California Law VS Classics

Discussion in '1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-' started by Banditlead, Sep 27, 2004.

  1. Banditlead

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    CT
    Found this on Yahoo (In the Oddly enough Section, Oddly Enough)
    Article Here: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=583&e=4&u=/nm/20040927/od_nm/cars_dc

    SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Lovers of California's classic cars, celebrated in the Beach Boys song for "fun, fun, fun," worried that a new state law could take their T-birds and little deuce coupes away.

    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (news - web sites) has signed a bill requiring that cars 30 years and older be tested under California's strict smog regulations, closing a loophole over the protests of classic car collectors, including "Tonight Show" host Jay Leno.

    Aides said the bill signed on Thursday would help the state's air quality. California also approved the nation's most stringent rules to reduce auto emissions linked to global warming this week.

    But classic car hobbyists argued their cars have little effect on the state's smog.

    "We're not too excited about it. The impact on the environment by classic cars is minimal," said John Halstead, president of the Bakersfield Camaro Club. "Most of the cars don't make it out of the garage for any other reason than for car shows once or twice a month in the summer."

    The exact number of classic cars in California is unknown, but the state has hundreds of clubs for car hobbyists.

    Leno, on whose show Schwarzenegger announced he would run for governor, protested personally against the bill, said Marva Diaz, legislative director for Assembly Member Sally Lieber, who wrote the bill.

    Leno called Lieber's office twice to register his displeasure, Diaz said.

    "He was very upset the first time," Diaz said. "He thought his whole collection would have to be smog-checked."

    "The second time he called he was upset because he had been told the assemblywomen had said on the radio that he supported the bill," Diaz said. "He wanted to make sure it was clear to me to tell her that he remained opposed."
     
    #1
  2. gp001

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    #2
  3. draco_1967

    draco_1967 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dang, that sucks. :nonono:

    At least my 67 is still free :D

    :notnice: :notnice: :notnice:
     
    #3
  4. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  5. zookeeper

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,171
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    59
    Location:
    Northern California
    For someone that doesn't even live in this state (not that you wouldn't fit right in) you sure seem to take a lot of pleasure in seeing our hobby under attack. In fact, you seem to enjoy stirring up crap with every single post, why? I can understand having an opposing view, but you have THE opposing view on ever subject you post about, whatever it may be. I don't visit this site much anymore, mostly due to the likes of you turning it away from our common love of classic Mustangs and into a giant bicker-fest. You have nothing of any interest to say, so instead you try to start trouble. Stay in Colorado and listen to John Denver, tree hugger...
     
    #5
  6. one2gamble

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Monterey
    what a joke....my question is whos going to pay for this? oh wait let me bend over and take it while the state looks "green". The problem with this state is they continue to change the laws over and over again concerning autos, in my opinion this should be illegal in its own right. Since they instituted the rolling smog laws pollution has not increased, it has in fact dropped. The state is cleaner today than it ever has been, this is proof in itself that the rolling smog laws has little direct impact on the states air quality.
     
    #6
  7. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    none


    :D
     
    #7
  8. jikelly

    jikelly Advanced Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,855
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    69
    Location:
    Lubbock Tx
    I'm a tree hugger, but I think this law is pointless and that it sucks. From what I saw and smelled during my visit to the state california should be more concerned with bovine emissions. Pee Yew! They were probable just looking to raise revenue. I mean they have to know that there aren’t that many classics on the road in Cali.

    If you live in California you should raise hell because contrary to popular belief if the public puts on enough pressure they can get a stupid law changed or repealed.
     
    #8
  9. 2nd Mustang

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Location:
    Southern California
    ...and I voted for him in the recall election. Is he going to get rid of his Hummer? That backstabbing S.O.B.
     
    #9
  10. tacoy

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    California
    yet we have that great air coming over from Tijuana...Good thing their cracking down on us. The Article said 30 years and older doesn't that mean all of our cars?
     
