New North Carolina plates

[snopes]

Comment: The North Carolina DMV is changing its licence plates, and replacing every
old license plate with new one by April 2008. The new plates have the same
"First In Flight" design as the old ones, except the plate ID (the big
letters and numbers) are red instead of blue.

A young man in line at the DMV with me told me that he heard the red
letters on the new plates enable law officers to "run the plates" and get
a driver's information from very far away.

Is there any validity to this rumour??

It seems to me like it could be true. The new plates are hideous. NC DoT
claims the purpose of changing the plates is to get rid of all the old
ones on the road, but that is dubious because they are replacing all of
the new plates as well. They also claim the new plates are easier to read
and do not fade as easily- both untrue.

NC DoT site with info regarding the plate recall:
http://www.ncdot.org/dmv/hot_topics/PlateRecall.html

So which is it: officers can "run the plates" from very far away, or they're not easier to read?

[KirkMcD]

They probably don't need the color change to read the plates. There are systems that can read the plates from a-far.

Police use of plate scanners to catch scofflaws grows

The company that makes the system in the above article.Remington ELSAG/

Hmmm, they are based in NC.

[imjustasteph]

I dunno, but isn't red used in stop signs, brake lights, etc, because of the high visibility?

And I have decent vision but have learned that I have a harder time reading license plates and road signs (not stop and yield; just [city name] next exit) than most people. That is, even my guy who actually has poor vision (passes the eye test, but only on the second try) can read them before I can.

So, if the red ones are easier to read, great....not that I read a lot of license plates, though.

And I'm not in NC anymore anyway...but hmm, I should ask my family there if they're having to turn in and exchange their plates....

[Mr. Furious]

All I can tell you is that the North Carolina plates were already among the most hideous in the nation, with the super high-tech 80s font at the bottom and cheesy screen print of the Wright Flyer, but they've somehow made them uglier, which I didn't think was possible. Way to go, NCDMV!

[snopes]

I don't follow. If the state truly changed the plates to make them easier to read, why is that likened to some sort of nefarious conspiracy scheme? Isn't that one of the primary purposes of license plates, that they can be read and checked to identify the owner/status of a vehicle?

- snopes

[rogue74656]

I like the idea the way that it is being used. Scan and compare to a list of offenders. If there is no match, forget about it.

What concerns me is that it might become scan and record, because it would be so easy to build a database of tags, gps, and time, thereby tracking innocent citizens.

Before you scoff, when OK passed the manditory seat belt law, promises were made that it would only be ticketed in conjuction with speeding, etc. and that there would not be checkpoints for enforcing it. It has taken a few years, but just recently they had what...a checkpoint looking for seatbelt use. The ACLU may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

-rogue

Originally Posted by rogue74656

when OK passed the manditory seat belt law, promises were made that it would only be ticketed in conjuction with speeding, etc. and that there would not be checkpoints for enforcing it. It has taken a few years, but just recently they had what...a checkpoint looking for seatbelt use. The ACLU may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

Well, that sort of thing could have been guaranteed by law. Up until this year, seat-belt use was considered a "secondary offence" in MN, meaning, like you say, you can't get stopped for ONLY that, but it can be added onto another (primary) offense like speeding. This year, they made it a primary offense.

I have no idea why, though. I'm all for seat-belt use, but it seems that cops have better things to do than stop someone over such a thing...

-Tim

[Radical Dory]

Originally Posted by Mr. Furious

All I can tell you is that the North Carolina plates were already among the most hideous in the nation, with the super high-tech 80s font at the bottom and cheesy screen print of the Wright Flyer, but they've somehow made them uglier, which I didn't think was possible. Way to go, NCDMV!

Hah, no the fun part comes with one of the random 3-letter prefixes they let slip though the system. I guess the DOT isn't up on internet speak, as there are now tons of vehicles in the W-S/Greensboro area that have plates that begin with "WTF". The fact that they're in all in red while a lot older vehicles still have their old blue plates just makes them stand out more.

[robbiev]

Originally Posted by Rehcsif

Well, that sort of thing could have been guaranteed by law. Up until this year, seat-belt use was considered a "secondary offence" in MN, meaning, like you say, you can't get stopped for ONLY that, but it can be added onto another (primary) offense like speeding. This year, they made it a primary offense.

I have no idea why, though. I'm all for seat-belt use, but it seems that cops have better things to do than stop someone over such a thing...

-Tim

Same thing happened here a few years ago. "They" said that it would be a secondary offense. Then, a year or two later, it became a primary offense. Now, it's fairly common (at least in this city) two see 4 police officers standing at 4-way stop signs checking for seatbelt violations in every car that pulls up. Between two major intersections right by my house, you can count on seeing it at least once every couple of weeks.

Yep.... seat belt use enabled my son to walk away from a serious accident yesterday, and also saved the people in the other car from serious injury.

