[Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?

Mon Sep 5 21:16:19 PDT 2011

I'm not an expert on the ITD permit process for moving oversize loads.  
Are you saying that there is no such process, and that Exxon/Mobil is 
breaking the law moving these loads?  I thought they had secured the 
proper permits through the normal process.  Is that not true?

Paul

On 09/05/2011 08:02 PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
> "Nothing is different for them. Walmart, Target, and any other 
> business can happily move their products down the State highway as 
> long as they go through the process of securing the proper permits."--Paul
> Well, that certainly is news to me and millions of others with a 
> commercial drivers license. Please, Paul, enlighten us as to this 
> "process of securing the proper permits" to drive hundreds of loads 
> grossly overweight and oversized across the entire northern half of 
> Idaho. We all stand to make a fortune if we can do this too, not to 
> mention we won't have to stop at all those damn weight stations.
> Donovan Arnold
> On 09/05/2011 07:05 PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
>
> *From:* Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> *To:* Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
> *Cc:* "Gier, Nicholas" <NGIER at uidaho.edu>; Moscow Vision 2020 
> <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, September 5, 2011 8:14 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?
>
> Nothing is different for them. Walmart, Target, and any other business 
> can happily move their products down the State highway as long as they 
> go through the process of securing the proper permits.
>
> I'm of the opinion that Lucifer himself should be allowed to move 
> megaloads down the State highway as long as he secures the proper 
> permits and isn't violating any laws.  I don't know about Loki, 
> though.  He is a trickster god, after all.  You can't really trust 
> him, but you can't really deny him the permits either.  Just keep a 
> close eye on him, I guess.
>
> Paul
>
> On 09/05/2011 07:05 PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
>> I don't think people are protesting the company, just their 
>> destructive behavior as is evidenced by the protesting not occurring 
>> at any of the ExxonMobil gas stations or their other products 
>> elsewhere in the community. The only rules that have changed are the 
>> ones that ExxonMobil made for themselves and nobody else to be able 
>> to ship products at a weight and size deemed unsafe. Honestly, why is 
>> it safe for ExxonMobil to move this size cargo and not Walmart, 
>> Target, and other business passing through? It would save them money 
>> too. What is different for them?
>> Donovan Arnold
>>
>> *From:* Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
>> <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com>
>> *To:* Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> 
>> <mailto:donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
>> *Cc:* "Gier, Nicholas" <NGIER at uidaho.edu> <mailto:NGIER at uidaho.edu>; 
>> Moscow Vision 2020 <Vision2020 at moscow.com> <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 5, 2011 8:39 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?
>>
>>
>> Hey, they're not my favorite company, either.  However, the rules 
>> don't change based on how much we like them.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 09/04/2011 10:38 PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
>>> Yeah, poor Exxon Mobile. They seem to always be getting the short 
>>> end of the deal because nobody likes them. All they have to comfort 
>>> and console them is the 100s of billions they make every year from 
>>> cheating and exploiting people and the environment. We certainly do 
>>> not treat all the other companies that roll large numbers of 
>>> megaloads through our pristine environment the same way do we?
>>> Donovan Arnold
>>>
>>> *From:* Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
>>> <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com>
>>> *To:* "Gier, Nicholas" <NGIER at uidaho.edu> <mailto:NGIER at uidaho.edu>
>>> *Cc:* Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> 
>>> <mailto:donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>; Moscow Vision 2020 
>>> <Vision2020 at moscow.com> <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, September 4, 2011 5:54 PM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?
>>>
>>>
>>> Who is paying and who should have to pay are two different things.  
>>> If Exxon/Mobil is paying as part of a contract they negotiated, or 
>>> if they are paying in order to keep their drivers safe, so much the 
>>> better.  I just don't like this current-object-of-my-ire-pays rule 
>>> that seems to have sprung up here.
>>>
>>> If you walk through a dangerous part of town on the way home and you 
>>> have call 911 a few times to get the cops to break up bad 
>>> situations, I don't see how you should expect to be billed for it.  
>>> If you decide to hire an off-duty cop to walk with you, it doesn't 
>>> change the fact that you shouldn't have to do so.
>>>
>>> In effect, it's akin to fining Exxon/Mobil for having a bad 
>>> reputation amongst local Muscovites.  I don't see that as a positive 
>>> thing.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> On 09/04/2011 01:45 PM, Gier, Nicholas wrote:
>>>> Greetings:
>>>>
>>>> What has been lost in this discussion and rather detrimental to 
>>>> Paul's and Jay's position is that Exxon Mobil paid for police 
>>>> security going up Highway 12 (and is still paying for it as the 
>>>> load sits there being ugly); and, according to our mayor, 
>>>> Exxon-Mobil is willing to pay the Moscow MPD for any extra costs.  
>>>> I don't know why Nancy would tell me something that is not true, so 
>>>> this ends, for me at least, the discussion about who should pay.
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>> Paul states,
>>>>
>>>> "As a property tax payer, I'd rather pay for general police 
>>>> coverage that way than to have to have a credit card handy when I 
>>>> dial 911."
>>>>
>>>> Paul, I think that is an excellent counter argument to a claim that 
>>>> people should be required to personally finance the costs of their 
>>>> legitimate emergencies to the city. But since that claim was never 
>>>> made I am unsure as to why you would make it.
>>>>
>>>> However, I am sure that many for profit businesses would be pleased 
>>>> to hear that you are willing to pay a share of their costs of doing 
>>>> business by transferring their company responsibilities to 
>>>> publicly funded government agencies they don't pay into. I am not 
>>>> so willing and generous as you are, apparently. I believe that 
>>>> general city services should be used for the general public not 
>>>> to pawn off expenses of private for profit companies to local 
>>>> taxpayers.
>>>>
>>>> Donovan Arnold
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >>> > =======================================================
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110905/6db0375e/attachment-0001.html>