    #10
  11. 2nd Mustang

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Location:
    Southern California
    Just read the article in the SEMA site, and it said 1976 and newer, so the printed story was misleading. On another note, I just sent an email to the governor's office stating my opposition to his signing the bill into law. He said he was a governor of the people, well not this person anymore. I only need to be screwed once and I'll remember forever.
     
    #11
  12. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0



    :D
     
    #12
  13. pabear89

    pabear89 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Location:
    High in the Hills of So Ca with the Voices in My H
    :rolleyes: As for Our Gov, He shows that he can be pressured into things for Political reasons.

    As for the Tree huggers that pushed the Bill thru,
    Their reasoning was that from 1976 on All manufacture's were making 50 state engine emission legal cars.
    So It has to have what ever it was made with to be legal in Ca.
    But when it comes down to it most of it IS :bs:

    A properly tuned and cared for vec will pass their smog test.
    But to fail mine because it has a aftermarket air cleaner. :bang:
    What the heck is that.


    My 2cts
    PB
     
    #13
  14. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0







    :D
     
    #14
  15. gp001

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Oz,

    I don't know if you are just trying to get the natives riled up or if you truly can't see the big picture. You keep proclaiming your love for the air, yet you own and drive an old Mustang. While your Mustang may not pollute as much as my Mustang, I bet it pollutes more than my Expedition. So, in the name of precious air, why don't you scrap your Mustang and buy something less polluting? I really don't understand your "It's OK to pollute at my level just not your level" stance. I hear mixed messages in your posts. You remind me of the actress Alexandra Paul.
    For years she starred on "Baywatch" where they blew things up (even in the ocean), used all sorts of petroleum burning vehicles (land, air, sea), not to mention celeb trailers, catering, limos, the actual process of processing and editing the film, etc. All this pollution was fine while she was getting paid big bucks. Then she has the nerve to stand in front of TV cameras when she got her EV1 and said everyone should quit polluting the air.
    Also, how long do you think non performance parts suppliers (you know, purists parts) will last with only the "purist" market sustaining them?
    I posted in the last thread on this topic how the precious air is still polluted by industries and low income car owners, but I guess none of those points matter to you.
     
    #15
  16. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  17. gp001

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    I don't see how I am twisting anything, but you like to use that phrase to try to imply an upper hand. It's OK. ;)
    I hear you talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say "yes, if and when Colorado tells me to park my ride, I will do so because the law told me to do it " and then you say "We are killing ourselves, and I am down wind of you guys, so..............I breath your air. At what point do we say enough is enough? When we are all choking?", so which is it? :shrug: If it is air quality you are concerned with then you should be responsible enough to scrap your polluting car (you know a carb's car with an atsmopherically vented tank pollutes even while sitting, right?). You shouldn't need the law to tell you to do so.
    Also, as I pointed out in the other thread, THIS law will do nothing to reduce the levels of pollution, but it will generate revenue (testing fees, certs, etc). The true polluting vehicles will "waiver" or "exempt" themselves through the program. And industries will still be the main contributor to the LA basins pollution.
    I am all for implementing valid prgrams for reducing pollution, as is SEMA, but this law comes no where close.
     
    #17
  18. zookeeper

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,171
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    59
    Location:
    Northern California
    GP001's hit the nail on the head. This law and others like it are NOT about clean air at all. What they are about is government control. Environmental whackos push easily swayed politicians into passing legislation that serves their agenda. We all think life will go on status quo until we go to register our musclecar, dirtbike, firearm or dog, then find out that our rights to lawfully use them were taken away years ago. How did it happen? By us sitiing on our ass and letting it happen. Educate yourself and take action, because you can bet your butt the Sierra Clubbers are, and they are dead serious about you not enjoying your life. People like Oz, who visit California twice in their life, then proclaim they have all the answers on how to solve our problems are as big a threat as there is and all too common. Want to clean up our state? Fine, go home and take someone with you when you leave!
     
    #18
  19. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  20. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :D
     
    #20

Share This Page