politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
As long as there's an "and" in there, I agree.
Vehicle modifications are, imo, a form of self-expression and should be protected by free speech as long as they don't compromise the safety of the vehicle or cause it to spew more greenhouses gases than necessary; however, modifying your car in a way that intentionally makes it unsafe or increases pollution is fucking awful.
To put it another way, modifying your engine timings and shoving a turbo in there should be legal even though it will probably increase emissions because the intent is to increase power. Modifying your car to increase emissions just because you can is an asshole move.
I know this opens a loophole regarding intent as people could potentially argue that "rolling coal" somehow increases horsepower (or create a mod that increases horsepower while also dumping shittons of unburnt diesel into the air). However, you could also argue that you don't need to "roll coal" to increase your truck's power, and that the modification needlessly increased emissions.
Tbh I kinda think ICE vehicles are going to become the "vinyl records" of Gen Z, alpha, and whatever comes after. Electric cars will be the norm and will be used to get people from A to B, but ICE and hybrids will be something enthusiasts have; and tbh, I'd be willing to bet that in a world where ICE and hybrids are mainly in the hands of hobbists and enthusiasts, the emissions released would be negligible.
While people in the car community hate CA's CARB certs, they exist for a reason. If you can prove that your performance parts don't increase the emissions, CARB has no issue giving the mfg. a certificate that says it's legal to sell and use in California.
It's not hard to make big power in a gas or diesel vehicle and not substantially increase emissions. Hell, Gale Banks has been doing diesel performance for decades and he loathes rolling coal.
I'm not entirely sure how to take my more-than-slightly-cheeky response being interpreted so seriously, but I'm happy it's fostering true thought and discussion on the subject.
My dryer-than-Mojave humor has its moments, at least.
My real take on this would be such that the case of modifications for rolling coal is a widely known "zero gain" modification that accomplishes nothing other than allowing for the forementioned act, and yes, absolutely the off-the-cuff verbage would be changed to 'modifying for the intent of enabling coal rolling...' or whatever works linguistically to narrow the scope just to this act.
I did genuinely try to word it in such a manner that someone accidentally doing it with a modified vehicle wouldn't be at risk of losing their license, but yep, naturally that allows an interpretation of any modification being at odds with the "law" and it's clear I don't actually write legislation for a living.
In the grand scheme of things, of course there are totally far, FAR more emissions from otherwise acceptable vehicles than the few that do this, but I'd like to think a majority of sound-minded people see the act as so mind-bendingly douchey, that it deserves to be a crime (and I truly do, for one).