Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Is it? I am sure you would have to provide documentation that such modifications keep the car street legal. Modifying the tire-size without adjusting the internal workings will make your odometer and MPH off and 'illegal'. You have to be within 5 MPH or face a work order with a mechanic's documentation so most people who have things like 'almost illegal' tints or modified tires like that keep the documentation easily available.

Technically, ANY alteration to ride height, changing wheels/tires could make your vehicle a target for an "unsafe vehicle" stop. But, I've never seen one of those idiotic monstrosities pulled over because most cops would be worried/afraid of facing "profiling" charges, or pulling the guy over for DWB or something inane like that.

I assume that illegal tints or unsafe modifications would be cited as a secondary offense should there be a primary offense to pull someone over.

But coal rolling is just as dangerous as throwing projectiles at the car behind you, which in my state is serious business. Someone got 2 years in jail for throwing her drink at another moving vehicle, I would assume blinding cars with a smokescreen from coal-rolling would face similar laws due to causing other cars to potentially crash.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

nkelsch wrote:


Cops can and will pull you over for illegal tints and illegal mufflers which are too loud so it would be easily enough to pull someone over for Coal rolling. If your car is operating in an unsafe manor due to modification, they can take your car off the road. They already do currently.

then Why is this:



still allowed on the road?

Not top heavy.

so an article demonizing conservatives by labelling all coal rollers as them?

is it complete with redneck labelling as well?

great,
But it seems odd though as half the idiots I know who roll coal are liberal and the other half are conservative...


im sure most of the people who have issues with rolling coal have no issues with rolling doobies or cigarettes and stinking up the air with that particular form of smoke.

personally I hate all forms of unecessary public smoke creation equally without having to make it into some kind of conservative/redneck bashing thing

Think the "bird" is no longer effective

I still do it though with style

 easysauce wrote:
so an article demonizing conservatives by labelling all coal rollers as them?

is it complete with redneck labelling as well?

great,
But it seems odd though as half the idiots I know who roll coal are liberal and the other half are conservative...


im sure most of the people who have issues with rolling coal have no issues with rolling doobies or cigarettes and stinking up the air with that particular form of smoke.

personally I hate all forms of unecessary public smoke creation equally without having to make it into some kind of conservative/redneck bashing thing

Hanging a lit cigarette out the window is not going to reduce viability of the car behind you to dangerous levels to cause auto accidents. And Cigarettes are not the primary source greenhouse gases either. I don't like cigarettes either, but it is not the same thing.

Coal Rolling is not simply to have big stacks on a truck, but modifying it so it can belch black smoke on demand to explicitly to cause the vehicle behind you inability to see as well as dumping extra pollutants in the air to 'offset' the conserving of other motorists.

It is a violent protest intended to put those they are protesting against at risk via dangerous actions. It is as close to the "missile" laws as you can get when causing danger for other motorists.

That doesn't seem...smart.

Clouding the guy behind you - guy behind you can't see your brake lights-BOOM,

All I can think of so far if I was to use one. Those bastages that tail gate me

 notprop wrote:
On the plus sides its these idiots local environments and families that they are poisoning.

They'll be able to use the Obama Healthcare they probably also protest against so might.

Who said 'Murica doesn't do irony.

iuh.... no. I'm going to have to disagree with you on that

nkelsch wrote:

Coal Rolling is not simply to have big stacks on a truck, but modifying it so it can belch black smoke on demand to explicitly to cause the vehicle behind you inability to see as well as dumping extra pollutants in the air to 'offset' the conserving of other motorists.

It is a violent protest intended to put those they are protesting against at risk via dangerous actions. It is as close to the "missile" laws as you can get when causing danger for other motorists.

The sight limiting attributes you are putting on this black smoke is just a little bit exaggerated mate... Fort Campbell had a TON of these sorts of d-bag trucks from soldiers with too much time and money, and not enough sense rolling around town.... This smoke really only covers, at most their license plate or slightly obscuring a signal light, but I was ALWAYS able to see red lights through it (for tail lights) or green/yellow/red traffic lights regardless.

Ensis. You cannot insert real life experience into this discussion. It will derail the topic

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Coal Rolling is not simply to have big stacks on a truck, but modifying it so it can belch black smoke on demand to explicitly to cause the vehicle behind you inability to see as well as dumping extra pollutants in the air to 'offset' the conserving of other motorists.

