Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Ghawblin t1_j3m3k05 wrote

Go move to one of those other states. If you want to live in a safer cleaner environment, then deal with it.

Lived in GA/FL for a spell where there's zero inspections required for anything and you end up with barely held together shitboxes spewing black smoke.

High rates of uninsured motorists and no front-plate requirements mean hit-and-run drivers can usually get off with no repercussion.

129

mdavis00 t1_j3orcyp wrote

Can confirm, I spent a few years in AL and every time it rained there was a car on the side on the road on its roof because no one would think to check their tires to see if they are safe to be driving on.

9

1diligentmfer t1_j3m9rpm wrote

"Why can't I drive around on bald tires, useless wipers, and shitty brakes if I want, it's my vehicle?"

Because you may hit my vehicle with my family in it, with your shitbox. Then I'd sue you into homelessness, so the law is actually protecting both of us, see?

129

toppsseller t1_j3tez9n wrote

They don't check wipers and barely check E-brakes. Tires can be down to 3/32nds of tread which is basically bald.

Mass inspections are nothing but money grabs. If they really cared they wouldn't require an inspection until a car was 5 years old.

2

labrie_sideloaders t1_j3rea7q wrote

Mass state inspection doesn't check your brakes. They check if your e-brake will hold up to 1600rpms. So goodluck with the lawsuit

1

lostmindplzhelp t1_j3su4b5 wrote

I think they do. On the Inspection Report there are "service brakes" and "parking brake"

2

labrie_sideloaders t1_j3t0ckc wrote

The service brake check they do: Verifying there is not excessive pedal travel when stepping on the brakes, and making sure the vehicles stops and does not pull to either side at a speed of 4-8mph. Speeds rarely traveled at, speeds also easily controllable should there be a brake issue. Sure these may show if there is a fluid leakage. Not the actual condition of the braking system.

2

lostmindplzhelp t1_j3t236z wrote

Oh, yeah, that's not much, I'm surprised they don't include a visual inspection of the pads and rotors.

1

Opposite_Match5303 t1_j3lsrgu wrote

There was literally a post on this sub a couple days ago about a hit and run that they couldn't ID because the offender was missing the front plates.

127

warlocc_ t1_j3mxv4k wrote

Which only proves that without serious enforcement, it's just another law meant to inconvenience honest people.

−82

Educational-List8475 t1_j3n35jj wrote

I don’t think it was created to inconvenience honest people lol

50

massahoochie t1_j3n9emb wrote

Their comment made me laugh so hard. Like how delusional?

30

LionClean8758 t1_j3pli21 wrote

If anything, it helps me identify my ride faster, which I as an honest person appreciate.

9

warlocc_ t1_j3ncau6 wrote

I'm not sure what else to call a law when it's not enforced. Any ideas?

−20

Educational-List8475 t1_j3npz3j wrote

Well you call it an unenforced law. What your comment says is the law was written, and thereby meant, to inconvenience honest citizens. It’s not written specifically to inconvenience you by the way.

10

WedSpassky t1_j3ov0uw wrote

Considering the police are lazy self-righteous fucks that have the blue flu every time there’s even a sniff of reform/accountability most laws in this country are unenforced, particularly ones linked to crimes that entitled white people commit.

What do you call that? Systemic racism.

6

Yanosh457 t1_j3quidj wrote

It’s enforced. I bought a new vehicle once and drove it home with only one license plate. I got pulled over but only given a warning.

2

RevengencerAlf t1_j3ne5xk wrote

Having a front plate doesn't really inconvenience anyone.

Aesthetically, I would prefer my car not have front plate, or have European style plates that are longer and narrower so they fit in the lines of most cars better, but it doesn't inconvenience me one bit. Every car built in like the last 50 years has front plate mounting points and when you register for the first time they just give you two plates.

26

PantherBrewery t1_j3o9pkh wrote

I agree with having two plates but my Dodge Challenger does not have a plate mount on the front bumper. I had to drill into the front fascia to mount the plate. Someone already hit it and tore it off, so it goes. It was replaced, something would have been damaged anyway. I would have liked a different European plate mount but I am an American, what is, is.

2

RevengencerAlf t1_j3r9ilp wrote

If a car made since the 90s doesn't have a plate mount on the front that is literally no one's fault but the dogshit manufacturer that is living in the 80s.

