Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
And again we see the why in 3 wheels. They don't want to actually have to crash test and meet emissions standards of cars. Trust me, if they plan on putting a million of these things on the road the government will reclassify 3 wheelers as cars before they can make a year's production.
|
Yes, but Elio was petitioning the government to REQUIRE EMISSIONS AND CRASH TESTING FOR 3 WHEELERs.
They weren't lobbying against such measure but for, they wasted a good chunk of their budget trying to get protectionist laws like emissions and crash tests into the 3 wheel segment.
And given how lobbyists write law, I have no doubt that the requirements would wrap around whatever they expect the Elio car to be capable of.
Sort of like larger trucks don't need to meet the same stringent pollution control laws as light trucks but semis need to exceed emissions standards on both.
Laws are not written to protect or help the public but to guide the public into specific decisions that benefit a special interest,
our failed crash test requirements are a perfect example of how law can be written not to make cars safer per se but can be made to exclude and make it more difficult for other cars that may actually be safer to enter our home market.
The best example was of the hushed up euro crash tests done on American cars by our car companies to make the case that our standards were higher than euro and thus there was no need for American cars to be tested under Euro law to be sold in Europe.
Our cars resoundingly failed Euro standards!
No one likes to talk about that and by the silliness of our standards, Euro cars need to be modified to come here as well, but does that make it safer?