It is a violent protest intended to put those they are protesting against at risk via dangerous actions. It is as close to the "missile" laws as you can get when causing danger for other motorists.

The sight limiting attributes you are putting on this black smoke is just a little bit exaggerated mate... Fort Campbell had a TON of these sorts of d-bag trucks from soldiers with too much time and money, and not enough sense rolling around town.... This smoke really only covers, at most their license plate or slightly obscuring a signal light, but I was ALWAYS able to see red lights through it (for tail lights) or green/yellow/red traffic lights regardless.

Many of the youtube videos, show the smoke is so thick, cars almost drive off the road and can't be seen from the back-seat of the 'coal rolling' truck. No argument can be made that it is not at all a safety issue. But of course, it is a local law enforcement issue and local legislature issue... so I suspect where it is being done has politicians who won't outlaw it. I can tell you if coal rolling appeared in my area, it would be banned and people arrested almost immediately. A glass pack muffler or an illegal tint will practically get your car seized here.

As for the emission legality, more than likely it's an aftermarket modification that allows you to choose when you want to dump the extra fuel. So, it wouldn't be running like that all the time, only when they want to be d-bags. Performance mods have been on diesels for a looong time, and they've always been like this; but this just looks like it's for d-baggery.

 mega_bassist wrote:
As for the emission legality, more than likely it's an aftermarket modification that allows you to choose when you want to dump the extra fuel. So, it wouldn't be running like that all the time, only when they want to be d-bags. Performance mods have been on diesels for a looong time, and they've always been like this; but this just looks like it's for d-baggery.

Here you go

Using your vehicle to make a political statement is not new. What is new and has recently appeared on the horizon now is coal rolling. Coal rolling is buying the coal rolling equipment for a mere $500, a diesel truck to install it on, a tall smoke stack for the exhaust, and begin rolling down the road. The vehicle is tricked into needing more fuel, thus blowing an exclamatory amount of black smoke on anyone behind, next to, or within the local vicinity of said vehicle. Rolling coal as a political party statement is currently riding a wave of mass notoriety.
Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/07/coal-rolling-and-party-politics/#yJRTyzKGJyUMAaIH.99

 Frazzled wrote:
That doesn't seem...smart.

Clouding the guy behind you - guy behind you can't see your brake lights-BOOM,

So if someone did have one you could reasonably slam into the back of them and claim it was their fault due to the smoke...

 Jihadin wrote:

 mega_bassist wrote:
As for the emission legality, more than likely it's an aftermarket modification that allows you to choose when you want to dump the extra fuel. So, it wouldn't be running like that all the time, only when they want to be d-bags. Performance mods have been on diesels for a looong time, and they've always been like this; but this just looks like it's for d-baggery.

Here you go

Using your vehicle to make a political statement is not new. What is new and has recently appeared on the horizon now is coal rolling. Coal rolling is buying the coal rolling equipment for a mere $500, a diesel truck to install it on, a tall smoke stack for the exhaust, and begin rolling down the road. The vehicle is tricked into needing more fuel, thus blowing an exclamatory amount of black smoke on anyone behind, next to, or within the local vicinity of said vehicle. Rolling coal as a political party statement is currently riding a wave of mass notoriety.
Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/07/coal-rolling-and-party-politics/#yJRTyzKGJyUMAaIH.99

Oh, I'm aware of what it's used for and how it's used. I was just saying it's more than likely user-controlled, and you can shut off the excess fuel dump whenever you want. So, when you need to pass emissions, you can simply turn a dial, and it'll set the fuel usage back to factory standards.

 purplefood wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
That doesn't seem...smart.

Clouding the guy behind you - guy behind you can't see your brake lights-BOOM,

So if someone did have one you could reasonably slam into the back of them and claim it was their fault due to the smoke...

Well
1. Your following to closely
2. Why did you not slow down when visibility went to zero
3. Impact from the rear

nkelsch wrote:


Many of the youtube videos,

Sorry mate... but people generally film these sorts of things on their phone, or at best, a gakky hand held camera... it's going to distort the image, darks get darker, lights lighter, etc.... in short, not a good picture to provide accurate judgement of whats going on in person.... Again, I've real life experience with this gak, and while annoying it isn't nearly so bad as you're trying to portray.

 Jihadin wrote:

 purplefood wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
That doesn't seem...smart.

Clouding the guy behind you - guy behind you can't see your brake lights-BOOM,

So if someone did have one you could reasonably slam into the back of them and claim it was their fault due to the smoke...

Well
1. Your following to closely
2. Why did you not slow down when visibility went to zero
3. Impact from the rear

You don't necessarily need to be following closely.
You can slow down but still be moving since you could claim you thought they would keep moving.
Not sure what that last point is supposed to mean...

The driver that hits from the rear is more likely to be at fault.

 notprop wrote:
On the plus sides its these idiots local environments and families that they are poisoning.

They'll be able to use the Obama Healthcare they probably also protest against so might.

Who said 'Murica doesn't do irony.

I like this statement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
.

There are lots of tiny penises everywhere I guess. I usually just put up my pinky and wiggle it at them.

It's illegal to wave your little fella at people

 Jihadin wrote:
The driver that hits from the rear is more likely to be at fault.

Unless the one in front is actively releasing a smokescreen...

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

nkelsch wrote:


Many of the youtube videos,

Sorry mate... but people generally film these sorts of things on their phone, or at best, a gakky hand held camera... it's going to distort the image, darks get darker, lights lighter, etc.... in short, not a good picture to provide accurate judgement of whats going on in person.... Again, I've real life experience with this gak, and while annoying it isn't nearly so bad as you're trying to portray.

Shenanigans:




The cloud is so thick, you can no longer see the cop's headlights. His entire car is obstructed from view. No amount of apologizing for them makes that not a safety issue.



These clouds are so dark, they are dangerous on the road. No one is exaggerating.

Nice... MD already has laws and here is a turd getting pulled over in Ocean City MD! So my area already cracks down on it. You are only allowed to emit excessive smoke when pulling a heavy load and for no more than 6 seconds. In California it is a 2500$ fine.



It is basically illegal everywhere, and these people just want to pay the fines...

Coal Rolling




Smokescreen/smoke grenade




25 years old No kids were hurt

This should be a vehicle seizure and summary destruction on site offense.

Let them have it. We took their gun racks already

 Jihadin wrote:
Let them have it. We took their gun racks already

These aren't exactly the kind of people I want toting guns everywhere anyway. They seen barely half a step removed from the sort that'd go shot-gunning up the local elementary school library because Obama supports education, before going to dig more potholes because he supports infrastructure spending. The harder it is for them to carry those things around, the better.

I've seen 2 year olds throwing tantrums with more coherent thinking than these tools.

 Chongara wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Let them have it. We took their gun racks already

These aren't exactly the kind of people I want toting guns everywhere anyway. .

They can't even see what they are aiming for with all that smoke anyway.

At least they don't have the ultimate self defence weapon, tanks.

 purplefood wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
The driver that hits from the rear is more likely to be at fault.

Unless the one in front is actively releasing a smokescreen...

nope, it's common to have a statute or a legal precedent that pre-assumes that the person who hit from behind is the liable party. You'd need a lot of other evidence to prove otherwise, like witnesses, or police investigation, or tire-tracks from the vehicle in front of yours showing they intentionally slowed. I've been behind a "coal-roller" but that was a completely rebuild car and it was steampunk through and through, with tripe turbo on the sucker. the stacks cleared up as high as the guy could get it, and directed the smoke up. I tolerated that, because that WAS cool, and the guy wasn't being a dick on the road. Unfortunately though, the fact that he's got his vehicle modded to blow out smoke, whether intentional or not doesn't reduce your own liability in the event you should strike him. You could try going after his testicles by way of civil suit, but i'm not sold on the fact that it'd go your way: you saw the smoke on the road, could judge it wasn't moving, or it moving slower relative to you, etc... liability is funny that way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bullockist wrote:
At least they don't have the ultimate self defence weapon, tanks.

armored car + open carry. That's all you really need. Sure, sure, sure, it might only class as an AFV, but, it's close enough to pass muster.

Buy a dump truck, steel plates, and wielding equipment. Have a hoist system to. Make a Drug Cartel Up Armor Dump truck