Warning to those on Ft Lewis
Technically, you did not "MODIFY" the exhaust system if you replaced it in it's entierty. A modification would be like a stock system with a dump on it. In fact by definition you repaired it and more than likely purchased it and had it installed at an automotive repair facility which is perfectly legal. Otherwise the State received tax proceeds from the sale of an illegal device and are guilty of cooperation in the conspriacy to commit a crime.
RCW 46.71.011
Definitions.
(2) "Automotive repair" includes but is not limited to:
(b) All work in facilities that perform one or more specialties within the automotive repair service industry including, but not limited to, body collision repair, refinishing, brake, electrical, exhaust repair or installation, frame, unibody, front-end, radiators, tires, transmission, tune-up, and windshield; and
Note this line in initial quoted subsection 3) - "A court may dismiss an infraction notice for a violation of this subsection if there is reasonable grounds to believe that the vehicle was not operated in violation of this subsection."
A picture of the original exhaust system removed or a receipt of the internet purchased exhaust as well as any other reasonable visual proof of no attempts "MODIFY" the stock exhaust system is the achillies heel of this law.
RCW 46.71.011
Definitions.
(2) "Automotive repair" includes but is not limited to:
(b) All work in facilities that perform one or more specialties within the automotive repair service industry including, but not limited to, body collision repair, refinishing, brake, electrical, exhaust repair or installation, frame, unibody, front-end, radiators, tires, transmission, tune-up, and windshield; and
Note this line in initial quoted subsection 3) - "A court may dismiss an infraction notice for a violation of this subsection if there is reasonable grounds to believe that the vehicle was not operated in violation of this subsection."
A picture of the original exhaust system removed or a receipt of the internet purchased exhaust as well as any other reasonable visual proof of no attempts "MODIFY" the stock exhaust system is the achillies heel of this law.
Last edited by EVO Tweeker; Jul 1, 2007 at 09:19 PM.
Man this is getting crazy! What about all these loud Harleys running around. Domestic lovers. Anyways things could be worse read what they going to try in Hawaii 
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=62213
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=62213
FYI, the excerpt from the preceeding subsection gives content to it's application:
RCW 46.37.390
Mufflers required — Smoke and air contaminant standards — Definitions — Penalty, exception.
(1) Every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with a muffler in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, and no person shall use a muffler cut-out, bypass, or similar device upon a motor vehicle on a highway.
I believe that the definition of the preceeding section can be presented as reasonable deniability of infraction when considering the intent. Furthermore, I do not believe it is legal to envoke a new law that immediately makes a prior operating capacity illegal.
In court there may be a few questions that are reasonable to ask:
As written in RCW 46.37.390 - definitions
1) What is the legal definition of excessive?
2) How is excessive measured?
3) Who defines unusal?
4) What non-subjective criteria has been legally established to measure unusal?
5) What is the stock db of an EVO exhaust?
6) What is the db of my exhaust?
7) From what physical measured distance was my exhaust measured?
8) What measuring device was utilized in it's measurement?
9) Is the measuring device instituionally or SAE recognized?
10) When was the recognized device last calibrated?
11) Was it calibrated by a recognized institution using an ASTM standard?
12) What device was used to measure the distance from my vehicle to the observers vehicle? (repeat 8,9,10)
13) At what speed was my vehicle traveling?
14) Where there any buildings or other surrounding elements that might otherwise serve to amplify a vehicle exhaust noise?
15) At what revolution was my motor operating when the audible sound was measured?
16) What device was used to measure my motor vehicle revolutions? (repeat 8,9,10)
Point being to present questions that an officer cannot present evidence to support and create reasonable doubt in the eyes of the court............dismissed
RCW 46.37.390
Mufflers required — Smoke and air contaminant standards — Definitions — Penalty, exception.
(1) Every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with a muffler in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, and no person shall use a muffler cut-out, bypass, or similar device upon a motor vehicle on a highway.
I believe that the definition of the preceeding section can be presented as reasonable deniability of infraction when considering the intent. Furthermore, I do not believe it is legal to envoke a new law that immediately makes a prior operating capacity illegal.
In court there may be a few questions that are reasonable to ask:
As written in RCW 46.37.390 - definitions
1) What is the legal definition of excessive?
2) How is excessive measured?
3) Who defines unusal?
4) What non-subjective criteria has been legally established to measure unusal?
5) What is the stock db of an EVO exhaust?
6) What is the db of my exhaust?
7) From what physical measured distance was my exhaust measured?
8) What measuring device was utilized in it's measurement?
9) Is the measuring device instituionally or SAE recognized?
10) When was the recognized device last calibrated?
