2003 RAM 2500 Diesel towing do's and don'ts

You're going to love it.

Turn O/D off if it starts hunting. i.e. downshifting constantly.

Depending on grade, you should be able to use O/D. I tow my boat, which weighs 7000+ lbs., using O/D without any problem. But then, I'm in Texas. Flat.

Wait until it gets colder outside. You can wake the dead (and shitty neighbors. I've done it many times myself.)

Craig C.

I was sitting in the drive though bank line with my windows down, enjoying some fresh breezes and jazz on the radio. One of those boom boxes on wheels pulls right next to me in another line. The guy looks at me and smirks, obviously enjoying his windows down experience also, and not caring that his sub woofer is rattling every ones car around him. I rolled my windows up, cranked up the Cummins and revved it up a bit. Poor old Mr Boom Box had to roll his windows up also. Bummer.

bb

That's great. I like to do the same thing to high maintenance North Dallas women in their BMW, Mercedes or Saab convertibles. Optimal placement is for their front bumper to be lined up with my passenger rear tire at a stop light. Rev it up a little, watch the horrid look, smile big and say to myself "It's gonna be a good day, tater."

Craig C.

i would suggest using the tow/haul button if you have it it will keep it in 3rd until you need 4

When you have the time, consider a fuel pressure gauge. Some '03s had issues with the lift pump on the back of the fuel filter housing going out and supplying 0psi to the expensive pump. The expensive pump soon dies leaving you on the side of the road. Consider upgrading your fuel pump with a Walbro. Loads of info from DTR and you can purchase their Glacier Kit if you are so inclined. I was, and did.

FMB ('03 HO QC 6sp 4wd LB, leaving in the morning with my first wife and an Arctic Fox 24-5N for a week of R&R)

If it is a violation of a zoning law or restriction then the use that is in violation should be pursued by the zoning authority. In MA it is the city govt.

And exactly why would say... a 6' fence be violation of a zoning code, where a 5'11" fence is not? If two adjacent neighbors feel that a 7' fence between their two properties is ok, who is the government to step in and make a case out of it??

Again, zoning should be a means for two individuals to find an equitable solution, not a means for government to step in and persecute the individual.

BTW, don't confuse "property codes" with "building codes." While I find some of the building codes a bit stifling, they are generally written with the cause of public safety and welfare in mind.

If for the zoning district the two properties are located the max hieght is

5 feet for a fence. One could appeal and get a permit for a 6 foot. I some areas like those that are strictly residential a 7 foot is not permitted. I areas zoned commericial or industrial they are.

If one of the owners is in violation of the zoning laws the govt. is the enforcment party.

In MA zoning defines what can be built in certain area's, size, density, and use of the building..

You can't put a auto repair operation in a area zoned for single family homes. A multi family house or apartment building can't be built in a area zoned for industrial use.

I'm not.

While I find some

Yup, and to keep fly by night contractors from building pos structures and screwing those who buy them. In Ma all contractor's have to be licensed. You can't get up some morning and say I'm a builder and stick a sign on your truck.

Why? Why is a 7 foot fence not ok if the properties it seperates have two agreeable owners? What POSSIBLE reason could the govenrment have to regulate something that is inherently the property owners right to decide?

Why? Why is a 7 foot fence not ok if the properties it seperates have two agreeable owners? What POSSIBLE reason could the govenrment have to regulate something that is inherently the property owners right to decide?

You are, see above.

I don't have a problem with zoned use, or building codes. I have a problem with government thta thinks it knows better than the owner of the property when it comes to use and modification that is not a public hazard.

Which is a good thing. However, property codes do nothing but regulate things that are none of the governmentes business, and 50% of the time the codes are ignored by the GOVERNMENT.... such as one local code that stipulates all driveways must be paved.

Again, if the code has nothing to do with the public saftey, then it shouldn't be "enforced", but should be used as a guidleline in CIVIL action between neighbors.

Just for this exercise. A 7 foot fence could degrade adjancent property value.

What about the owner across the street that has to look at it. He bought his property pursuant to the zoning in place.5 foot max.

I disagree. Property utilization and what is placed on the propertry is under a zoning code. Construction of the buildings in a given zoning district are governed by building codes.

I disagree again. If you look at a zoning district and decide to build in a area that is for single family residence with lot's of 1 acre minimum that prevents your next door neighbor from starting a heavy trucking company on his property. Don't you think that your properties value would drop if that happened? A well thought out land use plan requires zoning laws to protect the individual homeowner and the large corporation.

Your idea, imo, would result in expensive, avoidable litigation. The one with the most money would win. With zoning, the situation for civil action does not arise as everybody knows the deal before they purchase the property.

1) How?? 2) If both owners agree to it, how is there any negative issue with the fence height?

He should see an optomotrist for his eye problems. The fence has no effect on his property. He has no right to dictate what happens on property he does not own, unless it threatens his safety.

You say you understand, but you don't. Zoning for uses such as manufacturing, business or residential is not the issue here. The issue is property codes pertaining to private use on private property within the definition of residential use. If my neighbor chooses to park his tractor trailer on his property when he arrives home, he should do so with no complaint from anyone. If he and I agree that a 7' fence should go on our mutually owned property line, then there should be no isssue with anyone else.

