REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-01-2012, 10:50 AM   #51
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nsx042003 View Post
what the hell? might as well give everyone in the city a ticket because that's how fogs are wired from the factory....

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubenoff View Post
from the B.C Regulations.



4.11 (1) A motor vehicle may be equipped with 2 fog lamps, mounted on the front of the vehicle below the headlamps, that are capable of displaying only white or amber light.

(2) Each fog lamp must be
(a) mounted not more than 30 cm below the headlamps, and
(b) adjusted and aimed so that, at a distance of 8 m from the lamp, the centre of the beam is at least 10 cm below the height of the fog lamp.
(3) The fog lamp wiring and switch must permit simultaneous operation of the parking lamps, tail lamps, licence plate lamp and, if required, clearance lamps.
(4) The operator of a vehicle may use fog lamps instead of headlamps when atmospheric conditions make the use of headlamps disadvantageous.

Ok, let's look at the important bits.

There's nothing illegal about the way most cars are wired from the factory. The regulations require the car to be wired such that when the fog lights are illuminated, the tail lamps, corner markers, licence plate lamps, etc.. must be on.

The regulations don't require the low-beams to be off when the fog lights are in use - the low beams can be on at any time (even though in practical use, it would be better if car makers didn't wire them up this way).

The regulations do not restrict the use of fog lamps to adverse weather conditions. This means you can have your fog lights on at any time of day or night regardless of the weather. However - they can only be used in place of your low beam headlamps if the weather conditions make the use of low beam headlights disadvantageous.
Advertisement
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-05-2012, 09:07 AM   #52
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks we need to get the Regulations and Police on their toes to better address highways safety issues, here is a letter we wrote to our premier to try and get the regulations updated



Ms. Christy Clarke Premier of B.C Feb 09 2012


as a retired Licensed B.C. M.V. inspector we ask your assistance in Having a order in council put in place update to the current Motor Vehicle act regulation # 4.11 controlling the installation and use of fog lamps on vehicles .


Reason for the request for update is related to improving highway safety in B.C
the regulations currently do not allow or require the Police to issue citations to people who switch on their vehicle fog lamps and never shut them off, this cause a problem in
the night time when the weather is clear and there are no fog or atmospheric conditions that requires the use of fog lamps and using the fog lamps adds 100% more light for the eyes,s of the approaching motorist, Because the Low beam headlamps are also lit


Please have the following words added to section 4.11.4 which will read as an addition
(A) operators of vehicles may not use fog lamps with low beam beam headlamps during clear weather at night time due to the added light from fog lamps shining into the eyes of oncoming motorists, and or shining into the rear view mirrors or vehicles being followed
Suggested citation fog ignoring the 4.11.4 (A) regulation update $ 75.00


in the U.K and Australia this regulation has been in place for many years

Share
Reply With Quote
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2012, 06:58 PM   #53
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ms.Dianna Craig President and C.E.O .Ford Motor Company

Dear Madam.
My we please have your consideration and cooperation in sorting out the Minor glitch in the Lighting system on the 2007 ford focus serial #1FAFP36N57W115166
we love the unit however in the assembly of the electrical system there seem's a small glitch exist's in the the operation of the fog lamps and DaytimeRunning lamp operations ie.

The main light switch on the first position allows the parking light.s, Tail lamps and marker lamps to operate,and in that light switch position the fog lamps switch can be switched to fog lamps on, and that allows us to meet the B.C.Motor Vehicle act regulations 4.11. 3 and 4.11.4 so we could choose to have fog lamps alone with park tail and side marker lamps. The reason we want this use of fog lamps alone is to help shine light from the low mounted fog lamps under the fog or mist conditions, and to prevent the light from the higher mounted main lamps from reflecting back from the water droplets in the fog condition ( the Factory plan seemed to be in place up to this point)

However on the 2007 Ford Focus when the engine is started the daytime running lamps come on and we cannot shut them off, to allow us to use the lower fog lamps alone when the weather is foggy, snowy or sleet raining condition What we are asking for is a Ford approved Drawing to allow a modification to the O.E.M installation where the Daytime running lamp power supply is interrupted through a Normally closed relay and where there trigger signal for the relay will come from the fog lamp power supply .

