Ex Post Fatwa’ing

59
4316
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One way to avoid having Big Brother ride shotgun is to buy a ride built before Big Brother came with the car – or the truck.

(Italics for a reason; bear with.)

It has been legal – since the dawn of the automobile age – to buy a vehicle made before the advent of air bags, back-up cameras, driver “assistance” technology – and all the rest of it – and drive it on public roads.

The roads the public paid for.

Colorado just made it illegal – in principle.

And the precedent this establishes could become the practice whereby we’re forced out of older vehicles that aren’t “compliant” with the latest sssssssssssaaaaaaafety and emissions regs – including the new “emissions” regs that portray carbon dioxide (which has nothing to do with air quality) as an exhaust “emission” . . . in order to anathematize all internal combustion engines.

In order to force us all into “clean” electric cars – which are “clean” to the same degree that the girls at the Bunny Ranch are pristine.

The principle comes in the form of a law recently passed by the Colorado state legislature – SB19-05 – which originally was meant to make it legal for Colorado residents to register, plate and drive older military vehicles (e.g., surplus Humvees, cargo trucks, Jeeps and so on) on public roads, just like any other car. But the bill was amended after it was introduced using a procedure called “strike and replace” – and the version that was passed into law restricts such vehicles to off-road use only.

Effectively rendering them useless to their owners.

The law’s primary sponsor was a Republican – State Senator Larry Crowder. 

It is unclear whether the measure applies only to vehicles purchased after the bill became law – with vehicles tagged and plated prior to the law’s passage “grandfathered” into continued on-road legality.

That has been the general practice for generations, not just in Colorado but nationally. It is why it’s still legal – for now – to drive a 1970  car that doesn’t have all the equipment mandated since 1970 and thereby avoid all that crap.

But that could change – and this legislation is the first confirmed and officialized shot across the bow.

There is a provision that appears to be some kind of exemption; the law states that:

“These changes do not apply to military vehicles that are valued for historical purposes.”

Italics added.

A Soviet dacha… yours for as long allowed.

It is unclear – because the law’s text provides no definition – as to what, exactly, constitutes a vehicle that is “valued” for “historic” purposes. Nor who gets to decide what that means.

What’s clear is that it will be the government’s whim that determines which vehicles are “valued.”

This is the equivalent to the practice, in the old Soviet Union, of granting dachas (i.e., private homes rather than communal apartments) and other perks to “valuable” citizens . . . so long as the government considered them “valuable,” of course.

Thus, even the people allowed to continue driving their “historic” vehicles on public roads for now do so with the not-so-thinly-veiled understanding that the privilege is revocable at any time.

This serves the complementary purpose of making anyone considering the purchase of a surplus Humvee or deuce-and-a-half to think twice before they actually do purchase it, since it’s risky to buy a vehicle the government may at any time decree can no longer leave the driveway (legally) after you buy it.

But the most dangerous aspect is the precedent this sets – which could certainly be interpreted to apply to all vehicles not “compliant” with federal ssssaaaaaaaaaaaaafety and emissions fatwas.

Not just surplus military vehicles.

If they can be restricted to off-road-use only because they aren’t “compliant” with the foregoing than so – in principle – can any older vehicle.

This is critically important to understand because this is how the law works. Case law, as the lawyers style it. What that means is the laws on the books, which create the precedents for deciding the legality of future laws.

The legal reason we are required to submit to a groping by a government goon in order to travel by airplane today is that the precedent for treating people as presumptive “terrorists” was established decades earlier when it became legal to treat every driver who happened to be traveling a given road as a presumptive “drunk” driver obliged to prove to the satisfaction of a government goon they were not “drunk” – without any obligation on the part of the government to establish grounds for suspecting them of being “drunk.”

Similarly, we are now required to buy health insurance on the basis of the case law precedent set by the legal obligation to buy car insurance.

One thing inevitably leads to another.

Or rather, one thing the government does inevitably leads to more government.

And the government will have to do something about all those older vehicles which people are still free to buy – and drive – in order to avoid having to buy a new vehicle with all the very latest government-mandated equipment.

And to avoid having to buy electric cars with even more equipment – and far less ability.

The pressure to “do something” is already nascent. Electric car sales are wilting (Tesla deliveries have plummeted) . . .   the tiny “market” for them being saturated and with the subsidies declining, fewer are buying.

People are also buying fewer new cars, too.

The reasons are economic, functional – and personal. Some simply can’t afford a new car anymore. All the fatwa’ing has driven the price of a family sedan to half or more the average family’s annual income – not counting all the peripheral taxes and insurance costs piled on.

Others don’t want one – because they dislike being nagged and pre-empted by the technology being pushed on them. Most new cars come standard with multiple “assists,” such as Lane Keep Assist and Automated Brake Assist, Parking Assist as well as noxious “features” such as Automated Stop/Start (ASS) facial recognition tech and in-car microphones, even (i.e., Google Alexa).

Despite there being little market demand for these things. The object seems to be to get people used to these things – whether they like it or not. 

Cohorts – legions – of electric cars are also on their way, too – despite the wilting demand, because their manufacture has been forced by fatwas.

But no fatwas are yet in force requiring their purchase.

Nor the purchase of a new non-electric car with driver “assistance” technology, ASS – or airbags . . .

This is a “problem,” for those determined to nudge us into cars that do have all of that – and EVs that have even more (or rather, less – for more). And that is a “problem” that can best be addressed by fatwa’ing prohibitions on the on-road use of alternatives to them

That’s just what Colorado has just fatwa’d – in principle.

And by doing it, set the precedent for more of the same, outside of Colorado.

Curiously – but not surprisingly – there are no restrictions on government use of surplus military vehicles – including armored MRAPS and such – the better to Hut! Hut! Hut! us with, including those of us who “cling” to our surplus military vehicles.
. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet (pictured below) in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  

 

Share Button

59 COMMENTS

  1. While driving a 1967 VW in NY State in 1990, I was ‘pulled over’ by State Troopers who, after getting my license, registration and insurance told me, that since I wasn’t wearing a seat belt that I would be getting a ticket. I calmly told the officer that the car never came with seat belts because it was built before they were required. He shrugged and went to get his book while the other officer came back to the car and told me he thought my plate was fake because he had never seen one like that. It was a new Florida design and even with a matching registration they kept us for over an hour as they ‘investigated’ the mystery plate and the seat belt issue. Fun Fun

  2. Article 1 section 9; No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

    It is unconstitutional to outlaw vehicles that were once legal to operate on the public roads. They can have mine when they pry them from my cold dead hands. I may end up like Kowalski but I’ll be listening to Red Barchetta as I hit the dozers in the highway.

    • Hi Guererro!

      Of course – but it doesn’t matter what the law (Constitution) says. Just interpret it in a way that suits – or gin up something like “compelling state interest” – treasonous, on the face of it – and then do whatever you like, contrary to the plain language of the thing.

      It’s worth a mention here that all of this was probably on purpose. The Bill of Rights was not originally part of the Constitution; it was added as a sop to appease suspicious Virginians such as George Mason, who otherwise would not have supported it. And the amendments were written in such a way – by lawyers – as to be amenable to interpretation in ways agreeable to . . . lawyers.

      Why else, for example, the torturous language of the Second Amendment? It could have read like the First: Congress shall pass no law restricting the right of the people to possess and carry arms. Period.

      But it was constructed in such a manner as to provide a crack in the proverbial door that could be pushed open or wider by the right person, using the right weaseling.

      Same goes for the rest of the thing – and not just the Bill of.

      I agree with Spooner. The Constitution did what it was meant to – which was to create an omnipotent centralized government.

  3. This is why politicians are useless and pretty much brain dead. There are no qualifications to become a servant to the people (that’s a complete joke) and the government takes anyone…social justice or equality crusaders or whatever garbage they are pushing. Seldom are they giving us more freedoms and seem to be taking away more and more.

    • Agreed, Tom –

      The original idea was that legislators be part-time and not compensated. I think those are bully ideas. For openers. Also that these people be limited to no more than one term. The Professional Politician is a form of lice and there’s only one way to deal with them… which is to get rid of them.

      • no one likes to hear this but the only way to stop people like this is to kill them. since that will not happen from the cowardly most heavily armed people in world history prepare for your doom

  4. Colorado has produced some first rate legislative douchebaggery. CO state bar Association must have ginned this up as a future Gift to as yet unknown Bar member, who will represent the “guy” who slugs it out in court, as a matter of principal.

    Next election, if you have a choice, try not to vote for any Lawyers on the ballot.

    • Hi Round House,

      It’s not just CO, sadly. The “kudzu” of authoritarian collectivism has saturated the country, with the degree of it being the only difference. It boggles me that the government has – somehow – acquired the authority it has, but even more so how accepting most people are of it, provided it serves their interests.

  5. A couple of things. First, Colorado, and most Wesetern states have referendum. That is, the voters can vote to repeal idiocy passed by the State legislatures. I suspect that if this stupidity gets too onerous in Colorado, a repeal will be on the ballot.
    second, you probably won’t be able to drive an ex military vehicle at all in Colorado, since most official off-road trails are designated as forest service roads (IE: a government owned road) and you will need either an OHV permit or ordinary tags & registration to drive them.

  6. There is no area of our lives that is immune from government intervention and control. I recently watched a great video that asked, “How does a nation of over three hundred million get ruled by one city ?”
    That city is DC.
    The answer is that DC rules at the end of a gun barrel. They destroyed the Constitution in 1865, the money in 1913, and the process continues today.
    All of this is in service to the Oligarchs control of money and power.
    Forced obsolesce is good for commerce. We used to create wealth through productivity, but that fostered independence and autonomy. Making older vehicles illegal stands right along side of “Negative Interest”, No Fault Divorce, psychiatric medications and abortion on demand.
    Not to mention USURY…
    Money changes hands.
    Nothing will improve until we resume saying NO to women.

    • Hi Jack,

      Do you remember the great BBC series, The Prisoner? It begins with the lead character – who has been kidnapped and taken to “The Village” – asserting that he is a free man, not a number.

      You are Number Six, the sonorous voice says – and laughs at him.

      • “I am not a number, I am a free man!”

        Patrick McGoohan, probably the best thinking man’s TV serial ever.

        “I will not be filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered!”

        In that same opening scene, he drove up to hand in his resignation in a Lotus Super Seven, the very symbol of automotive rebellion. At the time, one had to build a Lotus Seven oneself as a kit car, due to British taxes on assembled motorcars.

        It was produced by ATV (Associated TeleVision), the Independent Television contractor for the Midlands in the UK, BTW, not Auntie Beeb.

          • Ah, “The Chimes of Big Ben”, and Leo McKern, the best Number Two of the lot IMHO.

            The keening scream of that Cosworth hotted-up Ford Kent engine as he roars down the car park entrance, that’s a real motorcar! Hard to believe that was the same engine in my first (well, second) car, a 1967 EnFo Anglia. Well, same but for the graces of Colin Chapman and Cosworth!

            Word is Patrick McGoohan himself chose the Seven over many other potential Six-mobiles due to its non-conformist image, “you want to tax me, HAH!, I’ll assemble it myself from a kit and STUFF YOUR TAXES!” and the fact that other more suave TV agents drove much more suave motorcars than this brutal little Lotus kitcar (like the Volvo P1800 and Simon Templar). Someday, maybe an article on the TV secret agent cars of the 60’s and 70’s might be in line!

              • Jeremy, Max had a Tiger and a Karmann Ghia, the Chief drove a ’68 Shelby convertible, can’t remember if it was a 500 or 350.

              • I’ve read that both a Tiger and a 4-cylinder Alpine with Tiger badging were used in the series. (The 4-banger in the Alpine left more room under the hood for the machine gun.)

              • Yep, you lads have it right! And, for the final season an Opel GT no less. Would you believe…!

                And The Avengers, Emma Peel’s Lotus Elan…yowza!

            • I dig it, Crusty!

              That car is . . . elemental. It is what driving is all about. And what so many have forgotten – or never had a chance to forget, never having been allowed to experience it.

              I agree in re the article idea. I already wrote it on a post-it and tacked that to my desktop!

              • Excellent, I look forward to that article for sure.

                Elemental, yes. That is it in a nutshell. It was said one could drive the Seven over a farthing and tell which side was heads from the driver’s seat.

            • Definitely one of my favorite series of all time! Every April 15th and every Census since it aired I can hear Number Two intoning in the back of my head:

              “We want information… (You won’t get it!) By hook or by crook, we will!”

              • Or the Supervisor intoning “Orange Alert! Orange Alert!” and Rover popping out of the sea. A good metaphor for any Federal agency and crossing their authoritay!

  7. Getting pedantic, but it’s deuce and a half, not quarter.

    The farm I grew up on had a deuce made in 1955. No solenoid starting, had to push a small pedal above the gas pedal to engage the starter motor to the flywheel and turn it over.

    Thing would go anywhere, although very slow. Got like 4 MPG.

    I would get a 5 ton though if I was in the market for one. They have power steering, auto trans, and real air brakes instead of air over hydraulic.

    • Thanks, AF!

      Not pedantic… I’m on my own here (no copy editor) and sometimes I slip. In this case, I subconsciously typed quarter because my unconscious mind ginned up the ol’ Buick 225… anyhow, thanks for the catch.

      Just fixed!

      • Not a bad slip, that. Both the “Truck, 6×6, 2.5 Ton” and the Buick in question weigh about the same, and ocupy about the same space on the road 🙂 And, the USAF did use Buick engines to start the SR-71 Blackbird…

    • Our VFD has a 5 ton 6×6 tender. It’s a brute of a truck that you can just push down trees with and make your own road. But it takes some acreage to turn around!

      The Navistar 4×4 and 6×6 trucks are much nicer and turn much tighter apparently due to the open knuckle front axles. We have one of each.

  8. Colorado is a territory of California. So many fled from CA due to burgeoning taxes and out of control real estate prices and landed in Colorado…only to bring with them…burgeoning taxes and out of control real estate prices, and I’ll also assume the love of heavy regulation. You cannot make it up. From Colorado to Colorazul in less than a generation.

    • Yeah, it seems like it really started in the early 1990s. We escaped in 1997.

      In 1988 you couldn’t hardly give a house away and by 1992 the Calipornians were bidding hundred year old shacks up over $100K. Drivers were trying to run over kids crossing Main Street in a crosswalk.

    • And … there was a guy from CA bought a little office building downtown. He told me that he was going to fix it up nice and plant Lemon Trees in the old planter boxes on the sidewalk. I guess he didn’t know that it gets -40* F in the winter!

    • I was a Colorado native. Lived there the first 55 years of my life. Five years ago I fled, and it was the best decision of my life. The front range is indeed now a suburb of LA. I couldn’t take the traffic hell anymore, the ever escalating property taxes and cost of living, or the ever encroaching regulation and nannyism. I will give the state credit for pioneering legal recreational weed, but it has had the effect of attracting even more hoards of liberal retards. When I was a kid growing up there it was a paradise with a low population density, mostly folks with good common sense. Not any more.

      • We moved to CO from AZ (prev TX) when I was 16. Colo Spgs was still something of a Cow Town in 1970. There were big western wear and boot stores downtown. It was still too big for me, and I ended up in a remote area of the western slope which was still virtually the frontier.

        NOW, there are paved roads into that once remote valley. People from Denver make it a Sunday afternoon drive, and thousands from all over the country haul in murderbikes and ATVs behind 40′ motorhomes and scream up and down the once quiet valley all day 🙁 Wear a cowboy hat and boots in the Springs and people think you are from Mars.

        When my mom is gone and the estate settled, I hope to NEVER go down there again. But Mrs Anonymous still has some relatives there.

      • I never have understood for the life of me why people who decide to move from someplace else bring their fetid politics with them without investigating what makes their new destination work. If I moved to a different state or country, I would at least look at what’s going on before I cast a vote. If you are escaping a place with high taxes, why would you want to vote for that where you have chosen to live. It makes absolutely no sense. Something else must be going on.

        • Hey Swamp,

          “I never have understood for the life of me why people who decide to move from someplace else bring their fetid politics with them…”

          Well, once you’ve destroyed everything that made the former place a good place to live, there’s nothing left to do. Gotta move on and spread the misery.

          Cheers,
          Jeremy

          • Hi Jeremy!

            Isn’t it something? On the one hand, we are told – sternly – that “the science is settled” with regard to “climate change” but when it comes to socialism/communism (and its endless roster of failure and piles of corpses) it’s always “but we can do it right this time.”

            • We are told that Somali’s will abandon being Somali’s and become Americans yet Califoricators bring their diseases to Colorado, unchanged,

              • Between the fleeing Californians and New Yorkers (and increasingly IL-annoyers) the whole freaking country’s being overrun. The whole east coast is already ruined from the NYers; the West is gone, thanks to Californians and NYers….and increasingly, those people, and the IL-annoyers are now infiltrating the rest of the country- and unlike myself (an exNYer) they’re not seeking more liberty and escape from the liberals…but rather just escape from the high taxes and third-world conditions caused by filling their former locales with the bottom-of-the-barrel third-worlders- but they have a logical disconnect, so that they proceed to establish the same things in their new locales, because they continue to believe that “someone else will pay for it”, and have no moral compunctions about imposing such costs upon someone else, even those costs could be borne solely by them.

        • Agree Swamprat. My family was fortunate to be able to build a small vacation home in a rural western state. I knew to not say a word until I got the lay of the land. And I loved what I was learning. Still kept to myself. Later, I started getting involved with the locals, met some great people, still kept my mouth shut, cause they don’t particularly like outsiders opinions. And I was from a very blue state and they knew it. Years later, after spending more and more time there, I finally got a welcome surprise. One of the old patriarchs of the town said to me “Your going to fit in here just fine”. And then later “We would welcome what you think about x”. I was happy to be able to help them with some things with my experiences.

          • We didn’t have much trouble fitting in. We came from a mostly rural/mountain area that had been Californicated to MT seeking a step back in time. Only thing is that I spent the first five years or so looking over my shoulder because of all the things we could do freely here that were illegal back in Coloradofornia. Of course it’s a hell of a lot worse down there now.

  9. ‘Mornin Eric!

    Hate to play Devil’s advocate (Hated that game!:D ) but could this be more about the fact that the surplus vehicles are newer– i.e. manufactured after the saaaaaaaaaaaaafety BS was mandated? I mean if one buys a surplus 2014 Bummer, they would then be driving a ’14 vehicle that doesn’t have the normal “safety” BS that all other ’14 vehicles have[gasp!].

    Not that that excuses these politician’s interference in one’s ability to choose what they deem acceptable….but I kinda think that is what the stupid bill is about. If they were to expand it to cover old vehicles that were manufactured before the mandates, they would then be creating an ex post facto law….which is illegal (But of course, never stops them, now-a-days).

    And if that were the case, where would it stop? Would every vehicle manfuctured before 2010 have to meet 2010 standards? Or would every vehicle made in 2019 have to meet 2020 standards? Etc.