[Dark Blue]

I have no idea why, though. I'm all for seat-belt use, but it seems that cops have better things to do than stop someone over such a thing...

Some of the best cases, arrests etc I got started from a traffic stop on a small insignficant violation.

[maotseduck]

I personally think that the new plates are both uglier and harder to read.

[Foxy Lady]

I agree with maotseduck; the blue letters on white background were much easier to read than the new red on white background.

[AnglRdr]

Originally Posted by rogue74656

I like the idea the way that it is being used. Scan and compare to a list of offenders. If there is no match, forget about it.

What concerns me is that it might become scan and record, because it would be so easy to build a database of tags, gps, and time, thereby tracking innocent citizens.

Before you scoff, when OK passed the manditory seat belt law, promises were made that it would only be ticketed in conjuction with speeding, etc. and that there would not be checkpoints for enforcing it. It has taken a few years, but just recently they had what...a checkpoint looking for seatbelt use. The ACLU may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

-rogue

Seatbelt violations as primary stops have recently come into effect here, too.

But so what? Why should a person who is a seatbelt scofflaw be able to get away with it just because they aren't scoffing any other laws?

And I am not sure what the ACLU has to do with this. Unless it is an illegal search/seizure, the ACLU isn't going to get involved with driving issues.

[Mr. Furious]

Originally Posted by rogue74656

What concerns me is that it might become scan and record, because it would be so easy to build a database of tags, gps, and time, thereby tracking innocent citizens.

There's nothing for you to be concerned about, citizen. Just make sure your papers are in order.

Originally Posted by Radical Dory

I guess the DOT isn't up on internet speak, as there are now tons of vehicles in the W-S/Greensboro area that have plates that begin with "WTF".

I saw one of those! I pointed it out to my wife and said "well, that pretty much sums up my reaction to the new plates."

[Avril]

Originally Posted by Dark Blue

Some of the best cases, arrests etc I got started from a traffic stop on a small insignficant violation.

What are you saying, then? The checkpoints are just a means of finding some flimsy legal ground for stopping everyone?

Was this what they meant by *cough* illegal search and seizure *cough*?

Avril

[Dark Blue]

What are you saying, then?

What I am saying is that while many people think cops have better things to do than to stop people for minor things such as say a cracked windshield, they don't realize that the last time I stopped someone for a cracked windshield I found someone with a felony warrant, which led to the discovery of stolen property in the car and drugs for sale. This was on a legal traffic stop so their is no illegal search and siezure. One officer I worked with made a traffic stop for something as small as a license plate light being out. The next day there were burglaries in which thousands of dollars of items had been taken. THe officer remembered seeing the stolen items in the vehicle he stopped the night before, and we were able to track down and arrest the suspects. These are just 2 examples. I can tell you numerous stories of cases solved, wanted people from all over the country, and major crimes stopped or solved that started with a simple traffic stop, sometimes on rather minor violations.

I was not commenting on the checkpoints, just the comment that officers have better things to do than stop people for small violations, such as seatbelt use if it is a primary violation in your area. Some times LEGAL stops on small violations lead to the discovery of big violations.

[snapdragonfly]

Originally Posted by rogue74656

Before you scoff, when OK passed the manditory seat belt law, promises were made that it would only be ticketed in conjuction with speeding, etc. and that there would not be checkpoints for enforcing it. It has taken a few years, but just recently they had what...a checkpoint looking for seatbelt use. The ACLU may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

-rogue

Same here in Texas. Now they have billboards, "click it or ticket."

edit: I firmly believe in using seatbelts, and I don't have a problem with being stopped as a primary offense. What I don't like, and what scares the crap out of me, is that they always start these things out making all these promises about they won't do this or that and it will be contained to thus and so, and then whoosh! out the door the limits go - the proverbial camel with it's nose in your tent...

It would be different if they hadn't make such a big deal out of promising they woudn't ticket non seat belt use as a primary, but they did, and now they are renegging on it. I really, really don't like that.

[KathyB]

Studies show that there is a correlation between having primary enforcement laws and a reduction in fatalities,because primary enforcement states have much higher rates of seat belt use.

Primary Enforcement Saves Lives from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. They cite studies that show that "that front seat occupants in primary States are between 13 and 17 percentage points (Mean = 15) more likely to be properly restrained than those in non-primary States." And--

NHTSA researchers compared the percentage of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities and fatality rates between those States that had and those that did not have primary safety belt use laws from 2000 to 2004. Results not only showed a smaller percentage of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities in primary enforcement States (51 percent compared to 65 percent), they also showed significantly lower fatality rates.
[snip]
In December 2004, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a study21 designed to estimate the effect that a change from a secondary to a primary law would have on driver fatality rates. The results of the study showed that, “After accounting for possible economic effects and other general time trends, the change from secondary to primary enforcement was found to reduce annual passenger vehicle driver death rates by an estimated 7 percent…”