Front Plates Are Pointless, So Let's Get Rid of Them

"OverKel" (OverKel) 08/29/2013 at 19:15 • Filed to: oppositelock

1

26

I need your educated input, fellow Jalops.

If you're an auto enthusiast in Texas and a keen political observer, you may have been eagerly watching the progress of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in this year's state legislature. It was Texas' version of a "one-plate state" bill, which would have eliminated the front license plate issue from new registrations. Sadly, it stagnated in committee, never saw the floor of either congressional house, and died a depressing death once the session ended.

I was disappointed, but I thought, "No problem. Texas doesn't punish for the violation anyway. I'll just keep my front bumper intact, and keep the 240's front plate on the dash like I have it now."

I'll explain…

Texas has a normal legislative session every two years. This is the only time new state laws are written, debated, voted on, and signed. The 2011 session saw passage of a bill that rewrote the license plate law in the state transportation code. It read that two plates must be attached to passenger cars with fitting specifications placing the front plate on the front bumper only. (I have been pulled over and issued warnings for having my front plate on the dash at the center base of the windshield.) However, the bill hilariously neglected to specify a penalty for violation, and nobody noticed before the session ended. The result? For two years you could be pulled over and cited for driving without a front plate on your bumper, but could not be penalized for it. A happy accident, to be sure.

All that goes away on September 1st.

Enter !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , a bill that was unfortunately not on my radar. Its sole purpose is to add a specific penalty for violation of the current front plate law. If you are cited, you face a fine not to exceed $200. The bill passed both houses and was signed by the governor. It takes effect this Sunday.

I could go on a huge rant here, but I already took care of that yelling at the windshield on my way home. Instead of that, I want to ask you all what pros there are to requiring a front license plate, since we all could enumerate the cons pretty easily (though don't let that stop you from providing a cons list). This is especially targeted to any jalops currently or previously in law enforcement.

There is one downside (to the state anyway, but good for local government revenue) that I will mention, as it's not immediately obvious: each bill was supplemented by a report showing the fiscal effect of passage. The one-plate state bill, if passed, was shown to have !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . The penalty-added bill was shown to add an " !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! " Okay, follow the money, right? It's no mystery what happened.

My overall point here is to develop more outstanding arguments against front plates, and I think enthusiasts' efforts would be all the more effective if we fully comprehend the arguments supporting them. Some states already only require the rear plate. If those states can do without, there's no reason they all couldn't. As far as I can see, it provides a win-win: more money for the state road funds, and less holes drilled in our cars. There's a great pro already.

So, what do you guys and gals think? Feel free to chime in on either side.

Party-vi > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:04

2

Hey you're an author - try reposting this to Oppositelock instead of your blog.

AbigGRNboot > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:28

1

Except that it provides a flat surface for cops with speed detectors to bounce a signal back from.

/lameexcuse

More Power!!and also some brakes. > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:29

2

I too am a Texan and run without a front plate. I keep it in my glovebox just in case though. But now that this is a thing, I might think about putting it back. Maybe.

Andy Sheehan, StreetsideStig > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:31

1

It's just a fundraiser. Red light cameras, mostly.

BJ > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:35

4

Front plates can help enforcement and identification efforts by allowing a greater range of angles, and therefore a greater number of situations, in which the plate number can be read, either fully or partially.

Some valid use cases for this are hit-and-run, suspected stolen vehicles parked on private property, and recovering evidence from video surveillance.

Chairman Kaga > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:43

2

For reference, states that do NOT require front plates...

1. Alabama
2. Arizona
3. Arkansas
4. Delaware
5. Florida
6. Georgia
7. Indiana
8. Kansas
9. Kentucky
10. Louisiana
11. Michigan
12. Mississippi
13. New Mexico
14. North Carolina
15. Oklahoma
16. Pennsylvania
17. South Carolina
18. Tennessee
19. West Virginia

Chairman Kaga > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 16:46

1

I know this isn't a legitimate reason but before the Lege, but from talking to the cops I used to know when I was a municipal employee, I do know they like the law because it gives them just cause to pull over out of state vehicles. This having happened to me on three separate occasions (I'm originally from Arkansas, but went to college in Texas, then moved back to Texas with a car registered in AR), I can verify cops do take certain liberties with the law even when they know you're a visitor.

fhrblig > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 17:04

2

When I worked in a gas station, they came in quite handy. We were trained to write them down, especially if the car or customer were sketchy. The police in the area didn't have other crime to deal with, and they were happy to go after gas thieves.

desertdog5051 > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 17:07

2

When I grew up in Michigan they did away with the front plate and it did not affect anything except increased revenue for the Secretary of State and the Highway department.

Also, Isn't New Mexico another country? :)

Mosqvich > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 17:14

1

There is no good reason. All other answers are moot.

Union of Smog Techs of CA > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 18:27

1

On behalf of mechanics shins everywhere, NO MORE FRONT LICENSE PLATES!

People can't park and they are all mangled up most of the time.

I don't care if half the license plate making industry dies!

That being said I take them off my car and scoff at the laws, no ticket yet. Other people get them first few days in CA, with out of state plates even. Just a money maker really.

Cloud81918 > OverKel 08/30/2013 at 18:37

1

Think they are dumb, but cars are shapeless anymore that I'm not sure how much it matters.

OverKel > BJ 08/31/2013 at 15:58

0

That's an excellent pro. Thanks for this.

OverKel > desertdog5051 08/31/2013 at 16:02

0

Nice! Do you know when this was? Or can you link to any reference material from the legi? I'd love to read records on it, as interstate reference is very common when searching for new law ideas.

Also, *Homer Simpson voice* Hey, there's a NEW Mexico.

OverKel > Chairman Kaga 08/31/2013 at 16:03

0

This is fantastic. Thank you! States often reference others when writing law. Citing 19 other states would obviously be a great help at a public committee hearing.

OverKel > Chairman Kaga 08/31/2013 at 16:05

0

Good info. I'm curious how that would hold up in court if it led them to discovery of another offense. I'm no legal beagle though.

OverKel > Party-vi 08/31/2013 at 16:07

0

Thanks again for the add. I saw how you got slammed with a couple hundred people asking the same question when Kinja debuted. Guess you're the go-to guy lol.

OverKel > AbigGRNboot 08/31/2013 at 16:08

0

I know it greatly helps lidar reflectivity, but I wonder if it's required for it to work at all. Radar doesn't seem too affected by the lack of one. You can guess how I might know heh.

desertdog5051 > OverKel 08/31/2013 at 16:09

0

I'll see what I can find. It has been a long time, though.

OverKel > Cloud81918 08/31/2013 at 16:12

0

Ha that's true here and there. In a public hearing debate, on this angle I would point out that it decreases the value of the car by forcing a destructive modification (drilled holes).

OverKel > Andy Sheehan, StreetsideStig 08/31/2013 at 16:20

0

It's a really odd fundraiser too. It's very strongly implied by the fiscal report from the penalty-added law that passed that it's simply to provide additional revenue to local governments. The plates are manufactured with taxes assessed on vehicle registration renewal. So you're already paying the state money that's immediately spent to manufacture plates, and then paying a fine to local governments if you don't attach the front one and are caught by their law enforcement. If it's entirely down to money, I wonder which is more — the additional aggregated revenue local governments get, or the $6 million yearly savings to the state highway fund by not manufacturing the second plate.

OverKel > Union of Smog Techs of CA 08/31/2013 at 16:21

0

California tickets you for not running two plates even if you're registered in a state that doesn't require them?!

Union of Smog Techs of CA > OverKel 08/31/2013 at 16:27

0

That's what the customer told me, I think she told the cop she had moved here and he took advantage.

Party-vi > OverKel 08/31/2013 at 16:33

0

At the beginning there was myself and Nobody, but now there are several of us adding people. If you see someone that wants to be an author just share their post onto Oppositelock and we'll sort them out. Also, don't forget that any NSFW content needs to go after the jump on a post ( a jump is just [ j u m p ] without any spaces between the brackets and letters) and keep the political stuff after a jump as well. Have fun on here.

OverKel > More Power!!and also some brakes. 08/31/2013 at 16:35

0

Yeah, I've been fortunate to only receive warnings from them (although they were both in the last two years, so that may have been an issue). I'm wondering how hungry the local cops will be to get some new revenue in beginning tomorrow, however.

On a side note, I'm military as well, and have actually been denied entry to base with my plate as it is in the picture. Even with no penalty, because it was law, they wouldn't allow it.

OverKel > Union of Smog Techs of CA 08/31/2013 at 16:38

0

Ah there it is. Bad luck mentioning that detail. :/