So that anytime the fog lamps are used the D.R.L .signal will be interrupted and extinguish the D.R.L. to the Low beam of the front lights as far as safety is concerned we will still have the fog lamps and park lamps side markers and tail,lamps lit and still meet M.V regulations

and any time we switch back to fog lamps off the circuit will revert to normal operations, all D.R.L and other functions of the lighting system will operate as designed and we will still be able to use low beam with the fog lamps added if desired when the weather condition reverts to clear, or to shut off the fog lamps until they are required again to meet road and weather condition,s

Having this minor modification on factory supplied units will allow the use of fog lamps alone with tail lamps marker lamps and park lamps or

allow the use of low beam and fog lamps on low beam with park lamps tail lamps marker lamps and normal D.R.L. operations so its a win win situation and the vehicle would better meet Vehicle regulation and customer needs where the operator wants to exercise their choice for better lighting control in foggy conditions

all other lighting system functions are well accepted on the unit These comment are coming from a retired Vehicle inspector, and licensed mechanic

thanks you in advance for the opportunity to submit suggestions for product improvements we will pay
the installation costs however would like the approved drawing and part number for the relay required to complete the modification
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2012, 07:36 PM   #54
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,508
Thanked 2,597 Times in 849 Posts
Now I'm going to write my own letter to the premier to not to listen to you.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-06-2012, 04:42 AM   #55
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
jlenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 3,562
Thanked 330 Times in 163 Posts
Hmm... Christy Clark gonna worry about fog lights.. or the teachers problem.

Writing letters like that... Wow, what a waste of time!
__________________
Don't be the next RS.net statistic - If you drink, don't drive. You'll lose your licence, and the rest of us will laugh at you.
jlenko is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-06-2012, 06:10 AM   #56
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Nolt to be confrontational or anything, but having someone proofread your letters for grammar, spelling, punctuation etc before sending them would give you more credibility. It detracts from the message you are attempting to convey.

BTW, as far as blinding other drivers goes...the existing regulations on fog lights already says that..

(b) adjusted and aimed so that, at a distance of 8 m from the lamp, the centre of the beam is at least 10 cm below the height of the fog lamp.

Last edited by zulutango; 03-06-2012 at 06:16 AM.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-06-2012, 03:41 PM   #57
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
duplicate sorry
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:28 PM   #58
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
Nolt to be confrontational or anything, but having someone proofread your letters for grammar, spelling, punctuation etc before sending them would give you more credibility. It detracts from the message you are attempting to convey.

BTW, as far as blinding other drivers goes...the existing regulations on fog lights already says that..

(b) adjusted and aimed so that, at a distance of 8 m from the lamp, the centre of the beam is at least 10 cm below the height of the fog lamp.
Thank you ,Yes there are many time.s throughout the life of a vehicle that the aiming of headlamps and or fog lamps are a road safety priority, some examples are listed below


(1) when the unit is new fresh from the factory
(2) any time weight has been added to the vehicle ie. Canopy. winch, tool box, fuel tank, welder
or a deck that is used for carrying weight
(3) when the unit is used for towing trailers,
(4) anytime repairs are completed to the suspension of vehicle ( new springs etc. accident's)
(5) when the unit ages and there is settlement of the suspension ( 3-5 years)
(6) operator complaint or complaint from the public

in our current M.V operations and policing system in B.C and Canada. there is a lack of a repeat requirement for mechanical inspection as in other countries

How many vehicles are referred by police authority to be taken in to. M.V. inspection station's for headlamp or fog lamp alignments??

why are there no road side inspections of the headlamp and fog lamp alignments ???

saying there is a requirement and ensuring the requirement is met are two seperate issue's as a retired fleet manager we trained mechanics in the use of headlamp alignment tools on Cars, truck's graders snow plow trucks and found in many cases new vehicles from the factory were supplied without the proper alignment adjustments Thanks for the reminder that many times road safety item's may go undetected

Have a nice week

Last edited by rubenoff; 03-06-2012 at 05:38 PM.
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 05:18 PM   #59
I Will not Admit my Addiction to RS
 
GoneGuru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Surrey
Posts: 503
Thanked 1,392 Times in 180 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
Nolt to be confrontational or anything, but having someone proofread your letters for grammar, spelling, punctuation etc before sending them would give you more credibility. It detracts from the message you are attempting to convey.

