• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a Deuce

Aswayze

Member
250
6
18
Location
Martinsburg Wv
The main reason I have my Deuce is to support my crack like addiction to playing milsim airsoft. It happens that we haul enough gear around when doing larger scale events that even a 1 ton pickup truck was not cutting the mustard and given that we always had to go some place off-road towing a trailer was not an option either. The Deuce has been a godsend for getting stuff around and has proven wildly popular with the player base in general since it makes a super convenient in game transport.

The question has come up from within our group several times about whether or not we can take our troop transporting out of "the game" and use it as a legitimate on road carpooling system to get groups of guys down the road to bigger events where parking is often times at a premium. With gas costing what it does, splitting Deuce diesel 16 ways is a hell of a lot cheaper than splitting car gas 2 or 3 ways. Additionally, many of the younger players do not own their own vehicles so attending out of town events is often times a bridge too far.

How does this play out in the eyes of the law? The Deuce does not have seatbelts in the back but neither does a school bus. Does the driver need to have a chauffeurs license? We always travel with our airsoft weapons in cases typically in a trunk of a vehicle. Since the deuce has no trunk, we would probably stash them in the M105 trailer with the rest of the gear that would otherwise be crammed in the bed so there would be no issue there. I know that at some of the Vietnam reenactments I have seen deuces have used in this capacity to haul "troops" often times several hundred miles. Obviously, we often use our Deuces to carry people at parades as well, is this an exception to the rule thing or are we legitimately allowed to do this?
 

gimpyrobb

dumpsterlandingfromorbit!
27,786
755
113
Location
Cincy Ohio
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

I would print off the last 2 paragaphs and take it to your state patrol office. See what they have to say about it. It is worded well enough for anyone to understand.
 

Aswayze

Member
250
6
18
Location
Martinsburg Wv
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

Actually come to think of it, I live just up the road from a Kansas Highway patrol office. I should just dust off the duece and drive down there this afternoon and ask.
 

gimpyrobb

dumpsterlandingfromorbit!
27,786
755
113
Location
Cincy Ohio
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

I understand that "their" reach is only in your state, but it would point you in the right direction.
 

Jones

Well-known member
2,237
83
48
Location
Sacramento, California
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

Plan on hearing about and addressing these issues; Seat belts and ROPS (roll-over protection system).
They'll want to know your passengers are protected in case of accident.
Might also keep you from a lot of future grief should something unforeseen happen. I know it's a hassle and "not original" but you don't want to deal with having someone hurt in or around your rig while at an event. As lawsuit-happy as people are these days, CYOA is the order of the day.
 

HeadWizard

New member
729
2
0
Location
Chantilly, VA
Almost more importantly, print off your post and give it to your insurance agent. Chances are, they will FREAK OUT at your suggestion.

It's better to know now if you are not covered.
 

ida34

Well-known member
4,120
33
48
Location
Dexter, MI
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

Every state is different. The main key point is if the area was designed to transport passengers. I would say it is. It has side boards that fold down to make seats. The rear has a safety strap to make sure people do not fall out. It will haul cargo but was designed to transport troops also. Make sure you bring this point home. It will probably be the key for most states. My kids always want to ride in the back. I had kept saying no until I thought about it. Except for the lack of seat belts the rear offers the same amount of roll over protection that the front does. That is to say none. Lets face it. If we turn these things over we are screwed no matter where you are in the truck. You would not need a chauffeurs license unless your were transporting them to make money. In Michigan there is an exception for parades for carrying people in the back of pickups but again I would argue that the deuce is designed to carry troops in the back. Remember a few years back the subaru trucks came with rear facing seats in the back. It was a pickup but was designed to carry people in the back. Just having people sitting on the bed of a pickup would be a clear violation if the law prohibited it since there are no provisions for passengers. Some states also make an age cut off for putting people in the back of a truck. There is no doubt the deuce is a truck but it is designed to carry troops or people also.
 

CGarbee

Well-known member
2,472
552
113
Location
Raleigh, NC
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

In North Carolina, the cut off for kids in the back of a vehicle is 12 unless certain requirements are met, then it is lower... I have a page on my website with the General Statute on it.

Since the M35 actually has provisions for hauling troops as Chuck states, it doesn't even fall into NC's restrictions for hauling people. My personal rule is that they always have to be seated when the truck is in motion, and that we have at least one adult (usually try for two-one on each side on oposite corners) to keep an eye on everyone.
 

Stagg

Member
109
0
16
Location
Kansas City, KS
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

Not really hauling small kids anyway. For a lower limit, we are talking 18 year olds here and maybe a few 16 and 17s thrown in.
 

Somemedic

Member
531
0
16
Location
Hobart, IN
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

Regardless of the transports overall design, this whole thing is a grey area. While the state u live in probably doesnt require seatbelts in veh that didnt come from the factory w/o seatbelts moving minors around in a glorified pick up is gonna get you nailed. Probably not by johnny law but by a sue happy mom whos youngster hurt himself getting in or out of your truck.

