Laura, think what it would do for public transport and the congestion on the
roads.......
Also for a 99 Honda - it's got to be under warranty for emissions for what is
it, 5 or 6 years, so it should be free to fix at a dealership as far as I know.
At least it is up here in Oregon, then again your in California with those
different laws....
Alan
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Laura.G@141.com (Laura Gharazeddine)
Date: Mon, Jul 3 2000 13:22:57 GMT-0600
Subject: Re: Re: MOT Time...
I can only imagine the (financial) hardships a nationwide MoT would impose on
the average guy. The new(ish) smog program here in California has really caused
some hardships for people already-I met a woman at the car wash the other day
who was ordered to a 'State' emissions testing center rather than the local
testing center of her choice, with a '99 Honda-and it failed! They told her it
would be $400 to pass! What a racket! My friends (all sorts and years of cars)
all pray when they open their registration that they're not assigned to go to a
state emissions station-cause they know they're probably not going to pass!
Also, knowing the loopholes in our emissions programs for industry and big
businesses, I can only imagine the loopholes they'd come up with in a MoT!
Heck! Several million Californians now can't afford car insurance-can you
imagine if these people had to pass an annual inspection on top of that?
An inspection like MoT could be a good idea-but first they need to figure out
how to get these other programs to be both affordable- and applicable to ALL
vehicles.
Off the soapbox now...
Laura G.
>
>From: Douglas Braun & Nadia Papakonstantinou <dougnad@bellatlantic.net>
>Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 13:12:03 -0400
>To: "alemen@pop.ftconnect.com" <alemen@pop.ftconnect.com>,
> "sdspitfire@worldnet.att.net" <sdspitfire@worldnet.att.net>,
> "spitfires@autox.team.net" <spitfires@autox.team.net>
>Subject: Re: MOT Time...
>
>
>At 12:16 PM 7/3/00 -0400, alemen@pop.ftconnect.com wrote:
>
>>I was shocked to find that in my area (Portland, OR) all they did was
>emissions testing. Even more shocked to find that outside the area there was
>nothing. And all local standards, nothing federally mandated. Of course given
>the volume of the number of cars it would be almost impossible to impose such
>as thing as the MOT here. Also given the nature of the country it would also
>be vehemently opposed as it would affect peoples rights - who cares about
>safety. (Note that thsi is a personal observation and does not mean that those
>of you on the list think this way, in fact I hope most of you would put safety
>first). Hey think of it, a US MOT test - a big new industry, how many jobs
>would it create, how many cars would have to be fixed up, look at the income
>and parts potential for the auto industry.
>
>I think that one of the reasons for the laxness here is that
>mechanical problems are responsible for a fairly small number of driving
>deaths and injuries. I am sure that the DOT or NHTSA policymaking
>people, who keep statistics on accidents, have concluded that new
>vehicle standards, such as mandatory airbags, are more effective
>at reducing the death/injury rate. One reason for this is that
>cards in the USA tend to be newer than in other countries.
>
>One document that may be worthwhile reading is: <a
>href="http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/TSF97.pdf";>http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/TSF97.pdf</a>
>
>Doug Braun
>'72 Spit
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This message has been posted from Mail2Web http://www.mail2web.com/
Web Hosting for $9.95 per month! Visit: http://www.yourhosting.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|