BTW, as far as blinding other drivers goes...the existing regulations on fog lights already says that..

(b) adjusted and aimed so that, at a distance of 8 m from the lamp, the centre of the beam is at least 10 cm below the height of the fog lamp.

GoneGuru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2012, 02:17 PM   #60
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubenoff View Post
why are there no road side inspections of the headlamp and fog lamp alignments ???
Because we don't need to live in a police state.

Sorry sir, your lights are out of alignment
I know, I'm carrying cement and dirt for the new garden I'm building
Doesn't matter, your lights are pointing too high, here's your VI order, get it fixed.


It's pretty easy to spot illegal lights without the need for mandatory roadside inspections.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-08-2012, 06:45 AM   #61
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
BC used to have mandatory annual vehicle inspections, like most other Proivinces in Canada, but they droipped them a good few years back. In New Zealand, for instance, they require inspections every 6 months, not annually. Right now the only way an unsafe and/or illegally modded vehicle will be required to comform with the BC laws, is if the driver gets caught on the highway with it.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-08-2012, 08:51 AM   #62
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
BC used to have mandatory annual vehicle inspections, like most other Proivinces in Canada, but they droipped them a good few years back. In New Zealand, for instance, they require inspections every 6 months, not annually. Right now the only way an unsafe and/or illegally modded vehicle will be required to comform with the BC laws, is if the driver gets caught on the highway with it.
Thanks ! and its because of the lack of mandatory iinspections that the importance of road side inspections is of a safety priority, the road side inspections in the rogers pass reveal many vehicle faults and reap drugs, and other items that would normally go undetected, people that use drugs and drink and drive usually have a lower respect level for the vehicle being operated, we have seen fewer overloaded pickups with single tires, with heavy campers now on the roads the trend is to use larger sized trucks with dual tires with proper capacity to handle the load, our R.V. has duals and air bags and there is no problem with the headlamp alignment, Its because of road side inspections that there was a change in trucks with campers , Thanks Roadside inspection staff Much appreciated, watch for the guy with his lights pointed at the moon at night it will be the guy with a load of gravel in a Mini truck squirming from side to side because the tire,s are half flat and an accident waiting to happen
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 09:00 AM   #63
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
WE have a retired R.C.M.P. who has a goal to improve highway safety, he wants a call in tip line that has an input onto the desk of the M.V. supt. where unsafe driving is reported and the report contains names of person and witness making the report, with dates location licence numbers time etc, and the Supt would call the owner and ask for cooperation in better driving otherwise call the witness and do court action to correct bad driving or poor attitude towards highway safety we like the idea drivers who have poor driving habits normally offend more than one driver on the highways, and need our support to improve Have a nice day
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 09:35 AM   #64
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
BC used to have mandatory annual vehicle inspections, like most other Proivinces in Canada, but they droipped them a good few years back. In New Zealand, for instance, they require inspections every 6 months, not annually. Right now the only way an unsafe and/or illegally modded vehicle will be required to comform with the BC laws, is if the driver gets caught on the highway with it.
Some consideration's for Provincial vehicle inspections should be

all vehicle over 5 years of age
all vehicles older than 5 years

Once inspected the repeat inspection could be considered at every 2-3 years

Its the first inspection that will tale all the Krap off the road system
because many of the older vehicles have underlying rust problems or will have a total repair bill that will have owners thinking this is the time to invest in a newer vehicles, Rather then throwing big Bucks into an older vehicle, we have seen many vehicles that have hugh holes in the bodies, Broken windshields bald tires and are still operating on the road systems, I.C.B.C should get interested in the inspection programme we know its not politically acceptable but death any injury accidents are expensive, having the inspections too often would be of no use other than a money grab
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 10:03 AM   #65
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
According to the 2007 ICBC collision statistics, vehicle condition was a factor in less than 2% of injury and fatal collisions and it's been that way for several years prior.

