Comments about ‘Fewer auto safety checks? House committee says 'yes'’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Feb. 9 2012 9:00 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Sorry, auto repair guys, the inspection program was imposed on citizens as a "Safety" program, not some sort of "jobs" bill.

Change your marketing strategy from "state law forces you to patronize me" to something like "see me and make your car last longer and avoid having to buy a new car" and drivers may patronize your new services.

Although I would have preferred to see the inspection program eliminated entirely, this is a good step in the right direction.

Salt Lake City, UT

"The bill was a compromise to Dougall's original proposal to do away with most state safety inspections altogether."

I'd prefer the safety inspection be eliminated altogether. As the article explains, equipment malfunctioning is not the cause of accidents and deaths on the highways. The real culprit is speeding... which the Highway Patrol almost completely ignores. Standard modus operandi for government mentality.

Salt Lake City, UT

How do you know that the safety inspections don't reduce accidents. Saying that accidents right now aren't because of vehicle breakdowns could easily be attributed to the fact that we do have safety inspections. If there is actual data that proves that safety inspections don't reduce accidents then by all means eliminate the program. But you can't use the fact that accidents aren't happening now due to vehicle breakdowns to prove your point, because we do have a safety inspection program....

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

I live in Washington State. There are no vehicle safety inspections here.
I used to live in California. There were zero vehicle safety inspections when I lived there.
I also used to live in Pennsylvania. They had mandatory annual vehicle inspections there. Talk about corruption. If they found something wrong and you repaired it yourself, they would completely reinspect the vehicle and you were guaranteed that they would find something else, real or imagined.

Many states require safety inspections. Many others do not. The data exists to determine if safety inspections increase safety. All you have to do is pull the data for accidents related to equipment failure. It is my bet that you will not find any difference.

Get big brother out of our lives.

Also, please add the check box back that allows us to stay logged in. What a pain having to log in just to click the "like" button.

Murray, UT

What should be a safety check; ends up being a government forced ripoff.
the safety inspector has you over a barrel; and you are forced to repair whatever they say needs to be done.
too many people end up paying for repairs that have nothing to do with safety, and more to do with increasing the bottom line of auto shops.
those places dedicated to only inspections, do not look at the lining of the brakes, which is probably the #1 safety related thing that need to be looked at; if anything.
when was the last time the police did a sting on a auto shop, to make sure they were not requiring unnecessary repairs to pass a safety inspection?

Somewhere in Colorado, CO


Do away with the "safety" inspection all together.

Talk about a "big government" program.

Where I live... I pay my taxes on my vehicle every year... And that is it.

No inspections.

When I visit "big government" Utah I am surprised at how many "big government" restrictions the voters there have put upon themselves...

The inspections are a racket, and I think this article *proves* it is a racket...

The auto-repair workers crying and whining that "big government" should protect their racket... Good grief...

Get rid of the racket all together...

ZERO inspections, just pay your vehicle taxes and registration, and let troopers ticket you if your vehicle presents a hazard...

The whole inspection thing is a complete-and-total .gov protected racket...

I am lucky to live where I live... No inspections, just taxes. Something breaks on my car, I fix it... A wiper blade gets worn... I replace it when it is convenient to me... Not when a auto shop needs to make a few bucks on my inspection.

I got gigged on a "broken horn." My horn didn't work on an old vehicle... The shop wouldn't let me pass inspection until I paid them for a new horn... "bbbbut big government mandates that you have a working horn!!!!!" Who cares. I never used the horn, and the one they installed so I could pass inspection quit working a few days after I passed inspection. They just wanted money...

Palm Bay, Fl

The problem with letting repair shops do inspections is that it is wide open to fraud. That is one reason other states have dropped auto inspections. In florida we had auto inspections that were run by the state in facilities just for inspections, and it was dropped because they were ineffective and costly for taxpayers.

Vince Clortho

I can understand the potential hit repair shops will suffer. But this legislation is not about protecting jobs, it's about effect use of government resources. I'm growing weary of the 'This will cost jobs' argument.

When a particular service or product is inefficient, is outdated, or unable to compete it should be abandoned and not protected...

Ogden, UT

Good grief, people, this is not the end of the world. All this does is remove the 2 and 6 year old safety inspections.

Why does a 2-year old car need a safety inspection? Waste of time and personal resources. As much as I disagree with all of the anti-government fervor from our State Legislature, this is one proposal that makes sense to me.

Tremonton, UT

Great to hear that state safety inspections are cutting back. Disappointed to hear that state safety inspections are not being totally eliminated.

Only 17 states require inspections on passenger cars. Having lived in South Carolina and Kentucky, which are among the other 33 that do not require inspections, and spending many miles driving in many states, I have seen absolutely no evidence that safety inspections make us any safer on the road. I am absolutely in agreement that the money would be much better spent elsewhere.

Those that are objecting to the reduction based upon the job loss only validate the belief of most, that the inspections are nothing more than a money maker for the auto shops.

State Legislatures, please keep on this. Bill by bill, session by session, let's phase out state safety inspections. Let's give people their freedoms back.

the boonies, mexico

This whole program has been a complete scam for too long, get rid of all of it, let the shops do their repairs when other maint is done.

On the other hand
Spanish Fork, UT

I'm with DN Subscriber on this one. I can see where the auto repair guys are coming from, but the onus is on them to come up with a new business model, not on the government to send unnecessary work their way. Maybe they can send a postcard once a year educating customers on the benefits of an annual safety inspection (or whatever other service they propose), along with a coupon for that service. Then, let the work speak for itself.

West Jordan, UT

If we're going to still have mandatory emissions inspections, then I say keep the safety inspection and make it part of the same inspection. The problem is, in some counties in Utah, you don't have to have an emissions inspection. I think the state needs to standardize that. I'm actually on the fence for this issue. I know a lot of people who don't take care of their vehicles, and genuinely do pose a risk to other drivers. But, I think these business owners would do well to make this an opportunity to change their business model, and maybe even increase their profits in the process. Maybe offer a program to get your car inspected annually in exchange for a discount on any repairs they find you need...

In the end, I guess I'd like to see more concrete data supporting either side. It's easy to point to other states' statistics, but not all of those states have the same driving conditions we do with snow, etc.

Silence Dogood
Caliente, NV

It said in the article that equipment failure is not a major cause of accidents. Maybe that's because regular safety inspections are performed.

10 years ago, I was an automotive tech in Utah. The safety inspection only cost $10 at that time. Most cars passed easily. But then there was the time that we had a guy bring a car in that had no brakes... literally. The pads, the rotors, AND the calipers on all wheels had been worn down until there was nothing left, not even brake fluid (it's kind of hard to keep fluid in the system when the calipers are missing). We asked him how he was stopping and he replied "I just throw it in reverse". We told him that if he tried to drive off we would call the state police. This of course upset him because it was going to cost a couple of thousand dollars to fix the problem. But would you want him driving on the road with you? The cars that did NOT pass inspection usually had bad tires (in the wintertime in Utah driving with bad tires is akin to attempted murder). Do you really want to be on the road with cars that cannot stop effectively because the tires are bald? Safety inspections simply ensure that a car can stop, that the lights and horn works, that the driver can see properly, and that a wheel isn't going to come off when it's driving down the highway at 75 MPH. I'd say that these things are pretty important.

South Jordan, UT


How do you know that the safety inspections DO reduce accidents? A program should be proven effective before implementing. But especially, if it can't be proven justifiably effective after implementing, it should be scrapped.

No safety inspections in California. No reports of car failure that I can recall ever reported, though I assume there may be a few. But it's not worth charging all drivers $$$millions for the 1% (or whatever small number it is) that do have a problem.

Crying that safety inspection reduction will cost jobs at repair shops just proves how unnecessary the program is from a safety standpoint. Without any safety argument, it's a waste of time/money for drivers, which is all that should matter.

Obviously most of the posts here correctly think it's a waste. Isn't the government supposed to represent the people?

Salt Lake City, UT

@Noodlekaboodle: "How do you know that the safety inspections don't reduce accidents."

Some states, Washington for example, do not have safety inspections. Their accident rates likely approximate Utah's.

"Saying that accidents right now aren't because of vehicle breakdowns could easily be attributed to the fact that we do have safety inspections."

What's a breakdown? Engine stops running? Pull over and call a tow truck. Brake pads need renewing? Brake pads have a device that squeaks when low. Educate drivers to monitor. Tire tread low? Garages automatically check with periodic maintenance (oil change, etc.). Horn doesn't work? Car owner can check that. Tail/head lights don't work? Cops will pull you over to remind. Otherwise, just look out your windshield as you leave the house. If it looks too dark, get out and inspect.

"If there is actual data that proves that safety inspections don't reduce accidents then by all means eliminate the program."

Is there any data that show inspections reduce accidents? Or did the government pull data out of the air and unilaterally decide it knows best? I grant you that the government does own the road, so, naturally it can decide under what conditions a driver can use it.

"But you can't use the fact that accidents aren't happening now due to vehicle breakdowns to prove your point, because we do have a safety inspection program...."

The state apparently can enforce inspection sans data.

The way to reduce accidents on the freeway with the potential for breakdowns is to (1) obey speed limits, and (2) obey other traffic laws such as don't tailgate.

Salt Lake City, UT

Did I see where the annual vehicle registration fee will increase to cover the reduced revenue should the safety inspection be cut?

Good grief! I had no idea that the government sucked up some of the inspection charge.

West Valley, UT

Yes! Less inspections please! All these "safety" inspections are just a gimmick... a way for the state and auto shops to make a quick buck off of people.

If you want to decrease highway traffic accidents try spending some money to get people OFF CELL PHONES!

Scotty Boy
Logan, UT

I worked in the Automotive business for many years, and I saw the way people fix their vehicles. If it is not broken they don't fix it. I can't tell you the amount of cars that came from other states that did not have inspections and how bad they were, brakes, suspension, tires, exhaust, windshields, were not fixed until they failed the inspection. Now I don't like to pay if I don't have to, but to say that safety inspections were and not working is very irresponsible. They have and do work. We need to get the State Legislature out of the mix, and let the DOT set what needs to be done on the inspections. The DOT is the ones that have to deal with the problems that are on the road. Plus they need to tighten up the inspections, there are many state inspection stations that are willing to pass anything, if it is one of their buddies or friends. the thing about the inspections are, you can go to any shop to have them fixed.

Mr. Bean
Salt Lake City, UT

Silence Dogood:

"Do you really want to be on the road with cars that cannot stop effectively because the tires are bald?

Do you want to be on the road with car divers who exceed the legal speed limit? There's were the deaths occur. Studies show most property damage and deaths on freeways is caused by speeding. The government and the Highway Patrol almost totally ignore this proven killer. Instead, they make everyone pay an inspection fee to maybe save someone from having a breakdown on the road.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments