[cywinr]

If we want to argue the merit of the VI's, they're mostly valid according to the MVAR. There are areas where it is clearly not specific enough (such as measuring db levels), but like many laws, there needs to be room for law enforcement to use their judgement. If we try to argue against the MVAR and the specifics of each VI, we will lose every time.

Instead, the argument should be whether or not we are being judged fairly. That means whether the severity of the punishment is equal to the severity of the infraction.

Does a stock lambo deserve a VI when there isn't realistically anything the owner can do other than change their driving behaviour? Probably not. Does he deserve to get a ticket for excessive noise? Probably yes. Was the owner driving normally or in race mode and revving unnecessarily?

Does a modified car deserve a VI if the owner fails the db test when pulled over and forced to rev their engine with the measuring device extremely close to the exhaust? Technically yes, if it exceeds 93db in any case, then it's not compliant. We can't argue against that. I'm not sure if we can even argue we are being discriminated against based on our vehicle that's the entire point of the MVAR. The best way to enforce those regulations is to target vehicles that don't look, sound, or even smell, compliant.

Regardless, Cain doesn't care about any of that. He just targets anyone that he thinks he can fail and blatantly "hands out VI's like candy". That may be something we can argue against. It's a tough case to make and we don't have a lot to work with on our side.

Maybe if a stock Toyota Corolla could fail his decibel test, perhaps we have a case to argue we are being discriminated against?