1

warlocc_ t1_j3nivb1 wrote

>Having a front plate doesn't really inconvenience anyone.

I actually agree with this.

I was pointing out the issue of having a law and watching people ignore said law.

−3

pillbinge t1_j3prhfd wrote

Would honest people not attach a license plate to their car?

1

ThrillDr1 t1_j3lrsmi wrote

Massachusetts strives to be better, safer and smarter, and so far, they are doing it well.

71

Old-Spend-8218 t1_j3pk3y2 wrote

Sure and Moderna is a fine representative of that sentiment.☠️☠️☠️

−3

modernhomeowner t1_j3ls4hv wrote

I have to say, having taken an Uber in many states and countries, in MA, having a plate on the front and back is much easier to find the car! I hate in one plate states, a white RAV4... Oh goodie there are three in a row! Lol.

Inspections... The places without inspections you see more cars missing a brake light than the ones with all 3 lights. I don't love a nanny state but I do like knowing when the person in front of me is stopping so I can too.

65

heklakatla t1_j3m2tyu wrote

IIRC every state in the northeast except PA & DE require front plates; even VA.

Life is too short to stress over something like this but if it causes heartache take a look at the states above, or OH.

62

PakkyT t1_j3mcyky wrote

There are not 31+ other states that allow single license plates. Only 19 and many of those are some of our shittiest states for a variety of reasons. I don't think we should be saying MA should be more like, for example, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and West Virginia.

62

KayakerMel t1_j3njbrf wrote

Even Texas has required front license plates for decades!

16

Notmystationbro t1_j3nab28 wrote

Your extreme bias is showing

−21

Son_of_Blorko t1_j3ncccc wrote

You're in Mass and you don't share that bias? Feel free to move. We're one of the top states on every list for a reason.

23

PakkyT t1_j3njw1o wrote

Yes it is because I was not just "showing", I was explicitly stating my biased opinion. But good job on your deduction skills. Gold star for you.

10

Notmystationbro t1_j3nydgd wrote

What’s wrong with Florida? It’s the number 1 state people are moving to.

−8

PakkyT t1_j3o5uhi wrote

"Florida Man" sums it up.

6

A_Man_Who_Writes t1_j3okskw wrote

No it definitely doesn’t. Florida Man is a meme and it’s an extremely unrealistic picture of people who live there. It’s insane how anyone can say don’t live in Florida because “Florida Man” and get upvoted here. Such a shame. Are we to suggest we don’t have plenty of uneducated crackheads in MA?

−3

PakkyT t1_j3pc0yp wrote

>Are we to suggest we don’t have plenty of uneducated crackheads in MA?

HAhahahahahaha. I love that your counter is basically...

"well sure it is full of crackheads, but there are some in MA too, right? Anyone? Are you with me? Someone?"

You showed me Florida Man.

1

Notmystationbro t1_j3o71su wrote

So explain why people are flocking to Florida then? https://studyfinds.org/florida-states-americans-moving-to/

−4

PakkyT t1_j3pbpmj wrote

You seem a little obsessed. Perhaps you should go with them. Bye Florida Man!

3

FishballJohnny t1_j3n9yft wrote

Florida shitty state? Huh?

−24

PakkyT t1_j3nk4n6 wrote

One of the shittiest. Heck you even have a universal term of "Florida Man" because of what pieces of work most people are who live there. Not even Mississippi has that. Good job Florida!

17

Competitive-Boat4592 t1_j3lqz7j wrote

inspection: safety, emissions and emission controls. Double plates: LE

21

AxemanFromMA OP t1_j3lr7na wrote

MA should abolish the front plate rule. Imagine buying a $50,000+ car and having to drill holes into your front bumper. Front plates reduce the areo dynamics and hurt MPG. They also create more waste. Bring back the green rear plates only.

−83

Son_of_Blorko t1_j3m75mn wrote

> reduce the areo dynamics and hurt MPG

JFC, are you for real?!? Please, move to Florida - you'll fit right in there.

32

ButtBlock t1_j3n6hva wrote

Won’t get good mileage when your car is underwater though.

7

Competitive-Boat4592 t1_j3lrle1 wrote

I don’t personally find it to be that much of an issue.

