AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (15) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

for those who say recap tires are the way to go....Pic!
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> Machinery TalkMessage format
 
Funacres
Posted 1/6/2012 10:13 (#2146194 - in reply to #2145561)
Subject: Re: for those who say recap tires are the way to go....Pic!


Texas

plowboy - 1/5/2012 21:36

 When you read a code, you can't just go around selectively picking words you don't like and leaving them out.   You also can't go all through the entire set of code books looking for some subpart to some code that says something you want and then try to say it applies to other codes. 

The CA code says "farm labor vehicle."  It does not say anything about a farm truck which is not being used to transport laborers. 

The TX code 647 you copied states it applies to  vehicles used to transport migrant laborers.   That means all of it's subparts (like, for instance, 647.012) also apply to vehicles used to transport migrant laborers.

 

 

This is why back in the olden days they made us diagram sentences in English....back in the olden days we used logic in language, too, not just in math.    Lawyers and judges (well, most of them) still understand logic. 




Plowboy, you are correct on all points.

The CA defination of a "farm labor vehicle" is: "any motor vehicle designed, used, or maintained for the transportation of nine or more farm workers, in addition to the driver".  It does not say anything about a farm "truck", and neither did I.  (No, I did not edit my posts to remove the word "truck".)

The TX code I copied included the subpart that was relevant to our discussion.  Had I not copied both the code and subpart, it would have otherwise not been clear what it was in reference too.  That is why I DID copy both parts and did so in the correct order, and provided you with the correct code numbers so as to be very clear about what I was proving. 

While you have not stated that you meant me when you said "you can't just go around selectively picking words", or that I attempted to look "for some subpart to some code that says something you want and then try to say it applies to other codes", you statement infers that maybe I was doing that. Could you clear up my confusion about the purpose of your post as copied in this reply.  I'm trying real hard to understand what you were attempting to communicate.   

   

Top of the page Bottom of the page


Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)