You clearly do not understand "my idea", which is the basic tenent of property rights, as established by the U.S. Constitution and case law. You keep referring to zoning of land usage residential vs. business, where I am referring to private homeowners and their use of their private land within the definition of residential use. If you would like, I can send you the document to which I referred previously.

As to the expensive litigation, the Borough's improper prosecution against me cost them roughly $2000 each incident, and they lost all five. My defense cost me almost nothing. IOW, thje public lost $10,000 over a code that should never have been in place according to the state recommendations and case law supporting those recommendations.

Let's say the 2 neighbors decided to put in a row of dumpster's and call it a fence..

If it looks like shit it certainly could.

He has no right to dictate what happens on property he does

If it degrades his property value he sure does.

Wrong. the tractortrailer is used for commercial use, thus should be parked in a area zoned for residential use.

Wrong. What a person does to his property in a residential area can easily impact a neighbor.

You bought your house with the understanding that it was residentially zoned, no commerical, industrial use, just residential. The next door neighbor sell's his house and the guy who buy's it decides to put 100 pigs under your bedroom window. That has a impact on your quality of life and the value of your property, but his neighbor on the other side agreed to it. They didn't ask you. Your okay with that?

What I am talking about is the zoning for land in MA. I think that you will find that although it is established by the U.S. Constitution, a state can establish more restrictive standards. Follows a city can place even more restrictive standards.

I'm glad you won. I think you'll agree that most cases having to do with land use are pretty much based on past practice and precedent.

In MA there are special permits, a appeals board and other remedies usually based on need or hardship. My wife has been on the zoning board of appeals for about ten years so what i9nfo I pick up is pretty much what I get from her and the books of reg's she bring's home.

Try this site.

that should put us on the same page for a bit.

Ooops! Should be, parked in a area zoned for commericial or industrial use.

But, thats not a fence. So your example is moot.

If the fence looks like shit at 5', what then? What I keep seeing is that your examples are predicated on a devaluation based on something OTHER than the height of the fence. Further, the devaluation is based on something that isn't even next to the other guy's property.

Lets say the entire neighborhood agreed that 7' fences were ok. What then? What right would the borough have to step in?

No, he does not. I'll be glad to send you the document to which I refer.

Huh? I think I just said that. Furthermore, as I addressed with Tbone, its the operation of said truck, not the presence of it that might be offensive. Thus, it should be enforced on a complaint about operation, rather than a presence. That would be a crimes code violation, not a property code violation.

Not in this case.

Sadly, no.

Again, that is a residential vs. business use. Thats not where I have an issue. Further, pigs WOULD fall under the public health and safety definitions.

Massechusettes is also the state that regards emininant domain as a means to take private property and hand it to developers for use to make a profit.

What section is pertinant to our discussion and to my points?

Disagree. It is the use, not the presence, of such a vehicle that would be offensive. Uses which disturb the public welfare are addressed under the crimes code. They who do not believe in gun control should see the wisdom of this... it is not the presence of a gun which is harmful, but the use thereof which may be.

So lets get this straight.... the cable guy comes home in the company truck, but nothing is said. The Electric company tech comes home in the compay vehicle, and nothing is said. (Dad did it for years, nobody said a thing). But the second the "company vehicle" is a Kenworth, its a problem?? I could see it if the guy dragged all manner of trailers into a residential district (operation) or if he allowed it to idle for long periods of time (operation) or if he made excessive noise at inappropriate times (operation), but the mere presence is what is against code. Thats bullshit.

Again, the PRESENCE of a Kenworth isn't the problem, its the operation of said vehicle that is the problem. In this scenario, if it were a gun, we'd agree that the mere presence of a gun is not a problem. How that gun is used IS the problem.

No, the defination of a fence in your world can be what the property owner calls it.

A permit is required for a fence from the building inspector. If it was taller than what is permitted , yes.

If it was lettered and used for commerical pupose's it is not allowed to parked overnight in a residential zoned district.

That is too bad.

The pigs would fall under farm use as well.

That is why I'm pretty much out of there. Emininant domain is one of the lessor problems. Hell one of the larger problems left and is running for president.

Sorry the site I posted is way to general, wish I had the wife's stuff with me.Want to see somthing scary, take a look at 40B, low income housing .

A flat out lie. In my world, a fence is a fence, no matter its height. In your world, the government determines its height, or its not allowed to be a fence. You have yet to address the issue... why is a 5' fence allowed, but a

7' fence is not? Next question: Why is a fence agreed upon by the property owners on each side of said fence not agreed upon by the government?

The answers should be based upon logic and reason, not "because the government said so." Last I checked, that sort of logic works on 5 year olds, but not so much on adult citizens of a free country.

You clearly are not getting this. There is no reason to regulate or enforce property codes in most instances. In Pa, fences are property code, not building code. Furthermore, regulating such things as fence height, unless the height is truly out of reason, is an invasion of individual property rights. Again, I can show you documentation proving this.

Why not? What threat to the public welfare is a parked truck? Don't recite laws... give reason and fact.

Yup. Hate the house, and the location. Currently looking for a bigger house in a better location, or land with same qualities.

So the very reasons I say are bullshit are why you left, yet you'll stand by the laws as reasonable and enforceable. Ok.....

What is a fence? What is constructed of?

Well, the answer is that it is law and enforcable.

Yes they are enforcable. Do I think they are reasonable? No in most cases, yes in a few.