"Dakotacowboy" (Dakotacowboy)
09/16/2013 at 19:00 • Filed to: NHTSA
4
8|
"Dakotacowboy" (Dakotacowboy)
09/16/2013 at 19:00 • Filed to: NHTSA | 4
| 8 |
Most people around Jalopnik and Oppositelock seem to want the 25 year law on importing non-U.S. market cars eliminated. I suggest a much more drastic change. I propose that we severely cut the role of the NHTSA. They will still be allowed to do crash tests and provide the information from these tests to the public. However, they will no longer be able to mandate safety equipment for vehicles. The insurance companies already encourage the purchase of safer vehicles by with lower premiums for vehicles which perform better in crash tests or have more safety equipment. This will allow us to decide whether we want an SUV filled with airbags or an Ariel Atom. Also, the NHTSA would no longer be allowed to recall or coerce a manufacturer to recall any vehicle which was produced more than 10 years ago.
The following rule changes are for the EPA, CARB, and all other vehicle emissions regulatory agencies. Make it simple. Eliminate all of the rules on vehicle modifications. Set a number for each vehicle model year, and make each vehicle go through a smog test whenever they get their annual or bi-annual safety inspection. If it passes, it passes regardless of how much it has been modified. Those states without a safety inspection program would be forced to start one.
Eliminate corporate average fuel economy rules. Raise fuel taxes and use this money to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. This will encourage the adoption of fuel efficient and/or alternate fuel vehicles. It will also give us safer roads to drive our more efficient/alternate fuel vehicles on. A win/win.
I believe that by making these changes we will be much better off as a country. The 25 year rule would be rendered moot by all of the other changes. The roads would safer vehicles due to all vehicles now being inspected. The air would be cleaner thanks to every vehicle being smog checked. The roads would be better due to the increased fuel taxes. We as consumers would have much more choice in vehicles due to all of the rules being eliminated.
lone_liberal
> Dakotacowboy
09/16/2013 at 19:04 |
|
I'd go along with most of those, but it will never happen. Liberals won't agree to get rid of the regulations and conservatives won't agree to the increased gas tax. Common sense need not apply.
Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire
> Dakotacowboy
09/16/2013 at 19:04 |
|
No, it would never work, it makes too much sense.
Bandit
> Dakotacowboy
09/16/2013 at 19:11 |
|
How about no. I want more safety equipment in cars, hear me out. I am all for proper air bags and that kind of stuff. I have no confidence in the other drivers on the road. What they should cut down on is the stupid stuff like rear view cameras, lane departure buzzers, etc. As far as insurance stuff goes, it was cheaper for me to go out and buy a 30+ year old muscle car that barely has any safety and absolutely no emissions equipment than it would be for me to drive my mothers 5 year old ueber safe volvo s40 sedan.
505Turbeaux
> Dakotacowboy
09/16/2013 at 19:17 |
|
I like the way this is structured. Now let me have my Citroen XM please Uncle Sam.
delete-me-please123
> Dakotacowboy
09/16/2013 at 19:20 |
|
You had me hyped until the tax increase. The state and feds get plenty from the current rate (which is still too high).
|
Dakotacowboy
> Bandit
09/16/2013 at 19:20 |
|
The old one is cheaper because in the eyes of the insurance company, it is worth less. What I was referring to was on same year, same class vehicles, one that is safer is always cheaper on insurance. If you don't trust other drivers and elect to drive around with twenty airbags around you that should be your choice. It should also be my choice to be able to buy a new vehicle with no airbags and pay extra for insurance.
Decay buys too many beaters
> delete-me-please123
09/16/2013 at 19:59 |
|
To me it would depend largely on where that extra tax money went. If 100% went into fixing/maintaining roads, I'd be all for it.
|
delete-me-please123
> Decay buys too many beaters
09/16/2013 at 20:14 |
|
All of it should go to state transportation. Keep others hands out of the kitty and it wouldn't need to be raised. There also needs to be some accountability, none of this "over budget" shit.