby government for severe restrictions on RVs and their drivers--of all kinds--who have for decades lived in a gray area of the law because the use is non-commercial. Openly discussing this sort of dangerous activity and admitting that you're doing it deliberately under the guise of some kind of "personal responsibility" calculus just makes it worse.

My only hope is that the manufacturers continue to build stronger trucks that are rated for more weight. Then, perhaps, the vehicles we use to carry and tow our RVs will have sufficient capacity that people will not be tempted to think this way.

The engineering factors in these vehicles are there for a reason. It isn't an attorney who decides how big the engineering factor must be--it's a professional engineer.

No body is speaking of actually doing this ( in this day and age of nanny save me from myself)... Just speaking of the idea of doing this back in the day without the " realization of consequences". OR the realization that in most situations, no one was really in the Arm of harm anyways. But hey let us bask in the rays of " we are much better off now, the back then" mentality.

Reddog1 wrote:
Actually, we were more creative and less concerned with the sky falling back then. No need to weigh it, cause we were going to haul it anyway. Personally, I totally ignored the door stickers then, as did all of my camping friends. We did not have air bags, not required to have helmets while riding a motorcycle, it was common practice to have passengers in the TC while traveling. We actually even drank the water from the TC tank.

Best quote all day. Hilarious (and true) Wow... To remember back when the idea of helicopter parenting was not even in the vocabulary.

Jaxom wrote:
Obviously needs diesel & a Dually. And a tag axle!!!

LOL

Funny how those states with seat belt laws don't worry about school buses, municipal buses, and tour bus passengers being belted in.......?

Tour1 wrote:
Is it now illegal to carry passengers in the camper part of a truck camper?

If the states you travel through have "seat belt laws" then yes, it would be illegal for passengers to ride in the camper.

Reddog1 wrote:
... it was common practice to have passengers in the TC while traveling.

I'm thinking about buying a truck camper now, still without significant knowledge of RV-ing. I searched for "passengers" and this is the first thread that almost answers my question.
Is it now illegal to carry passengers in the camper part of a truck camper? It will make a difference in my thinking.
Thankfully I don't own a pickup yet so we are spared the extended can-my-truck-do-this discussion. This thread here was a learning experience but I could use a link to a truck camper beginner's thread.

Edit: Found the FAQ and the thread about threads... wow that's a lot of reading to do. And I only looked at this forum again because I was seduced by some not-quite-spam.

I think we can all agree that this truck has a "Floating" axle