30

AxemanFromMA OP t1_j3lrtgc wrote

They ruin the look of the car

−61

notanotheramber t1_j3lsd31 wrote

According to your profile you drive a 2014 Tacoma... Who cares?

45

somegridplayer t1_j3m4kwn wrote

That plate is hurting his MPG in the truck with the worst economy on the market.

10

AxemanFromMA OP t1_j3lsgts wrote

Yeah I’m buying another car and don’t want it

−29

Hot-Cry920 t1_j3lvfz3 wrote

I have a brand new corvette, im gonna velcro it to front for inspection shits stupid

−26

AxemanFromMA OP t1_j3lvija wrote

Finally someone on this sub is a car guy

−4

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3lwdho wrote

You're in the wrong sub if you like cars, guns, or freedom. Everyone here thinks anyone with a car louder than a brand new stock prius is a little dick asshole who just wants attention. They think anyone with a gun is actually a serial killer and school shooter. And they all think if we don't have the nanny state controlling everything, nobody will be smart enough to survive. It's fucking annoying.

−27

Son_of_Blorko t1_j3m7bb5 wrote

You three sound like Maine would suit you better.

8

ThreeDogs2022 t1_j3mhgle wrote

They sound like a truck stop bathroom when the cleaning service has been on strike for three weeks would suit them better. Garbage is as garbage does.

5

SugarSecure655 t1_j3lvdgp wrote

I'd rather be safe pal. There are more important issues other than esthetics.

8

somegridplayer t1_j3m4hmo wrote

​

> Front plates reduce the areo dynamics and hurt MPG.

You have a giant wing that you think does something don't you?

16

Paul_Molotov t1_j3lukfz wrote

2 plates also makes it easier to identify a vehicle in hit and run situations, amber alerts, and more difficult to swap out license plates on stolen vehicles.

13

ManifestDestinysChld t1_j3ngjjo wrote

I thought you had to be at least 13 years old to post on this website...?

5

Hoosac_Love t1_j3lrnjr wrote

The State police want them for plate scanner equipment and for the auto tolls on the pike that also can scan for plates on cars reported stolen.

18

DunkinRadio t1_j3luzn9 wrote

So cars from states without a front plate don't get tolled?

−1

Hoosac_Love t1_j3lvcbz wrote

I think they do It's also for State police scanner equipment

2

ManifestDestinysChld t1_j3nfnkc wrote

And just miss out on collecting that revenue? I'm sure they figured something out.

0

DunkinRadio t1_j3ngs5v wrote

They take a picture of the back plate, not the front.

To beat that, just use a bike rack which covers your plate. Free tolls!

2

sterrrmbreaker t1_j3m9474 wrote

I would hate not having car inspections here. It's one way we can assure that the cars on the road with us are safe to drive and aren't going to cause accidents or emit too much pollutants that take down our air quality.

13

poprof t1_j3nzym3 wrote

Because I don’t want my family killed by you in your shit box whose frame is so rusted out it’s falling apart…or whose brakes and turn signals don’t work.

Sorry it’s an inconvenience - but get your jaloppy of the road. I grew up poor so I get it - and public transit sucks - but so does getting rear ended by a motorist driving a piece of shit with no insurance.

10

labrie_sideloaders t1_j3rer9w wrote

Mass state inspections do not check for brake or frame wear. They check if your ebrake holds up to 1600rpm. They check for cosmetic rust on the body claiming you will cut yourself.

1

lostmindplzhelp t1_j3svy2c wrote

They're supposed to check the frame too

1

labrie_sideloaders t1_j3szwwl wrote

It is listed in the book as a "visual inspection for rust that causes a hazard " I can assure you, even the tiniest of inspectors can barely fit underneath any vehicle that isn't an suv to get underneath and check. I've never once seen an inspector fully get a vehicle in the air and check its frame and undercarriage, because it is not required/specified.

1

lostmindplzhelp t1_j3t0vvc wrote

It must depend on the place doing the inspection. I've had one jack up one side of the car to look underneath and another that put my boss' car on the lift to check the tightness of the front end, which they ended up failing him for.

Some places definitely do as little as possible but there are some that really try hard to fail you. They are on camera now so there is less they can get away with.