    I could be wrong, but I think the key here is that the bill pertains to relatively modern vehicles not meeting the BS mandates which were in effect for the time in which they were manufasctured, because they were not subject to those standards, being they were not intended for the consumer market.

    If the BS laws were legitimate, the bill would kinda make sense that way.

    • Do you mean to say that our sainted soldiers are riding around in war zones without air bags, automatic start/stop, and lane assist ?????

    • I got pulled over for not having a light over my plate….I was able to convince the cop to not give me a ticket as the vehicle was not manufactured with a plate light, and there is no wire to add one- everything is crank powered on the tailgate, but I still got a warning. A battery powered light would quickly die in our cold dark winters in Chicago. I would take it to a judge, but to your point, in 1986 cars were required to have plate lights, so it would be interesting how it would play out to a judge when challenged. There is a DOD exemption to emissions standards as well on military vehicles and planes, so there is no emissions control either

    • And then Colo Spgs is trying to charge for the rainwater that runs off your roof and driveway into the non-existent storm drain system.

  10. Ive had an M1009 for 10 years now…great truck,
    But there already is an executive order passed long ago by Clinton, or maybe even as far back as Kennedy which allows the gov to retake any surplus military vehicle in a time of national emergency. I think they still see these things as theirs, I am just a temporary caretaker (probably true anyway, the truck will probably outlast me!). None the less, I agree 100% this is a slippery slope and should be fought. You should do some military truck reviews to spark some interest- m1008 and 9, m715, m35A2, m37, m998, m37…

  11. Citizens of this country need to take a page out of the liberal, progressive “playbook” and just say (and act as well) – “We will NOT comply”.

    • Amen, Joe –

      Der tag has “kommt.”

      For my part, I have already stopped paying to “renew” the registration for several of my vehicles and I will not comply with the “individual mandate” to hand over money to the health insurance mafia. The more of us who simply refuse, the easier it will become for more of us to refuse.

      I advocate this policy with regard to all illegitimate laws – defined as those which impose obligations (and punishments,financial and otherwise) on people who’ve caused no harm to anyone else or the property of others; who are simply going about their own business, peacefully. Any law that violates the property or person of a peaceful person who has not caused any harm by his actions is by definition tyrannical – and the person afflicted has every moral right to refuse and resist.

    • The entire liberal playbook, akin to the Communist Manifesto, needs to be burned. It’s going to get far worse if ever the socialists get full control of DC.

      • I really wish that would happen (The scumbag socialists get control) as disgusting as it would be. Better it should happen now, while those who strenuously oppose it and those who would be negatively affected by it (i.e. a LOT of people- even those who are apathetic about it now) still have enough autonomy, resources and arms to do something about it- and then the pendulum would swing the other way (Not that that would be that great either, as it would still be tyranny), but at least it would stop some of the worst insanity, and might even rekindle a little interest in the preservation of at least some aspects of liberty- kinda like how the Russians are now more concerned with liberty than most Americans, after having endured Soviet communism and it’s aftermath.

        Alternatively, if things continue as they are, with Neocons and Republicans being elected, we’ll just be on a slower march to the same end- and when we finally get to that end, our guns will be gone, and so will our money and propertyu and personal lives, and life as we know it; we’ll be just clawing to survive amidst a bleak state-controlled economy (We’re just about there already) and desperate tyranny (“…”), and no one will have the will, time or ability to resist.

        Better that it should be the rural people vs. the city people, now, when we still have the capacity to prevail, even though greatly out-numbered, rather than the ranks being thinned even further through “education” and economics to the point where we’ll just be the bitches of what the city-dwellers dictate.

        Let the fools have what they want; the reality is the only thing that will teach them. At least now there’s still something left for them to return to. A few more years of the same-old, and there will be nothing, and the newer generations will have no idea of how things used to be. We’re damned close to that right now.

LEAVE A REPLY