7/3 split question

Sir,
The source I got was directly from the FMCSA website. I also checked again this morning. I understand you’re quoting something from the FMCSA but bulletins do show up periodically to clarify issues. You are not wrong by what you were showing in writing however the FMCSA clarified Recently with more information that a pre-trip is required. FM CSA did this I’m sure because the CFR is vague. I am nicely saying you were showing information without showing the new bulletins with clarification. It’s kind of like trying to build a toy airplane model with missing instructions. If you contact the FMCSA Directly with their carrier safety rep department they can clarify this to you by showing you exactly what I posted.

 

The Motor Carrier Safety Planner
scroll down to 396.13

The US government put it in writing through 396.13 and will hold the driver accountable to the publication.

 

Which is an opinion piece. One put out by FMCSA sure, but just an opinion piece that has zero legal weight. It's not even a guidance.
What do you think the courts will follow. That opinion piece or the actual regulation?

 

Sir, a publication me directly from the FM CSA which is part of The department of transportation in the United States. It is not a Opinion piece. Courts take their guidance directly from FMCSA concerning commercial safety. If there was a fatality and it was a big deal a lawyer would actually bring in a representative of the FMCSA if requested.

 

There's a disclaimer at the bottom of that page. You might want to read.

 

The disclaimer is on their website and has been on their website. No matter what part of the FM CSA website you will find the disclaimer. Doesn’t change the thing. FM CSA states in writing you must do a pre-trip. It disclaimer at the bottom of every publication is there because the lawyers put it there. That does not mean it is wrong.

 

Like I always say. Just because an leo doesn't a regulation make. Simple fact is the regulation doesn't claim the driver has to do the inspection. Period.
Maybe if there was guidance it would be one thing, but it's not even that much.

Let me guess, you believe the LEO's that claim if there is a light it must work, even though the regulations specifically state otherwise?

 

Nope. You got me wrong. I wouldn’t put me in a category with somebody if you don’t know who I am. I am a person that had experience working with the government publications prior to entering as a driver. bulletins are treated as updates and further explanation. Unless themselves changed, bulletins are used for regulation.

 

Then why do you believe one opinion piece that specifically claims to not trust it and to refer to the regulation over the regulation?

 

You will usually find a disclaimer at government websites. It is standard legal practice these days Whenever regulations are being explained. The government cannot error for the lack of judgment on others