Dennis rants:
>I can state, with 100% accuracy and authority, that SM does not
require
>catalytic converters, emissions equipment, or any other such
things.
That's not in question in this discussion. The intent and the
actual wording of the rules are mutually exclusive, but the
intent has been clear all along.
>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?
>If it has current plates,
>it's legal.
Which makes no sense at all. Why require plates?
>That is it. Cut and dried. Any other interpretation of the rules
is
>flat-out WRONG.
It's not _interpretation_ that's at issue here, it's the
_implication_ of requiring road licensing while allowing carte
blanche with emissions equipment. Do we _really_ want to be
perceived as requiring (or even encouraging) entrants in SM to
commit a Federal offense? Why is street registration still in the
rules?
Jay "just curious" Mitchell
|