[roytoy2003]

The RCW vehicle code of no front plate is very very inconsistent.

For example:

On Saturday, I had my SV-R out, which is titled and registered to me. I have a personalized plate on it "SVR USA" so under law it requires the front plate be mounted.
BUT driving with me was a family memeber, driving my GT-R which carries one of Dealer plates on iit. Dealer plates ARE only required on the rear of the vehicle, (one plate only).

The GT-R pulled in behind us on the traffic stop, he did ask if it was mine and where the front plate for it was. I told him it had a Dealer plae, he walked back and looked and that was that with it.

Certain vehicles are exempt from front plates, mainly due to operation of the vehicle, such as cooling, lights etc..you can obtain the letter of excemption from the WSP, not a very big list at this time.

Certain collector plates and horseless plates ONLY require the rear plate as well.

Farm Vehicles, mianly in eastern Washington, licensed for the roadway do not require a front plate.

Indian Reservation titled plates do not require a front plate.

This law is totaly for the reason to make MONEY and allow the new exspensive LASAR speed measuring devices the WSP bought to operate. They require a metal object in the front to get a reading. EVEN the manufacture of the LASAR in their operating manual as well as traing class nited the location to target is the Front plate>

In these times of Budget crunch, just think how much better it would be for the State and its tax payers, to have SAVED a ton of money buy NOT buying over 400 PLUS LASAR units. Then add uop the coist savings of only producing ONE plate per car along with the deletion of the required TABS that have to be affixed to the front plate.

I would rather have seen that money go to social services that have been cut drasticaly instead of the an Agency that NEEDS to maintain their numbers monthly to show a "FALSE" need for continued revenue standards with not cuts th thier budget.