tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Front plate

To: 65Tiger@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Front plate
From: Steve Laifman <SLaifman@SoCal.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 12:24:33 -0800
Curtis,

We have heard from at least 5 list members that say it hasn't happened 
in their state.  I respond, "YET!".

You, apparently, recognize the need to reduce intersection red light 
running.

The law for front plates has been on our books (except during WW II, 
when they were using soy bean plates!) Look at vintage car photo's (1920 
and on) and you will see the front plates in CA. (and England)

http://www.acdclub.org/

It was only enforced after you were stopped for something else, and 
usually a inspection station report complied with judge's order to "fix 
it", and a fine for why you were stopped originally.

Running a red light is a real lethal danger, and it is done frequently.  
More people are killed in intersections than any other violation.  They 
tried to test enforcing it with cameras, to stop accidents.  However, 
the state got a real surprise.  The company making the cameras, 
detector's etc., in competitive bid for more, offered them for FREE, and 
they would even handle the processing of results for a percentage of the 
penalty.

A violation is $250 for the first one, without priors.  They also check 
for the mandatory accident insurance coverage. 50% are not insured!!

That income stream became really cost effective, and hard to fight in 
court.  The second violation doubled to $500, and the next, even more 
money AND MANDATORY JAIL TIME, and impounding of car ($$$$$).  Death to 
innocent drivers and pedestrians at our intersections needs to be 
stopped now.

That is when front plate enforcement became cost effective, especially 
when it's "free", and the violator pays the costs, and leaves a large 
profit behind.  It is a good law, saves lives, and acts as a deterrent.  
If one does not  break the law by driving in an unsafe manner, then they 
avoid the consequences.  Violate the law, and you ARE punished.

No use arguing that California is not democratic, or violates rights.  
This is a killing violation, and against the law everywhere. Enforcement 
costs are the only deterrent, as nobody is for intersection killings.  
Now, costs are little, and income large enough to expand the 
intersections watched 24/7

There is NO good argument against it, as your state has light running 
laws too.  Only enforcement may be missing, and revenue will overcome 
that issue.  If front plates enhance law enforcement, watch for that 
second plate law.

Steve

___
Steve Laifman
Editor - TigersUnited.com



65Tiger@comcast.net wrote:

>The only reason they are inforcing the front license plate is red light
>running.  The cameras need a picture of you, the car and LP.  
>The 'fix it' ticket to put on a plate does not generate any revenue.  
>The 'enforcers' tend to cut a lot to slack to vintage.  
>
>Curtis been there, got that




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>