11) Was it calibrated by a recognized institution using an ASTM standard?
12) What device was used to measure the distance from my vehicle to the observers vehicle? (repeat 8,9,10)
13) At what speed was my vehicle traveling?
14) Where there any buildings or other surrounding elements that might otherwise serve to amplify a vehicle exhaust noise?
15) At what revolution was my motor operating when the audible sound was measured?
16) What device was used to measure my motor vehicle revolutions? (repeat 8,9,10)
Point being to present questions that an officer cannot present evidence to support and create reasonable doubt in the eyes of the court............dismissed
Last edited by EVO Tweeker; Jul 2, 2007 at 09:40 PM.
My advice, get a lawyer. Set a prescedent with case law and stop future infractions through the system. The law should not be a burden nor should it be used to harrass a class of people.
BTW, I know a few lawyers who are also automotive enthusiasts ad whould be happy to be involved in a case such as this.
Just doing my part to help the community out....................
BTW, I know a few lawyers who are also automotive enthusiasts ad whould be happy to be involved in a case such as this.
Just doing my part to help the community out....................
slightly off topic: what is the ticket for not having a front plate? is it a moving violation that will affect my insurance? i see on the above post that its illegal, but what penalty have you guys gotten? i've been overlooked so far, but then again, when i pay attention i see a lot of cars with no front plate.
thanks for all the great info on rcws!
thanks for all the great info on rcws!
IMU, a front plate violation is a non-moving violation a "fix-it ticket" and not something that should affect your insurance. You should be able to go to the police station of ticket issueance and request an officer look at your car as having replaced the front plate (of curse after you have properly resecured it to your cars front bumper). Once an officer signs off and records the infraction is fixed you should be able to bring the record to your hearing and get off in court. However, if you get caught multiple times in the same jurisdiction the offense might come off as a more habitual offense and the judge will not look kindly on it.
IMO, keep the plate in your front window if you find yourself getting harrassed. The front plate law has been changed and can be interprited such that a front window location could be regarded as legal.
RCW 46.16.240
Attachment of plates to vehicles -- Violations enumerated.
Excerpt - "Each vehicle license number plate shall be placed or hung in a horizontal position at a distance of not more than four feet from the ground and shall be kept clean so as to be plainly seen and read at all times. In cases where the body construction of the vehicle is such that compliance with this section is impossible, permission to deviate therefrom may be granted by the state patrol."
I got pulled over once for no front plate and I told the officer that when I bought the car from a private party it did not come with a front plate adapter. I then walked the officer the the front of the car and asked him where he thought I should attach it. I explained that to block the intercooler would affect the performace of the vehicle as designed by the maufacturer and that typically the plate is offset to one side. He told me to make sure it was in the front window and visible at all time and let me go.
IMO, keep the plate in your front window if you find yourself getting harrassed. The front plate law has been changed and can be interprited such that a front window location could be regarded as legal.
RCW 46.16.240
Attachment of plates to vehicles -- Violations enumerated.
Excerpt - "Each vehicle license number plate shall be placed or hung in a horizontal position at a distance of not more than four feet from the ground and shall be kept clean so as to be plainly seen and read at all times. In cases where the body construction of the vehicle is such that compliance with this section is impossible, permission to deviate therefrom may be granted by the state patrol."
I got pulled over once for no front plate and I told the officer that when I bought the car from a private party it did not come with a front plate adapter. I then walked the officer the the front of the car and asked him where he thought I should attach it. I explained that to block the intercooler would affect the performace of the vehicle as designed by the maufacturer and that typically the plate is offset to one side. He told me to make sure it was in the front window and visible at all time and let me go.
Last edited by EVO Tweeker; Jul 4, 2007 at 09:44 AM.
i'm sorry sir/ maam
happy fourth everyone!!!!!!!!!!!!
I would be careful with it in the front window. I got pulled over in Auburn and the officer said it was not visible up there. Some may also say its a safety issue, if you hit something, it could fly back and hit someone.
I told him the I dont have the bracket to attach on the offset position and I cant put it in front of the intercooler cause it could f up the motor.
I guess it could just depend on the day the officer was having on wether or not they want to let you go. But from what I have heard and dealt with Auburn cops are the sucksors!
Hey traitor! cool looking MK1, from what I can see. I have owned a few in my days.
I told him the I dont have the bracket to attach on the offset position and I cant put it in front of the intercooler cause it could f up the motor.
I guess it could just depend on the day the officer was having on wether or not they want to let you go. But from what I have heard and dealt with Auburn cops are the sucksors!
Hey traitor! cool looking MK1, from what I can see. I have owned a few in my days.