1

Exepheous t1_j3me8v0 wrote

Still holding onto my green plate, had it since the 90s.

9

fakecrimesleep t1_j3nqova wrote

Green plates are better. I find the spirit of America plates to be disingenuous. If more of the US was like us we’d all be better off.

5

NCSUGrad2012 t1_j3osjm3 wrote

My uncle had his refurbished. Is yours original or did you have to have it fixed?

1

Exepheous t1_j42re1v wrote

Its original and does show some wear, I didnt think of restoring it, might have to look into it. Don’t want to lose it, if I can help it.

2

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3njoek wrote

It blows my mind that there are people on this sub that have argued that safety inspections, something empirically proved to make driving safer, don't need to exist.

7

Much_Razzmatazz1401 t1_j3ql356 wrote

As if the morning rush of over-caffinated SUV tailgaters in this state doesn't completely negate the miniscule safety levels that may or may not result from the inspection hassle.

1

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3qmd2y wrote

Empirical....evidence.

1

Much_Razzmatazz1401 t1_j3qn2l8 wrote

So you feel safe doing 85 with all the angry SUV drivers, but a Honda Civic with a bad airbag freaks you the fuck out. OK

0

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3qnq7i wrote

You changed your comment. Anyway, read the work of Luis Reyes on the subject. He does a lot of causal studies related to traffic safety.

>So you feel safe doing 85 with all the angry SUV drivers, but a Honda Civic with a bad airbag freaks you the fuck out. OK

No. Dont put words in peoples mouth. Speeding is dangerous, deadly, and stupid. But, the data shows that safety inspections lower crash rates and fatalities. So regardless of how stupid people drive, it helps.

0

Much_Razzmatazz1401 t1_j3qr5sa wrote

The "help"-to-hassle ratio does not help poor people who get harassed by police for failing inspection for oh, say, a check engine light, faulty airbag or a little rot on the wheel well. POC especially suffer from this. Cops scan your plate and see that the vehicle has "failed" and oh- wait....first name D'shawn? Bingo! Instant license to intimidate. But hey, if it keeps us "safe" enough to get killed by a stressed-out SUV mom who's been running on Dunkin on her way to her nursing gig, or an impatient Ford F350-driving roofing contractor, that's all that matters. It's a Yuppie's world ..

1

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3qswmp wrote

I don't a give a fuck about what you are talking about. I research transportation safety. Inspections save lives. Get the fuck over it.

You don't have a right to drive. Pass the inspection or get the fuck off the road.

1

MLC9206 t1_j3n57hr wrote

If you’re a safe law-abiding driver, then you should be in favor of front facing plates so that more negligent drivers can be held accountable.

4

AverageJoe-707 t1_j3nkhi4 wrote

It's part of the Massachusetts experience. It works for the other 7 million people here so just accept it and move on.

4

pk5489 t1_j3mpn9x wrote

I don’t have a problem with the inspections or plate requirements, but it would be nice to make it a bit easier to get the inspections done. It’s currently an old fashioned system of driving around looking for a place that only does inspections during the working hours of most people or on Saturday when the waits are the longest. I’m greeted by an annoyed stare by some gas station that doesn’t want to even do it for whatever reason. It’s 2023, so maybe joining the 21st century with an online scheduling system would help.

3

RevengencerAlf t1_j3nep50 wrote

This I agree with. Inspections being mandatory is fine but in 2022 I should be able to go to a single website somewhere and book an appointment to get it done. My sticker is overdue right now actually because the last 2 places I took a lunch break to go to weren't doing them. One apparently had a frozen garage door and the other I think had their license to do it taken away but wouldn't admit that so one of the 7 mechanics standing around told me they were shorthanded.

3

ManifestDestinysChld t1_j3nfslw wrote

My place has an online scheduling system.

Twist: It's shitty and frequently breaks, so it doesn't actually save frustration, more like displaces it.

3

AbbreviationsFar7867 t1_j3mrm26 wrote

I live in Nebraska, and though inspections aren't required, front and rear plates ARE.

3

BoringAccountName78 t1_j3opf50 wrote

I get needing front and back plates, but yearly inspections can be a bit tedious.

I have since moved out of state, but my mother was told that her car wouldn't pass inspection because her license plate was "too faded." Last time I saw her car was in August and it really wasn't that faded.

