Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-11-22
Maryland Out Of steO'

AlUC pe JuSClneo Dy the Ma
tlonal Safety Councils "Acci-
dent Facts" and most certain
ly should not be promoted by
such misrepresentation as ap-
peared in The Stars recent
editorial captioned Maryland
Is Out of STEP"
According to that council
no unsafe condition was found
IN vehicles involved in SO per
cent of all accidents or in e5
per cent of fatal accidents.
The 5 per cent unsafe vehicles
in fatal accidents are divided
among. 2 per cent brakes:
per cent lights; / per cent
tires; and ] per cent other. 1t
is not known how many Of the
3 per cent unsafe vehicles had
already passed inspection and
the unsafe condition developed
after inspection.
The proven safe operating
condition Of almost all vehi-
cles involved in accidents
would clearly indicate that
the inconvenience and expense
OF compulsory inspection in
Maryland is superfluouS. un-
necessary and totally unjusti-
fed as a safety measure.
Maryland and other States.
however, might well benefit
from a mandatory measure
requiring faulty drivers to
show cause why they should
be permitted to drive after an
accident for which they were
liable.
The American Automobile
Association reports that %
States do not require vehicle
inspection: whereas 10 States
and the D. c. have compulsory
vehicle inspection. Thus. Ma
ryland obviously is classed
with the majority Of States
which do not require cor in
spections. The Star editorial.
Maryland Is Out of STEP"
states. however, that MARY
land is one of the few States
which do not require car IN
spection or permit renewals"
Insofar as permit renewals is
concerned, that statement is
true and correct, but as re-
CARDS car inspection, the edi-
torial statement is patiently
misleading.
1t is to be hoped that the
1857 Maryland Assembly will
not be swayed by false propa-
ganda used to promote unjus-
titled car inspection.
Franklin I. Miles.
=
You state in an editorial Mo-
vember 10 that Maryland is
out Of step with regard to peri
odic inspection Of automobiles
and resistance Of drivers per-
mits. The only reason given is
that "all jurisdictions sur
rounding Maryland have strict
inspection and permit laws, the
pressure for similar action in
Maryland is supported by traf-
flc and safety authorities out
side the State" This seems a
weak argument In support Of
your position.
What data has been COM
piled in the State Of Maryland
which reflects the need for
change in these State laws?
For example, how many acct
dents are caused by mechan-
ically defective vehicles reg
istered in Maryland or BY
drivers possessing Maryland
permits who with any degree
Of assurance would not be re-
issued such q permit? Such
data must be available, partic-
ularly with regard to fatal
accidents. ! have the distinct
impression from reading news
paper accounts that few If
any Of these accidents would
be eliminated by virtue Of the
changes in State laws which
are supported by The Star.
John Greer Irwin.
Editors note: Safety au-
thorities say that although five
per cent Of vehicles involved
in fatal accidents are found
to have been defective, the per-
centage probably would be
greater II the crashes did not
obliterate some evidence Of
defects. But II defective cars
caused five per cent Of last
years highway deaths. that
means nearly 1900 persons
were killed By defective cars in
1855. The d. c. Trsfic De-
psrtment reports that whereas
the average rate Of rejection
for cars from other States in
spected in the District Is 81
per cent. those from Maryland
are rejected az a rate OF 81 per
cent On hrrf ireneeffon