The design of the truck while having the capacity to move men and equip would probably be at a time of war or some other duress (flood, disaster) and time would be more of a factor than safety. The safety of folks who have either been called up or volunteered but are none the less over 18y/o.
2cents
 

otisroy

New member
171
1
0
Location
Melbourne, FL
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

I have to start of by saying that this wasn't in Kansas, but I was in Colorado last fall and we took a commercial tour of some of the derelict mines. We rode in the back of a Pinzgauer without seatbelts and it wasn't an issue.
 

Jones

Well-known member
2,237
83
48
Location
Sacramento, California
RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in a D

The military gets a whole bunch of exceptions and exemptions because of who they are and what they do.
Just because the gumment gets to doesn't carry much water when you're discussing the finer points of vehicle code interpretation with an annoyed LEO along side the shoulder of some road.
 

Amxhunter

New member
119
0
0
Location
Mobile, Alabama
Re: RE: Legal issues with transporting "troops" in

Jones said:
The military gets a whole bunch of exceptions and exemptions because of who they are and what they do.
Just because the gumment gets to doesn't carry much water when you're discussing the finer points of vehicle code interpretation with an annoyed LEO along side the shoulder of some road.
But you can Bank on it , that the first person who gets hurt while in the confines of your vehicle will be on the plaintiff end of a lawsuit.

I would check my Insurance coverage. To heck with getting a ticket
 
  • Like
Reactions: rtk

ah1955

Member
223
1
16
Location
Lancaster County Pa.
When I saw this post I thought there was a post from sometime back that is relavent, I did a search and found it. Forgive me I don't know how to post the link to go there but the name of the thread is Sad accident and taking people along in the deuce .if you do a search the topic of that thread is somewhat relavent here.
 

CCATLETT1984

New member
3,507
5
0
Location
Saint Clair Shores, MI

ida34

Well-known member
4,120
33
48
Location
Dexter, MI
I said it in my post father up. Unless you have a ring mount like I do people in the front cab would not fare much better than the people in the back if a deuce rolled over. Even a hard top would offer marginally better protection. Then only extra safety measure in the front that the back does not have is seat belts. I guess I have a different perspective since I have traveled in the back of deuces and five tons a lot in the Army. I am not saying it is not dangerous but driving these machines is more dangerous than our newer daily drivers.
 

tamangel

New member
1,406
19
0
Location
Nor Cal Coast
a few cites from the Kansas VC:
K.S.A. 8-126. Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this act shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them herein:
(c) "Truck" means a motor vehicle which is used for the transportation or delivery of freight and merchandise or more than 10 passengers.
(x) "Passenger vehicle" means every motor vehicle, as herein defined, which is designed primarily to carry 10 or fewer passengers, and which is not used as a truck
http://www.ksrevenue.org/taxincent-ksa8126.htm

What are the requirements in Kansas for a vehicle to be titled as an antique?
Any vehicle, including an antique military vehicle, thirty-five (35) years old or older, propelled by a motor using petroleum fuel, steam or electricity or any combination thereof is considered an antique vehicle.
Antique military vehicle is a vehicle, regardless of the vehicle’s size or weight, which was manufactured for use in any country’s military forces and is maintained to represent its military design, except that an antique military vehicle shall not include a fully tracked vehicle.
http://www.ksrevenue.org/faqs-dmvtandr.htm


3) commercial class C motor vehicles include any single vehicle less than 26,001
pounds gross vehicle weight rating, or any such vehicle towing a vehicle not in
excess of 10,000 pounds, or any vehicle less than 26,001 pounds gross vehicle
weight rating towing a vehicle in excess of 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight
rating, provided the gross combination weight rating of the combination is less
than 26,001 pounds comprising:
(A) Vehicles designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the
driver; or
(B) vehicles used in the transportation of hazardous materials which requires
the vehicle to be placarded;
http://www.ksrevenue.org/pdf/dlhb.pdf

Do you need a CDL?
http://www.ksrevenue.org/pdf/cdlsec...00&rlead=500&sufs=0&order=r&cq=&id=48b8807634

Couldn't locate any info (Its there somewhere) on passenger seating requiremnts.

The problem as I see it as mentioned above is that, when in military ownership, it was 'designed' to carry troops in the rear and was excepted from any individual state requirements. When it passes to civilian hands, it now becomes subject to State requirements and definitions. Although your vehicle was 'designed' per the military to carry rear area passengers, it may not satisfy the civilian 'design' parameters for carrying passengers w/o being enclosed.. Maybe a tarp would satisfy this? I suspect the State HP will have a tough time locating the propers VC sections to quote. They may just say, 'nope, can't do it'.. Make sure they cite the specific VC section. Then you may have to check w/ the main office for your state and get a ruling/statement/etc..

Good luck,

Mike
 

ida34

Well-known member
4,120
33
48
Location
Dexter, MI
The biggest problem with the above post is that it does not take the whole law into account. I am sure it took a lot of time and I applaud your efforts but the problem stems from looking in a CDL manual for information on whether you need a CDL or not. When you are reading a CDL manual you have to realize that they are assuming you are a commercial operator. They are giving you information for when a commercial operator needs to have a CDL and what class. If the vehicle combination is small enough a CDL is not needed even for a commercial operator. The flow chart from the above link does not show the first step in the chart. Are you a commercial operator yes or no because they assume you must be a commercial operator to be checking the CDL manual. One must read the whole law to be able to see the exceptions and such.
 
Top