Mandatory inspections would increase the burden on the taxpayers to fund the system and on drivers to have inspections performed in addition to their regular servicing which is just as likely to catch a defect as the inspection would. Meanwhile we have patients dying in the hallways of overcrowded hospitals...

If you feel safer on the roads in a province or state where inspections are mandatory, then I suggest you move to where you're more comfortable. I like living where we have a little less regulation and a little less government meddling and somehow I seem to get by just fine. Please don't bring your security blanket with you if it's going to cover me too. I'm fine without it.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 02:29 PM   #66
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
According to the 2007 ICBC collision statistics, vehicle condition was a factor in less than 2% of injury and fatal collisions and it's been that way for several years prior.

Mandatory inspections would increase the burden on the taxpayers to fund the system and on drivers to have inspections performed in addition to their regular servicing which is just as likely to catch a defect as the inspection would. Meanwhile we have patients dying in the hallways of overcrowded hospitals...

If you feel safer on the roads in a province or state where inspections are mandatory, then I suggest you move to where you're more comfortable. I like living where we have a little less regulation and a little less government meddling and somehow I seem to get by just fine. Please don't bring your security blanket with you if it's going to cover me too. I'm fine without it.
The alternate to mandatory inspections are to give the police authority to visit Malls and parking areas where the Krappy vehicles are parked and have them towed and taken into inspection facilities and the required repair attended to so rusted out vehicle are taken off the streets and highways before they do cause accident because the conditions are very easy to spot
If the fenders and under the door areas are rotted out what condition do you think the brake lines and steering parts are in??

Have a nice weekend
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 02:46 PM   #67
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
That'll work well.

Er.. where's my car gone? Sorry ma'am, we noticed some spots of rust on your door, we towed it to an inspection facility.

Or... Hello, my name is officer ____, we're conducting random safety inspections. This will only take 20 minutes, we don't care if you'll be late for work or your Dr appt...


Again, so few collisions are caused by defective vehicles it's simply not worth it to spend the time and money on random VI's.


How about instead of parking 6 IRSU cars at the side of the road on the last day of the month running speed traps, they have the officers drive around looking for defective vehicles? It would spread the resources out over a wider area and catch more moving violations as well.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2012, 03:46 PM   #68
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
That'll work well.

Er.. where's my car gone? Sorry ma'am, we noticed some spots of rust on your door, we towed it to an inspection facility.

Or... Hello, my name is officer ____, we're conducting random safety inspections. This will only take 20 minutes, we don't care if you'll be late for work or your Dr appt...


Again, so few collisions are caused by defective vehicles it's simply not worth it to spend the time and money on random VI's.


How about instead of parking 6 IRSU cars at the side of the road on the last day of the month running speed traps, they have the officers drive around looking for defective vehicles? It would spread the resources out over a wider area and catch more moving violations as well.

Two cases near our home city (1) a father with no mechanical experience buys a $ 350.00 backyard fixer upper for his Daughter to drive and on her first trip is stopped in a road inspection and the car is pulled off the road because of serious mechanical safety problems. The father complains bitterly in the news media about the unfair treatment by the Police

BUT Guess what?? I.C.B.C. issued the licence for a 15 year old vehicle with faults to be operated on Public highways ?????

Case # 2 a low contractor purchases a 15 year old crew cab at an auction
and issues the unit to haul crew members to and from work, a concerned driver asked for a second opinion and after the second opinion The M.V. Branch did an inspection and the floor of the crew cab was rotted out so that the floor mat was the only thing holding the operators feet from falling through the floor of the vehicle the license plates were removed for the vehicle and the vehicle grounded

BUT Guess what ?
I.C.B.C issued the license decal for the unit without no regard for the condition of the vehicle that was to transport people ????

cheers is this the 2 % being quoted, I.C.B.C really need to address the need of prior mechanical inspections before issuing decals to problem older vehicles, because this is automatic approval to allow junk into the highway systems hoping the police may or may not catch the unit, in one case above thankfully they did

