On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Jay Mitchell wrote:
> >2) The SM requirement for street legality is that the car have current
> >plates.
>
> Which means that the car owner has represented the car as being
> legal to operate on the street to a state or county licensing
> authority, and provided the requisite proof of inspection,
> financial responsibility (insurance), etc. And signed a statement
> to that effect.
>
> >It makes no requirement for how those plates were obtained,
>
> Correct. It is also correct that, if one registers a
> non-emissions-legal car in ANY state in the Union, one is
> committing a Federal crime. But one is merely complying with a
> _requirement_ of the SM rules. What exactly is wrong with this
> picture?
It's a Federal crime to exceed the speed limit on a Federal
reservation, too. That hasen't stops the thousands of people
from commuting at high speeds on two the Park Service-controlled parkways
near me.
Removing the cat exercises an *option* within the SM rules -- there's
no *requirement* to remove it. By *requiring* a current registration tag,
the SM rules throw emissions and roadworthiness enforcement over to the
state governments who are supposed to be doing it, and implicitly
discourages competitors from messing with their emissions systems. As I
remember the conversations, it boiled down to a matter of enforcement --
did we routinely want to have to pull cats off cars in impound to insure
they weren't gutted? Given the nature of catalytic converters, heat and
rust, was that even practical at events? The registration solution isn't
perfect, but it is practical.
Jamie
'92 Prelude Si
Speed Demon Racing
http://www.mindspring.com/~jsculerati/sdr
|