Page 3 of 6

Re: Stupid Texas Law

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:56 am
by flintknapper
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
soccerguy59 wrote:CHL/LEO

What is stupid about the law? Texas is one of the few states still requiring a front license plate. Since you are a LEO and I have wondered this for 31 years of driving, can you make positive ID of the entire license number when approaching the vehicle from the other direction 100% of the time. If not then why have the front license plate. If iou have a vehicle matching the description you will turn around and ID the back license plate to confirm if possible match and act accordingly.
Vehicles are not always situated where the rear plate can be seen.

100% is not needed.
Using this logic....vehicles should be required to have a plate on each side too (drivers/passenger) . Perhaps one on top in case a helicopter is involved....and another on the bottom...should the vehicle go dirty side up.
:willynilly:


Just jerking your chain a little. :grin: :grin:

Re: Stupid Texas Law

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:31 pm
by txinvestigator
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
soccerguy59 wrote:CHL/LEO

What is stupid about the law? Texas is one of the few states still requiring a front license plate. Since you are a LEO and I have wondered this for 31 years of driving, can you make positive ID of the entire license number when approaching the vehicle from the other direction 100% of the time. If not then why have the front license plate. If iou have a vehicle matching the description you will turn around and ID the back license plate to confirm if possible match and act accordingly.
Vehicles are not always situated where the rear plate can be seen.

100% is not needed.
Using this logic....vehicles should be required to have a plate on each side too (drivers/passenger) . Perhaps one on top in case a helicopter is involved....and another on the bottom...should the vehicle go dirty side up.
:willynilly:


Just jerking your chain a little. :grin: :grin:
I know ;-)

Re: Stupid Texas Law

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:42 pm
by Wildscar
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
soccerguy59 wrote:CHL/LEO

What is stupid about the law? Texas is one of the few states still requiring a front license plate. Since you are a LEO and I have wondered this for 31 years of driving, can you make positive ID of the entire license number when approaching the vehicle from the other direction 100% of the time. If not then why have the front license plate. If iou have a vehicle matching the description you will turn around and ID the back license plate to confirm if possible match and act accordingly.
Vehicles are not always situated where the rear plate can be seen.

100% is not needed.
Using this logic....vehicles should be required to have a plate on each side too (drivers/passenger) . Perhaps one on top in case a helicopter is involved....and another on the bottom...should the vehicle go dirty side up.
:willynilly:


Just jerking your chain a little. :grin: :grin:
I know ;-)
Splain this one. :lol:

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_sto ... 34143.html
News story wrote:(AP) AUSTIN The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that a license plate frame that obscures, even partially, the state name or pictorial design is against the law and can lead to a motorist being fined or arrested.
A little chaos never hurts :twisted:

Re: Stupid Texas Law

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:45 pm
by txinvestigator
Wildscar wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
flintknapper wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
soccerguy59 wrote:CHL/LEO

What is stupid about the law? Texas is one of the few states still requiring a front license plate. Since you are a LEO and I have wondered this for 31 years of driving, can you make positive ID of the entire license number when approaching the vehicle from the other direction 100% of the time. If not then why have the front license plate. If iou have a vehicle matching the description you will turn around and ID the back license plate to confirm if possible match and act accordingly.
Vehicles are not always situated where the rear plate can be seen.

100% is not needed.
Using this logic....vehicles should be required to have a plate on each side too (drivers/passenger) . Perhaps one on top in case a helicopter is involved....and another on the bottom...should the vehicle go dirty side up.
:willynilly:


Just jerking your chain a little. :grin: :grin:
I know ;-)
Splain this one. :lol:

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_sto ... 34143.html
News story wrote:(AP) AUSTIN The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that a license plate frame that obscures, even partially, the state name or pictorial design is against the law and can lead to a motorist being fined or arrested.
A little chaos never hurts :twisted:
Uhh, it is so the name of the state on the plate can be seen. ???

Re: Just pulled over, 2 tickets...

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:01 pm
by starrbuck
I have owned and driven as daily drivers two different Firebirds for over 7 or 8 years, have been pulled over many times, and never was I ever cited for the missing front plate. (Neither car had one.) Funny how this law is enforced. Nobody ever even mentioned it to me. The Firebird looks so much better without a front plate. ;)

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:57 pm
by flintknapper
(AP) AUSTIN The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that a license plate frame that obscures, even partially, the state name or pictorial design is against the law and can lead to a motorist being fined or arrested.

Coincidentally,

This is another reason my daughter has been pulled over.

A plate frame that she likes just barely covers the edge of the text TEXAS on her plate...and she has been stopped for this also (no ticket).

I'm beginning to wonder if a 21 yr. old, blonde, college student in a firebird is more the reason for a friendly stop. :???:

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:33 pm
by bwahahaha
KBCraig wrote:
CHL/LEO wrote:
Texas still has the most stupid law
What's stupid about it?
Have you ever conducted a traffic stop from the front? Or don't you generally run plates from behind?
It's very reflective target for the purposes of LIDAR (laser speed guns) so I would assume that's the primary reason for keeping the inane front plate requirement in place.

A number of states don't even issue front plates so there's obviously no compelling safety reason for it.

The only agency that ever bothered me when I didn't have a front plate was the DPS, and they only issued a warning.

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:28 pm
by BrassMonkey
It's an excuse to stop someone if you have not other PC IMHO...

