The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

7 June 2005

Cross purposes

The state has laws against placing memorials by the side of the road, though they tend not to be particularly strict about enforcement: after all, somebody died there.

On the other hand, it's possible to abuse a privilege, and the placing of about 3000 crosses by a lobbying group hoping to win support for a fuel-tax increase would certainly thus qualify.

Why are these things illegal, you ask? They're considered a distraction to drivers, and therefore a safety hazard.

Neal McCaleb, head of Oklahomans for Safe Bridges and Roads, says that if his group's crosses should be removed, so should everyone else's.

I think I've just made up my mind on SQ 723.

Posted at 7:25 AM to Soonerland

But Mommy, all the other kids are doing it!

Good grief, I do believe there is a difference between a memorial here and there and a large group of crosses in a small area, the one is not as distracting as the many. Besides his are not being used as a memorial but as a political statement that I feel is incorrectly stated anyway.

Posted by: anstranger at 12:47 AM on 8 June 2005

Montana has a stretch of road - less than five miles - with 32 crosses. They're not the type of crosses that you usually see by the side of the road, but rather these metal ones made from street sign material. Apparently that stretch of road was particularly bad and the state of Montana put them up to drive that point home. On one hand, counting crosses while driving in an apparently dangerous stretch of highway may not have been remarkably safe. On the other hand, it did drive the point home.

Posted by: R. Alex at 9:47 AM on 8 June 2005