I thought your point was that people didn't care, not that they shouldn't. Sorry if I misinterpreted your incredibly clear argument.

I do note that you're reading and posting in the thread, too. Mr. Kettle, meet Mr. Pot.

 

Catalytic converters have three tasks; in our cars the major one is reduction of oxides of nitrogen. Nitrogen oxides aggravate asthma, cause smog, and acidify rain, which then damages trees and watery ecosystems. Other health problems are associated with nitrogen oxides, but the links are less clear.

Removing the cat increases the amount of toxic gas your car produces; that gas hurts the health and environment of those around you. I don't think it's unreasonable for me to say that that's immoral.

As for your other point, it fits perfectly with what I explain seems to be everyone's reasoning about this: you won't obey the rule unless everyone else has to obey equivalent rules that are just as strict.

 

I don't believe that speeding on the freeway where there's not another car in front or back of me for 1/4 mile is bad. Who besides myself am I going to hurt? Unfortunately, the police don't agree.

Testpipe...I think they should be banned for use on public roads. People are trying to drive hybrids..drive less in general...do what they can to help clean the environment. But then people go ahead and add a test pipe for better sound and a few HP. I hate being stopped at a light while sitting behind a car with a testpipe. Smells like ass. Thanks for doing your part keeping our environment clean.

 

Here shrike, this sites for you:

http://www.zombietime.com/concourse_of_hyp.../concourse.html

 

I have not read everyone's response but I intend to do so tomorrow. The responses appear to involve some emotion, morality, justification, and a host of other reasons supporting a person's personal driving habits relative to speeding and removal of the cat.

Unless this has already been discussed, someone should define speeding. Every jurisdiction has their own seperate ordinance discussing this activity but not all are the same. Also, are there well known enforcement polcies that allow drivers to exceed the posted speed limit by say 10 mph and not receive a citations? Yes, thousands of them. So then are the police guity of the oath to enforce the speeding laws?

The morality aspect belongs in a church discussion and not waste the time of sports car enthusiasts.

The environmental aspect again runs afoul of actual determination of the effect of one's specific act of cat removal on the quality of the air and ambient nose. Why has the US not signed the Treaty for reduction in production of gases causing the greenhouse effect for the entire world?

I believe the decision respecting each issue lies solely on each individual and should remain so. If speeding is warranted under the circumstances, that is a personal decision. So to is the removal of the cat converter. The penalites associated with each violation are also imposed on the violater personally as well.

Speeding is a national pastime ibut is considered a criminal act. The penalties associated with being convicted of speeding is solely responsible by each driver. Removal of a catalytic converter for street use is considered a violation in many jurisdictions, but yet is still allowed for racing events and other related uses. Again, the penaly associated with someone violating this law is again born personaly by the driver.

To judge others for their actions is just wrong in my opinion. We have delegated this aspect to forum called the court system. I see no need to infuriate anyone based on their actions on this forum. It would be nice sometime to see more members accept the actions of others even though they themselves consider the action to be wrong or immoral under whatever definition or concept they believe is correct.

I hope everyone drives safe whether fast or slow and enjoy whatever benefits stemming from the removal of the converter provide them. No matter how any of us elect to drive or improve the performance of our S2k's, the fun and or penalties ultimately lie with each one of us.

Best regards to all

 

I try not to speed on a daily basis, but it's hard to keep your foot out of the pedal all the time.
I usually do around 74 on the interstate in a 65 zone.

As far as test pipes I really don't think they are going to make that much of a difference to the environment. It is a small % of people running them and if it makes the car a little faster and sound better more power to ya.

 

If your point is just to be nasty, or to claim that I'm being hypocritical without really understanding what the word means, then I'll just let that one go. But on the assumption that you really are arguing that I'm being hypocritical, two points:

1. I am, and I know it. So are many other board members. That was the point of the thread; did you read and comprehend it? It's hypocritical to say that violating one fairly minor health-and-safety-related law is a terrible thing while condoning violating a different minor health-and-safety-related law. I started the thread to get insight into other people's rationales for their hypocrisy, in part because I'm interested in my own.

(Unfortunately, because no speeder-haters have turned up, we're not seeing their side presented.)

2. As for my being hypocritical by being against test pipes while still driving a gas burning (and wasting) vehicle, you've missed a big point. Society has determined, by the lawful (if screwed up) legislative process, that I am allowed to drive the car that I do, but that I am not allowed to remove its smog equipment. It is not hypocritical for me to distinguish between those actions, blithely doing the officially condoned one while opposing the prohibited one, because in each case my actions are in accord with the expressed will of society. This may not be the appropriate standard to use, but it is a perfectly sensible one, and to argue that it is hypocrisy is to miss my point.

 

In my mind, thats pretty much the case. I feel everyone should be treated EQUALLY. Until jet engines / deisel trucks, buses / etc have pollution regulations on them, I'm not going to worry about my pollution.

More or less that could be applied to the law as well. Until cops start acting like they are not above the law (speeding, running red lights, tailgating, etc), I'll keep somewhat speeding as well.

If we, as people, have to treat everyone else as equals I would expect the government to do the same. Unfortunatly, its not the case which is why I'll be rebelious until it is the case.

 

bravo. Thats my new favorite statement.

 

Then I guess it's time to worry, because all of those sources you mentioned do have emission regulations. If that was all you were waiting for, you can stop waiting.