home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!caen!rphroy!kocrsv01!c23st
- From: c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos)
- Newsgroups: rec.autos
- Subject: Re: Safety inspections (was Re: Raising the limit)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.174639.6276@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com>
- Date: 19 Nov 92 17:46:39 GMT
- References: <Bxtpps.EvC@ssesco.com> <1992Nov19.030248.19722@nezsdc.icl.co.nz> <19NOV199209334042@csa3.lbl.gov>
- Sender: news@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Usenet News Account)
- Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <19NOV199209334042@csa3.lbl.gov> jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov (Ad absurdum per aspera) writes:
- >Safety inspections are mandated, if at all, by the individual States.
- >I don't have a tally but my feeling is that a majority of states do
- >not have them. The American highway features a lot of marginal cars
- >and a few that look like studio props for "Mad Max IV." You might
-
- I think less than half the states have safety standards. And statistics
- indicates (from what I remember) that accident statistics in 'inspected'
- states are not different from 'not inspected' states, i.e. the inspection
- makes no statistically significant difference in accident rates.
-
- >Emissions checks are more prevalent, but again are done on a state-by-
- >state basis. Tighter regional standards are on their way as well. A
- >number of states have no emissions checks whatsoever.
-
- Or even area-by-area. In Detroit, only the tri-county area (Wayne, Oakland,
- Macomb) counties were required to have emission inspections, and
- sufficient loopholes were left in the system for most clunkers to still
- stay on the road (i.e. if income < xxxxx, no inspection, if clunker older
- than 1980 or so, no inspection, if it fails and you spent $100 and still
- fails, fine).
-
- Spiros
- --
- Spiros Triantafyllopoulos c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com
- Software Technology, Delco Electronics (317) 451-0815
- GM Hughes Electronics, Kokomo, IN 46904 [A Different Kind of Disclaimer]
-