Cheers and thank you
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 12:12 PM   #69
Need to Seek Professional Help
 
Speed2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: yvr
Posts: 1,099
Thanked 496 Times in 201 Posts
rubenoff, I don't know why you have so much beef with someone having both fogs & low beams on; but personally I, and I'm sure many fellow rs members, don't have a problem with it. In this case you are probably the 1%. I do not find vehicles with factory fogs and low beams on at the same time blinding. What most of us have a problem with is people installing HID lights into non-projector housing and blinding us with that light. I also have a problem with people that run their high-beams constantly.
__________________
www.instagram.com/alex.soo/
Speed2K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 12:24 PM   #70
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
[If you feel safer on the roads in a province or state where inspections are mandatory, then I suggest you move to where you're more comfortable.

I used to live in NZ and my next door neighbour drove his 1931 Model A Ford as a daily driver, guy down the street drove a 1938 Morris 8. The twice per year inspections were very thorough and you had to have a vehicle that really was 100% mechanically. It was very common to see 30-40 yr old vehicles being used as normal transportation.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 01:50 PM   #71
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
And while they're mechanically sound and passing two inspections per year, they lack modern safety innovations and other benefits of newer vehicles.

I keep my car well maintained and I don't need the hassle of and expense of inspections.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 02:17 PM   #72
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
We as well keep our vehicles maintained the average cost per vehicle varies with the replacement of tires, batteries, and parts that wear out Mostly when the vehicle is relatively new, its oil changes and tire and brake inspections as called for in the owners manual The mandatory vehicle inspection is really not for folks that keep their unit properly maintained and maintenance is like insurance ie.change the fuel filter for $ 20.00 and save the fuel pump replacement cost of $ 500.00 In fleet operations the cost saving of a P.M. programme reaps huge saving for the owner, and the inspection cost is quite low its what is revealed in the inspection that cost money, and its pay me now a little money now or pay me later in huge costs, and there is little argument that a stitch in time saves 9, Most of the Krappy rusty vehicles on the highways and being operated because people want to see what they can get away with and use the argument repairs are too expensive, yes many older vehicles can be operated on the highways if the owners will keep the required repairs attended to Cheers have a nice weekend
rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 04:07 PM   #73
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
[QUOTE=sebberry;7825436]And while they're mechanically sound and passing two inspections per year, they lack modern safety innovations and other benefits of newer vehicles.

Yep....only air bag in a Model A is the passenger mouthing off next to you.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-10-2012, 04:25 PM   #74
Wanna have a threesome?
 
MindBomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Squamish
Posts: 4,886
Thanked 5,052 Times in 1,656 Posts
The cost of semi-annual or even annual inspections would exceed the cost maintenance itself by a factor for my 10 year old Honda, and I maintain it to a nearly neurotic standard. Aggressively V.I. visibly defective or extremely poor condition vehicles, if they're on the road an officer should be able to spot them, I'm certainly able to.

I don't understand how anyone could care so much about fog lights. With all the wrong that happens in the world, and even more relevant, locally, this is a very strange issue for a person to concern yourself with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango
Nolt to be confrontational or anything, but having someone proofread your letters for grammar, spelling, punctuation etc before sending them would give you more credibility. It detracts from the message you are attempting to convey.

BTW, as far as blinding other drivers goes...the existing regulations on fog lights already says that..

(b) adjusted and aimed so that, at a distance of 8 m from the lamp, the centre of the beam is at least 10 cm below the height of the fog lamp.
That made me laugh, but I agree with Zulu's point completely. I have a difficult time not only reading, but taking anything Rubenoff writes seriously, given the complete lack of even basic grammar or apparent proof reading.
MindBomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2012, 08:54 PM   #75
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson B.C
Posts: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
[quote=zulutango;7825520]
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
And while they're mechanically sound and passing two inspections per year, they lack modern safety innovations and other benefits of newer vehicles.

Yep....only air bag in a Model A is the passenger mouthing off next to you.
some real nice vehicle's that are issued licence decals from I.C.B.C.
why are owners not required to supply photos of older units before licence decals are handed out like candy?? see u tube link below

rubenoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net