Periodic vehicle safety inspections have long been proven to be unnecessary and
ineffective, which is why only 14 states still have these inspections, and in
those states they are under fire. This program is an insult to the motorist, it
makes the assumption that motorists are lazy, stupid scofflaws that won't keep
their cars in order. In actuality, this program is really a clever
government-business scam that wastes the motorists time and money, and promotes
the up sell of fraudulent repairs to helpless victims.Rep.Dougall is
an honest and courageous legislator to take on this useless program, I commend
him for it, and while I'd like to see it go away completely, as it has in so
many other states, any relief he can get the Utah motorist from this RACKET is
very much appreciated. Go Rep. Dougall, you are the man!
Re: Silence Dogood | 11:01 a.m. Feb. 10, 2012 "and that a wheel isn't
going to come off when it's driving down the highway at 75 MPH."I'm much more concerned with the drunk driver or texting teenager headed
straight for me than I am about a wheel coming off my car. What it the truth
about safety inspections that California knows and we don't?
Having worked in a garage, I've seen the program work. Many people will run a
car until the wheel falls off in traffic, until they repair it. If a garage
tells you it needs repair, and you disagree, you have options, from a state
officer to getting second opinions. After 3 years, every other year
is fine. What is the motive behind this, we have had inspections for decades? Do
we want junkers driving our streets like third world countries?
@Mr. Bean: I see more problems here with drivers on the freeway going below the
speed limit than above it. Every day on my commute I come upon people doing
55-65 when other traffic is doing 70-80. It creates this massive backup because
everyone has to hit the brakes then try to go around. You get people slowing
down, speeding up, shifting to the left and to the right to pass. It breeds
confusion and disrupts the smooth and orderly flow of traffic.When
on the freeway the rule is "go with the flow." I.E. maintain speed
relative to that of vehicles around you. If traffic is doing 65-70 you need to
be doing 65-70. If traffic is doing 75-80 you need to be doing 75-80. Move to
the left if you need to pass someone, then clear that lane so the next person
can do the same. If you can't keep up with traffic on the freeway
you don't need to be on it.
Base the inspection interval on miles, not years. Years are almost
meaningless.Require inspections at:1) 50,000 miles2) 80,000 miles3) every 20,000 miles after that
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.
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.
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!
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.
@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.
Noodlekaboodle: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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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
Wowsie...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...
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?
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"
WrzHow 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 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.
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.