Reply With Quote"Could common sense be breaking out at the legislature?"
Possible but unlikely.
A state committee has released a report that says North Carolina ought to consider dropping their state vehicle inspection program.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4151838/
Could common sense be breaking out at the legislature?In findings released Tuesday, auditors said it is impossible “to determine how much vehicle emissions inspections contribute to the improvement of overall air quality.” Also, the DMV’s program oversight was found to be inadequate.
Greater emphasis should be placed on older vehicles, as they are more likely to fail inspection tests, auditors recommend. The report cited that other states that exempt newer vehicles from inspections.
Chip H.
"Could common sense be breaking out at the legislature?"
Possible but unlikely.
Dennis - Tucson
But more likely than personal integrity, at least here in NY.Originally Posted by D_E_Davis
Having lived in NC, I can say that it is unlikely that the legislature will repeal the law. The legislature is a liberal democrat body. Stranger things have happened, though. Could it cost them more to implement it than it yields the state? That would be the only reason for the state eliminating the program.
The part that bothers me is "... Greater emphasis should be placed on older vehicles." This usually translates as yet another assault on antique/classic cars - as in CA, where the former "rolling exemption" was cancelled. It used to be that after a car reached a certain age (I think it was 30 years) it became exempt from smog testing. Now, the state requires perpetual inspections for all cars built after a certain year (I think it's 1970), regardless of how old they are and despite the fact that cars 30 years and older are almost never in service as daily drivers and their total actual contribution to smog/pollution is so slight as to be irrelevant.
But they are easy targets, because they're "old clunkers" and "gross polluters."
If the purpose is to ensure that older vehicles are kept in good repair (i.e. meet the standards that were in force when they were built) then I'm ok with the occasional inspection for older cars, for the simple reason that there are older cars out there that are junkers that burn more oil than gas, drip fluids onto the roadways, and are so rusted that a used Jiffy-Pop pan has better crash worthiness.
It's when they try and force older cars to meet modern standards that I have a problem with the laws. It puts a HUGE financial burden on the owner for little return. It destroys the character & collectibility of the older car. And still won't do anything to prevent the clunkers from being driven on the roads, since it's not the car that's the problem -- it's the owner.
Chip H.
There is an easy way to deal with the "clunker' issue without subjecting legitimate collectors to both the hassle and the potential risk to their often very valuable antique vehicle via some greasemonkey with an air gun who doesn't give a damn about damaging your pristine/restored car:
* Exempt any vehicle from smog check that has "antique tags";
* Require any person applying for antique tags to submit a copy of their antique vehicle insurance policy. These are fairly restrictive - and also persnickety about things like mileage as well as how the car is stored, etc. Often, they require the owner to have the car appraised or show proof of its condition/value. It is a great way to weed out the few assholes who misuse antique vehicle tags to daily drive some broken down old POS....
Posting Permissions
