<VV> police harassment - again -long

Chris C ricorvair at cox.net
Sat Oct 1 14:18:10 EDT 2005

I tend to agree.  RI went to a 2 year inspection, and I think that was 
stupid (upped the fee to 47 because of emissions).
Now a car with marginal brakes and tires has two years to get really 
bad.  Had a car pass inspection on the first and get a new front axel by 
the 30'th.   But it passed then.

Inpections are not for those of us who care.  Its to protect us against 
those who don't care or know enough.

Still bring my cars to the shop classic or otherwise and pay to get them 
checked out by somebody else.

At 09:47 PM 9/30/2005, you wrote:
>We have a similar situation here in North Carolina. Cars 35 years old and 
>older are not required to have a safety inspection (regardless of plate). 
>This is a new requirement this year. I'm sure a lot of police officers 
>don't know about it, it wasn't very well publicised.
>I probably have a different perspective on this situation that a lot of 
>people. I am a State Inspector and I encourage people to have their 
>Corvairs inspected even though it isn't required. It certainly isn't 
>because of the $8 "profit" I make for 20 minutes of work that often turns 
>into an hour when I have a problem with the inspection machine or the car 
>being inspected. It's because I think the service I provide is a bargain 
>as is the certification that the car is "safe". I have personally 
>experienced a situation where an insurance company accused me of having an 
>unsafe Corvair when their insured ran into me. The fact that my car had 
>recently been inspected was a factor in the settlement. In North Carolina 
>an insurance company gets out of paying anything if they can prove that 
>you in any way (like 1%) contribute to the accident.
>I know that most people don't like the State telling them they have to do 
>anything, especially when it come to our cars, but I think it is foolish 
>not to take advantage of a real bargain.
>Spence Shepard----- Original Message ----- From: <mhicks130 at cox.net>
>To: <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
>Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 11:36 PM
>Subject: <VV> police harassment - again -long
>>A while back I posted about being pulled over by a York County VA sheriff 
>>because I didn't have the state-mandated safety inspection sticker in my 
>>window.  He told me that antique cars were not exempt.  Afterwards I 
>>talked to a state police officer (they oversee the safety inspection 
>>laws) and he said antique registered cars ARE exempt and suggested that I 
>>keep a copy of the laws in my glovebox for the next time I got pulled 
>>over.  Well I got pulled over again today - by the SAME sheriff's deputy.
>>This time he was directing traffic in front of a school.  He left his 
>>post, drove the wrong way in the opposing lane to chase me down - for not 
>>having a sticker (which I am exempt by law from having).  I was ready for 
>>him this time - I had my printouts.  He saw them when he walked up to the 
>>car and asked if was going to read them to him.  I replied "if I have 
>>to". I told him that I had talked to the state police and they told me I 
>>was exempt.  He said they lied to me!!!  I barked back that no they did 
>>not. I then read the laws to him as requested.  He admitted that I was 
>>right (??). He then threatened to pull my tags and force me to tow my car 
>>home because it was unsafe in his oppoinion because I couldn't "prove" 
>>the brakes were good.  I offered to jack the car up and show him but he 
>>wanted the inspection pink slip. I told him the inspection slip doesn't 
>>prove anything and again offered to show him my brakes.  I was actually 
>>YELLING at this guy by this time.  I know it's no
>>t a good idea but I couldn't help it.  Telling my the state police were 
>>liars and then threatening to impound my plates with no probable cause 
>>was more than I could take.  I accused him of harassment and demanded 
>>another officer be brought to the scene.  I felt things were getting ugly 
>>fast and I wanted a "real" cop to be there.  Well things calmed down and 
>>me and the deputy had a reasonable little talk after that.  He said he 
>>didn't remember talking to me before and was just trying to inform me of 
>>the laws pertaining to antique vehicles.  But of course he was telling me 
>>the wrong laws until I read him the real law.  He knew the real law too, 
>>he just doesn't like people not having inspections and using their 
>>cars.  They only gray area here is the law restricts the kind of driving 
>>you can do - you aren't supposed to use antique cars for daily 
>>transportation.  It does allow you to use it for club activities, shows, 
>>repairs and "pleasure drives". Unfortunately it doesn't define
>>  "pleasure drives" anywhere.  The state police officer said because of 
>> that I could drive it pretty much how I wanted.  The sheriff's deputy 
>> thought it meant I can't even stop for a bite to eat if I'm on a 
>> pleasure drive.
>>I ended up not getting a ticket, which I almost wish I had got so we 
>>could settle this thing.  I don't know what to do.  At the end of it all 
>>he was shaking my hand, tellng me I was a good guy, congradulating me on 
>>informing myself on the laws and offering to take me out for coffee the 
>>next time we met.  I'm quite the diplomat I guess.  The allows me to 
>>drive my car the way I have been driving but this guy doesn't like 
>>that.  I'm tempted to get a sticker just to get this guy off my back but 
>>I'm still young enough to want to fight for principle!!!  Dammit.
>>BTW, he did talk to me about the Bible and God and the commandments and 
>>stuff.  It turns out we're not human beings having a spiritual 
>>experience, we're spiritual beings having a human experience.  He's very 
>>knowledgible on holy things this guy.  I got a less of it this time than 
>>the last time he pulled me over.  It still aint right though.
>>Sorry for the long post but you guys are the only ones who would 
>>understand my dilema.
>>This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights 
>>are the property
>>of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
>>mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
>>This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, 
>>Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
>>Change your options: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
>This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are 
>the property
>of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
>This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, http://www.corvair.org/
>Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
>Change your options: 

More information about the VirtualVairs mailing list