‘Stop the Rocks’ Bill Weakened

I was amazed by your reporting of the “Rocks” legislation. I have lost two windshields to flying rocks, perhaps contributing to the fact that I had to obtain new insurance after decades of coverage by the Automobile Club of Southern California.

Where were the lobbyists of the auto clubs and other insurers when this crucial issue came to vote in committee in Sacramento? Why is it that those of us who put the most passenger-miles on the freeways are the least represented? Those of us who have lost windshields, have lost workdays getting them replaced--and then lost our insurance policies due to “too many claims” might wonder whether our interests are being represented in Sacramento.

There is no reason why trucks carrying gravel, sand etc. should not be required to have their loads covered by tarpaulins. It’s already in the Vehicle Code, albeit subject to a loose interpretation. If I read the California Vehicle Code accurately, the only substances presently allowed to fall from trucks are clear water and chicken feathers(!). Incidentally, I notice that rubbish trucks are routinely fitted with tarpaulins.

The truckers are profiting while we mortals have to replace windshields. Perhaps it is time to remind them just who paid for the freeways they now so casually pollute?

JOSEPH A. STRAPAC

Huntington Beach