• Steve@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    He’s not exactly wrong. On the face of it, it is a legal contradiction.

    NY says the car is legal to drive anywhere within the state.
    Then a local government sets a noise ordnance, making the car essentially illegal to drive in that part of the state.
    The conflicting laws need to get sorted out. No different than states not being able to make laws that go against federal law.

    If they take the same stance as State vs Federal, then the local ordnance being more restrictive than the states would supersede the state law. At the same time it could become unreasonable for individuals to research all the local ordinances they may encounter in a 20 mile trip.

    So yah. It’s easy to say “Asshole drives an expensive loud car and complains about the fine.”
    But there is more nuance and complications here that could go well beyond cars.

    • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      At the same time it could become unreasonable for individuals to research all the local ordinances they may encounter in a 20 mile trip.

      It is extremely reasonable. Drivers are always responsible to learn the laws of places they drive. Are you only required to follow the law of your plate’s state/province? Is turning right on red in NYC okay if you are plated outside the city?

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        NY requires each intersections that aren’t Right on Red to be posted at the light. So you know on a turn by turn basis if you’re allowed or not. A noise ordinance isn’t.

        In larger areas sure. Knowing those things is reasonable. But if you’re crossing 15 different little municipalities is it reasonable to expect people to look up all the local laws for each of them?

      • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not it is not. Driver’s licenses are valid in the entire country, the rules of the road should be the same everywhere.

    • rbn@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m with you. But the consequence to sort out the contradiction might be also a state-wide ban if certain boundaries are exceeded.

    • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      There is no contradiction. Just because the vehicle is licensed for street use doesn’t give the owner permission to operate it in ways that violates the law.

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Or at all? Because he wasn’t doing anything unusual. He wasn’t racing, or speeding even. Just driving normally.

        • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Nothing unusual? On the same he got the noise ticket, he got tickets for running a red light and speeding in a school zone.

    • Roggebrood@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You could argue the same about emission zones which are common across Europe (mainly in inner cities). Just because your vehicle is allowed on the road, it doesn’t you can drive it anywhere.

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Agreed. But again its a question of scale. Its reasonable for one larger city. But what about 20 small towns?