I could see having inspections ever 2 years for cars older than five years, but every year is a bit much.

3

iluvtravel t1_j3lsvbe wrote

I’m OK with 2 plates, and regular emissions, but is there any data that shows the “safety inspection” does anything to enhance safety? Anything at all?

2

lvalleli t1_j3mdt87 wrote

Meta-analyses show that studies vary between not being able to find a firm conclusion, or pointing to the conclusion that safety inspections make roads safer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8296297/

Much of Europe has much more stringent vehicle inspections than even Mass, (Germany as the most notable example). The most English-friendly single-case study I found was out of Norway, and concludes firmly that inspections reduced the number of unsafe cars on the road, but resulting accidents and fatalities were not reduced by as much as expected, and posits that drivers of cars with faults that would fail inspection know that and adapt around it, to an extent, or are so negligent that they will crash no matter what the condition of their car. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16887091/).

On a more social-contract style argument, many if not all of the things tested for in vehicle safety inspections are directly related to how safe and easy it is to share the road with others in different ways. Front plates make it easier to have accountability for tolls and thefts. Better emissions benefit us all and all of our offspring. Proper lighting make it so I can see your car, and that you aren’t blinding me. Effective brakes and tires mean that you have more power to evade or mitigate a crash whether it’s your fault or not.

Interestingly, the meta-analysis also concluded that all these things that inspections make sure are in “working order” are just givens for newer cars- your 1990 Honda Civic in perfect condition is still horrible compared to a 2016 Honda in okay shape, and the 2016 also doesn’t have nearly as much time to wear out. Because of this, they say it may make sense to cut out all of the cost for the government of running these inspection centers and instead pump that into subsidies to allow people to buy newer, safer cars. (But most dedicated scientists, scholars and enthusiasts in the automobile world will tell you that the last time we tried to subsidize new car sales and get old cars off the road, Cash for Clunkers, was a disaster and had horrible effects on both the enthusiast and general used car market).

9

fakecrimesleep t1_j3nqywk wrote

There are dumbasses that will not do shit to their cars if it wasn’t for the inspection. Know of people who will ride on bald tires and no break lights for as long as possible until they’re forced to do it because they fail. Same with exhaust systems going bad.

4

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3lx44s wrote

Nope. There is plenty going the other way, though. Yearly safety inspections are just poor people taxes. The people who know they won't pass just don't get their car fixed and take their chances with an expired sticker. I see it all the time. Also, if you know a guy and are willing to pay $50, you can get a sticker on anything. There's a guy like that in Taunton, there's three in Brockton, two that I know in Fall River, one that I know in Dorchester. It's still easy to cheat the system even though they keep making it more strict.

−8

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j3ngaz7 wrote

>The people who know they won't pass just don't get their car fixed and take their chances with an expired sticker. I

Even if that were true and provable, it's an idiotic move. It gives any cop an automatic excuse to pull you over and it's a moving violation that'll result in a surcharge from your insurance company. It comes out to thousands of dollars out of pocket.

​

>Also, if you know a guy and are willing to pay $50, you can get a sticker on anything. There's a guy like that in Taunton, there's three in Brockton, two that I know in Fall River, one that I know in Dorchester. It's still easy to cheat the system even though they keep making it more strict.

I'm not sure what level of enforcement/checking but inspection shops are required to have cameras recording inspections and they can get fucked over pretty hard for cheating the system. The extra $50 to pass something that'd fail isn't going to be worth it to most mechanics.

5

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3nhf54 wrote

It is true. I've done it. I know people who do it. I see it all the time. Making up excuses as to why you haven't gotten it done yet is extremely easy. The sticker on my tahoe is 3 years old. I've been stopped once.

Okay, so I'm lying. I actually made all of that up. I actually don't know any of this people. I definitely 100% get my inspections done legit and only pay the $35 because all my cars absolutely will pass inspection. Ya got me.

0

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j3nppln wrote

Did I say anywhere it doesn't/can't happen that people wait or find a mechanic who will play ball? Cause I think I was just saying that the risk/reward just isn't justified for the majority of people and mechanics alike.

3

fetamorphasis t1_j3no0r1 wrote

Let's see...one person saying "yes, inspections improve safety" provides multiple links as sources and another saying "nope" just makes a generic statement with no sources and a few anecdotes. I wonder who is telling the truth?

Additionally, just because a system isn't perfect doesn't mean that it is not better than no inspections.

3

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3nou8g wrote

I didn't reply to anyone who had sources. They are easy to find, do you know how to use Google?

Additionally, I didn't say no inspections.

2

fetamorphasis t1_j3npgdg wrote

No, but the other reply to the comment you replied to had multiple sources.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you want people to believe you, you shouldnt be asking them to google your statement. Provide the proof yourself or people will ignore you.

3

IllegibleLetters t1_j3n4pkb wrote

My problem is how few places do motorcycle inspections despite it being basically a 2 minute quick check of lights and horn. I say every shop should be allowed to do it,but for some reason only about 1/25 do.

2

Alphatron1 t1_j3qgm97 wrote

Because we’re better?

2

DirtySteveW t1_j3lxntr wrote

Still have a green plate. No front one. Passed inspection 3 months ago too.

1

NCSUGrad2012 t1_j3ost34 wrote

Original green plate or did you need to have it refurbished?

1

DirtySteveW t1_j3ot406 wrote

Original.

3

NCSUGrad2012 t1_j3otehn wrote

That’s awesome. My uncle has his originals but had them refurbished. They look like new. The guy told him this is the last year I’m going to pass them so my uncle fixed them. Lol

1

SnooPeppers6081 t1_j3mszsl wrote

Umm, Because it's the law. My apologies for your inconvenience.

1

read_it_later t1_j3n5yk3 wrote

This seems like an odd thing to complain about

1

Scary_Habit974 t1_j3npfb3 wrote

Because MA is like the other almost 20 states.

1

BeansWest t1_j3o8ou7 wrote

Sounds like someone has a big red R on their windshield.

1

tlister67 t1_j3o8rfz wrote

I lived in Idaho and Utah and both had front plates, Utah had inspections too.

1

MikeD123999 t1_j3qib58 wrote

Not all the shops do it right. The gas station here that does it pulls the car in and out so fast that im pretty sure they dont really check everything. Maybe they do it right but its literally 5 minutes in the garage

1

OwlBeneficial2743 t1_j3qiv4h wrote

Dropping plates I don’t get. But Ca, a very liberal state,doesn’t require inspections. Anyone know the real reason for this?

1

Technical_Hair_4383 t1_j3qlc83 wrote

Have you seen our potholes?

1

AxemanFromMA OP t1_j3qprqx wrote

They are horid, the $ that could be saved with no front plates could fix the roads

1

Technical_Hair_4383 t1_j3t53dz wrote

Front plates bring in revenue for the state (both in license plate fees and tolls) and save money on insurance costs, as others have pointed out on this thread. As a motorist and a cyclist, I am 100% in favor of front plates.

2

AffectionateBear2462 t1_j3sqd0y wrote

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$@$$$$$$$$$$ that’s why…and here is another if your license plate is not reflective you won’t pass inspection nd you need a duplicate plate

1

fubarofl t1_j3lygak wrote

Inspection is, especially for modern cars, just a highway tax at this point. I have an electric car and have to get my emissions test every year.

As for two plates: have you ever been rear ended and the person took off? You have two chances to catch the plate number instead of 1.

0

MajorProblem50 t1_j3my0az wrote

Feel free to own the roads and make your own rules.

0

[deleted] t1_j3m915o wrote

So the State can make more money

−1

Billerica44 t1_j3m1sq1 wrote

It helps to generate more revenue for the state. Everything done in this state is to get more of your money.

−4

[deleted] t1_j3mob0y wrote

I love how sheltered people of MA are. If you go to a state with no inspection it’s literally the same as it is here. You don’t get hit random hunks of junk everywhere you go . Y’all make it sound like mad max. Also “too much government regulation” is not a phrase that has ever been used in MA. You get what you vote for!

−4

MidwestTransplant09 t1_j3mqkow wrote

It’s literally not the same. It literally sounds like mad max on the roads.

Edit to add: I live in a state with no inspections.

3

[deleted] t1_j3mrpfs wrote

As someone who has lived in 2 no inspection states, it is quite literally the same. The dangerous cars are always on the road. In MA they just pay sketchy garages to pass them.

1

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3qoer8 wrote

Empirical evidence shows it reduces fatalities and crash counts. Your feelings on the subject are irrelevant and frankly wrong.

3

[deleted] t1_j3r2my3 wrote

Show me the evidence then!

0

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3r30hy wrote

Read the work of Luis Reyes

1

[deleted] t1_j3rft30 wrote

Ahhh the old I’m losing the argument so go do the research yourself trick. I looked and have no idea what you are referring to. Here is some actual data for you if you care.

“we conclude that ending these requirements did not result in a significant increase in the frequency or intensity of accidents due to car failure, implying that the consumer and government expenditures used for inspections could be reallocated to other areas of travel safety.”

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/coep.12284

−1

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3rgq6t wrote

I literally told you to read the work of an academic who did a causal study. That is, he took the results of tons of studies in the subject and reviewed them to get to his conclusions. This includes studies that found no link. The overall trend is that safety inspections reduce traffic fatalities. This is an empirical fact. It can not be argued against. Get the fuck over it.

I am assuming you didn't actually read the study you linked, thought about the methodology. You just read the abstract and posted it. That's fucking stupid. Thsts an insult to people like me who actually take the time to learn about the subject and have dedicated our lives to the field.

2

[deleted] t1_j3rqaui wrote

If you can’t post the data. You aren’t a serious person, end of story. Have a nice day!

1

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3rqqx2 wrote

Cope

This systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of periodic motor vehicle inspections on road crashes and injuries, compared to less exposure to periodic inspections or no inspections. The Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were used to search the literature. Ecological studies were specifically excluded. A reverse search of the results with these databases and of other identified narrative reviews was also performed. Of the 5065 unique references initially extracted, only six of them met the inclusion criteria and were selected for review: one experimental study, two cohort studies with an internal comparison group, two cohort studies without a comparison group, and one case–control study. Two authors independently extracted the information and assessed the quality of each study. Due to the heterogeneity of the designs and the intervention or comparison groups used, quantitative synthesis of the results was not attempted. Except for the case–control study, which showed a significant association between road crashes and the absence of a valid vehicle inspection certificate, the other studies showed either a small reduction in crash rates (around 9%), no association, or a higher crash rate in vehicles with more inspections.

1

[deleted] t1_j3rp8xz wrote

You could just post the link instead of posting your summary! What are you afraid of? The old “get the fuck over it” doesn’t cut it.

0

Bobbydadude01 t1_j3rpkov wrote

Do you have access to an academic database? You type in his name. You can't link something in a database unless you have access to that database.

I don't care it you want to be ignorant, but you are wrong. Get the fuck over it.

1

[deleted] t1_j3rpygf wrote

Yeah turns out most of us don’t have that. How about a screenshot? Anything? Nothing?

0

[deleted] t1_j3rpsbl wrote

Empirical facts are very easy to post links to. I’m waiting. Don’t you want to enlighten the people of MA?

0

Much_Razzmatazz1401 t1_j3qlito wrote

Mass people are bootlicking morons. The accident levels are remarkably similar from state to state. It's just another hassle we could all do without.

1

[deleted] t1_j3r2tbv wrote

Yup and people don’t care about the actual data. That’s the sad part.

2

Quirky_Butterfly_946 t1_j3lr4hv wrote

How else are they going to get more of your money

−13

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3lwh0x wrote

This is all it is, and it's so annoying.

−2

camlugnut t1_j3mhac5 wrote

Everywhere does it though. I live in "low tax" SC now and pay more on my car then I did in MA for an inspection, and there are absolute shitboxes on the road because there's no inspection. Also got hit and run in a garage but because SC doesn't require front plates, they didn't get a view of the plate and I was SOL.

4

Quirky_Butterfly_946 t1_j3lxk3v wrote

It's so funny how massholes can't stand truthful criticism. Their denial is quite remarkable

−6

Daily_the_Project21 t1_j3lxrxe wrote

And they all say they hate a nanny state while also supporting the nanny state.

−3

Much_Razzmatazz1401 t1_j3qlr9f wrote

Mass is the ULTIMATE nanny state, and these "Tough Massholes" just LOVE their annual spanking

−1