Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
> n.umich.edu...
> > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Jim Yanik wrote:
> >
> >> > OK. Define "noise pollution" for us
> >
> >> Taking the manufacturer's (stock) muffler off and installing a
noisier
> >> one.
> >
> > That's a nonstarter. If Chrysler will no longer sell me a muffler
for my
> > 1962 Dodge, and so I install a Walker or Goerlich aftermarket
replacement,
> > and it's even fractionally louder than the original 1962 item, my
car
> > flunks your poorly-thought-out standard of "noise pollution". If I
install
> > a muffler on my truck that's louder than the original BUT no louder
than
> > some other vehicle with a factory muffler, my truck flunks your
> > ill-considered standard of "noise pollution".
>
> > And if the standard is "no noisier than original equipment", then
who's
> > going to collect and maintain the necessary database of noise
levels from
> > all the different OE variants of all the different models of all
the
> > different cars over the years? And what's the standard, is it "when
the
> > car is brand new"? Is it "When the car is 3 years old"? Is it "When
the
> > car is driven by at 30mph, measured at street level 10 feet away"?
Is it
> > "When the car is revved in Neutral, measured 2 feet from the
tailpipe"?
> >
> > And what kind of sound meters are we going to equip cops with to
measure
> > exhaust noise objectively? You and I both know what's too noisy and
what's
> > not, but that's unconsitutionally vague and leaving it to the
discretion
> > of individual cops is fraught with unintended consequences.
> >
> > Just to save you some time, here's another equally-useless attempts
at
> > exhaust noise control laws:
> >
> > "No vehicle shall have an exhaust tailpipe or outlet that is of a
larger
> > size than original equipment". Terrific, what if I install a system
on my
> > '71 Volvo that has a 2-1/4" tailpipe, but is *quieter* than the
original
> > system with its 1-7/8" tailpipe? Bzzt, doesn't work.
> >
> > Next idea?
>
> You're not a litigator, are you Daniel? Because your arguments have
more
> and bigger holes than an Alan Smithee film.

Daniel isn't, but I am. So far, he's a lot more correct than you are.
We're still waiting for *your* definition - (Dare I say it?) - with
*bated* breath.
--
Ol' C.R.
(*Baits* another trap)