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:15 pm
by drinks
As a Texan who lived 3/4 mile from Arkansas for 12 years, I can give a very good reason to insist on front plates for Texas vehicles, seeing a car WITHOUT a front plate coming down the middle of the road gives one time to take early evasive action.
Arkansas does not issue 2 plates. :shock: :grin:

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:31 pm
by KBCraig
Drinks, it is the Louisiana cars you have to worry about. :grin:

FYI, from Wikipedia:

"In the United States, 20 states do not require an official front license plate, these states being Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, and West Virginia; U.S. territories Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam also do not require an official front license plate. In Nevada, front plates are optional if the vehicle was not designed for a front plate and the manufacturer did not provide an add-on bracket or other means of displaying the front plate."

And of course, motorcycles don't have them.

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:49 pm
by MAFWG
A few years back, I was stopped on 121 in Grapevine for no front plate while driving a 1994 Camaro. The motorcycle officer told me bluntly that the reason he cited me for no front plate was because without it he couldn't get a speed reading with his LIDAR. That pretty much guaranteed that I would never put a front plate on that car! (No front plate is a non-moving violation, no points, no insurance hit).

Hunter

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:12 pm
by CHL/LEO
Have you ever conducted a traffic stop from the front? Or don't you generally run plates from behind?
Not sure if I understand the first part of your question but if you mean have I ever initiated a traffic stop by observing a front plate - yes. And I have initiated quite a few more by not observing a front plate but that's understood so I will attempt to address your questions and several others that have posted since yours.

In Dallas there are quite a few opportunities during a shift where we're sitting at a traffic light and will run "front" plates of cars that are either coming toward us or crossing in front of us. The officer driving will call out plate numbers as fast as the other officer can type it in and hit the transmit button. We don't even read the response on the computer screen - we just listen for the audible cue that tells us we've just run a car that has warrants associated with it or is stolen. I cannot tell you how many stops I have initiated (and arrests that I've made) just off of hits from the front plates.

Also, when there is a line of cars coming at you during heavy traffic you can't turn and get the rear plate ID because they are running so close together. One other tidbit - lots of times it's easier to read a plate coming at you than moving away. "R"s, "B"s, "8"s all look similar at a distance. When they're coming toward you it gives you a chance to verify what you thought you saw at a distance.

A new device that's just come on the market (it's already here in the DFW area) is a camera that is mounted in the patrol car which scans every license plate it sees (coming and going) and instantly runs it for hits. It is unbelievable how fast this is and we don't have to type in anything - it's all done automatically and then it announces to us any hits it got including the description of the car it just ran and the plate number. The cameras are able to read up to 4 lanes of traffic with a single vehicle. They can read over 10,000 plates in just one shift. Hopefully you can see how this would benefit an officer in trying to recover a stolen vehicle or perhaps a kidnapped child where time is of the essence.

More info:
http://www.remingtonelsag.com/mobile-system.htm

Some people have also replied that Texas is one of the few states that still requires a front plate. If I recall correctly I remember reading somewhere that Texas is one of the majority of states that require a front plate.

While we're addressing license plates let me add one more bit of information - some of you might have recently seen seven digit Texas plates on the road and thought they were bogus (kind of like some LEOs did when they first saw them :smile: ). Texas has now joined CA as a 7-digit plate state.

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:11 pm
by JRG
Sounds like Big Brother is getting ready to pounce. Can the black helicopters be far behind?

:grin:

JRG

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:38 am
by kw5kw
jnkirk1974 wrote:
CHL/LEO wrote:
Texas still has the most stupid law
What's stupid about it?
It's stupid, because most people get your license number by looking at the rear. To my knowledge, LEOs use the front license plate as a flat surface to shoot radar and laser against.
Not having a front LP is Probable Cause for a traffic stop, just not having a working tail lamp(s) or a license plate lamp or even too dark of window tinting.

Traffic stops are one of the most effective ways of taking drugs off of the street, there is not a day that goes by that I don't see at least three or four seizures, by DPS Troopers, of dangerous drugs because of traffic stops.

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:04 am
by Wildscar
txinvestigator wrote:
Wildscar wrote: Splain this one. :lol:

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_sto ... 34143.html
News story wrote:(AP) AUSTIN The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that a license plate frame that obscures, even partially, the state name or pictorial design is against the law and can lead to a motorist being fined or arrested.
Uhh, it is so the name of the state on the plate can be seen. ???
I just went back and reread the conversation and I was mistaken about you 100% comment. It was referencing something else and not the visibility of the plate itself. So nix my comment.
flintknapper wrote:I'm beginning to wonder if a 21 yr. old, blonde, college student in a firebird is more the reason for a friendly stop. :???:
I'm not a 21 year old blonde but I have been pulled over just cause the LEO in question wanted to make sure that my Helmet had the required DOT sticker on the back of the helmet. I wasn't being stupid or speeding or riding out of my bounds. I was just on my way home from work one afternoon. I think crotch rockets hold a special place for LEOs.



And since we are on the topic of front license plates. Here's a little story that I remember from a time long ago. I use to work at a place that was right across from a bank with a drive threw window. One day it was robbed and the thief ran out the back of the bank to get in his get away car that was parked in the back where the tellers could see him. Well I guess they where from a state that didn't require front plates or where just stupid. I'm thinking the latter. I guess while they where trying to prep the car for the robbery they forgot to take the font plate off the car. Well they back into the parking spot they chose and gave the tells plenty of time to take the plate number down. They reported that the the cops where waiting for them at their home when they returned to the house. This is one that should have been on one of those Americans dumbest criminals shows. That just one more reason to have a front plate law. :smilelol5: