2013 Number Plates Unconstitutional

Prima Nocte

I thought it was a joke until I saw a car showroom on RTE getting ready for the new year. Instead of plate numbers being numbered 13-D they were numbered 131-D. Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.
Surely this must be unconstitutional for the state to enforce a superstitious belief on the rest of the population by creating number plates in this way. If for instance, the number 12 was held in the Islamic faith to be unlucky and the countries number plates had to be changed to accommodate this superstitious belief would this not amount to state enforcement of Islamic beliefs on the rest of the population?
If so, doesn't the same logic apply to beliefs held by poeople with regards to the number 13.

Shenshen

There's a constitutional right to get a certain type license plate???

Jeez, they sure were far-thinking in 1922!

Dodge

I believe its more to do with re-sale value, and pressure from the motor industry. People can now differentiate between early and late year 'new' cars (as opposed to guessing in previous years)

The practice is to continue in 2014 I believe

Drakares

Prima Nocte wrote: »

I thought it was a joke until I saw a car showroom on RTE getting ready for the new year. Instead of plate numbers being numbered 13-D they were numbered 131-D. Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.

I don't understand how someone can be "appalled" by something like this.

Seriously, who gives a shít?!

Mint Sauce

Prima Nocte wrote: »

I thought it was a joke until I saw a car showroom on RTE getting ready for the new year. Instead of plate numbers being numbered 13-D they were numbered 131-D. Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.
Surely this must be unconstitutional for the state to enforce a superstitious belief on the rest of the population by creating number plates in this way. If for instance, the number 12 was held in the Islamic faith to be unlucky and the countries number plates had to be changed to accommodate this superstitious belief would this not amount to state enforcement of Islamic beliefs on the rest of the population?
If so, doesn't the same logic apply to beliefs held by poeople with regards to the number 13.

Its simply been used as an excuss to help the motoring industy, and have two peak selling periods a year, rather than one. To cover it up further, it will continue for 2014 and beyond.

minidazzler

It's not at the request of the people, it's at the request of the car dealerships because a lot of people will NOT buy cars that are labeled "13" Even if they have the money and want to buy a new car a good number of people just won't.

Dravokivich

could you please point out which article of the constitution states how registration plates are to be set?

Prima Nocte

Drakares wrote: »

I don't understand how someone can be "appalled" by something like this.

Seriously, who gives a shít?!

I give a sh!t because it's just nonsense

Logical_Bear

Prima Nocte wrote: »

Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.
.

I dont want to live on this planet anymore....

hoodwinked

but is it just me or does 13 or 131 not both have 13 in them! :pac:


my superstitious grandmother who always upgrades refuses to anyways because 13 is in there somewhere

gobnaitolunacy

Not unconstitutional, just stupid.

Just curious, OP, do you have a problem with the reference to God in the Constitution also??

Prima Nocte

minidazzler wrote: »

It's not at the request of the people, it's at the request of the car dealerships because a lot of people will NOT buy cars that are labeled "13" Even if they have the money and want to buy a new car a good number of people just won't.

what if i refuse to buy a car thats is labeled 131 one because it is not labeled 13 my favourite lucky number?

donvito99

Take it to the High Court OP.

Anyone

Prima Nocte wrote: »

I thought it was a joke until I saw a car showroom on RTE getting ready for the new year. Instead of plate numbers being numbered 13-D they were numbered 131-D. Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.
Surely this must be unconstitutional for the state to enforce a superstitious belief on the rest of the population by creating number plates in this way. If for instance, the number 12 was held in the Islamic faith to be unlucky and the countries number plates had to be changed to accommodate this superstitious belief would this not amount to state enforcement of Islamic beliefs on the rest of the population?
If so, doesn't the same logic apply to beliefs held by poeople with regards to the number 13.

If a number plate gets you "shocked and appaled" you live a very very sheltered life.

BensonSlide

This is our X-Case.

minidazzler

Prima Nocte wrote: »

what if i refuse to buy a car thats is labeled 131 one because it is not labeled 13 my favourite lucky number?

You'd be in the minority. So who gives a fcuk.

Mint Sauce

Dravokivich wrote: »

could you please point out which article of the constitution states how registration plates are to be set?

Its the tiny bit between divorce and abortion.

branie

the number 13 on a car reg plate is just that - a number

Dodge

Prima Nocte wrote: »

what if i refuse to buy a car thats is labeled 131 one because it is not labeled 13 my favourite lucky number?

The only logical follow on from that is

1) The motor industry collapses
2) the government collapses
3) this brongs downt he eu
4) worldwide anarchy leads to dissolution of all governments
5) the alien overlords finally take control

Prima Nocte

Dravokivich wrote: »

could you please point out which article of the constitution states how registration plates are to be set?

section 40 subsection 6

minidazzler

branie wrote: »

the number 13 on a car reg plate is just that - a number

To rational people....

humberklog

Prima Nocte wrote: »

I give a sh!t because it's just nonsense

But you've really missed a large chunk of the reasoning behind this move.

It's a good idea, not about superstition. You've not heard why? Look it up, it's there somewhere on the web as it has been on the radio and newspapers too.

You've not picked the story up right.

Prima Nocte

branie wrote: »

the number 13 on a car reg plate is just that - a number

not if it is arranged according to a belief held by a minority of people

joydivision

Theres far too much running around trying to stop people believing in stuff . You arnt being forced to be superstitious just have a one at the end of a 13 on a number plate . Whats the big deal ?
Appalled like ? Your appalled?
As stated above its to try and prop up the motor trade nothing to do with superstition .
Im shocked and appalled that you wrote that post and I wasted time reading and replying to it.

Run_to_da_hills

gobnaitolunacy wrote: »

Not unconstitutional, just stupid.

Just curious, OP, do you have a problem with the reference to God in the Constitution also??

13 Is a favourite number of the Illuminati, They should also ban the use of 9, 11, 33, 216, 322 and 666.

Prima Nocte

joydivision wrote: »

Theres far too much running around trying to stop people believing in stuff . You arnt being forced to be superstitious just have a one at the end of a 13 on a number plate . Whats the big deal ?
Appalled like ? Your appalled?
As stated above its to try and prop up the motor trade nothing to do with superstition .
Im shocked and appalled that you wrote that post and I wasted time reading and replying to it.

how has it not anything to do with superstition?

Dodge

Prima Nocte wrote: »

not if it is arranged according to a belief held by a minority of people

Prima Nocte wrote: »

how has it not anything to do with superstition?

Are you deliberately not reading the posts that explain it has nothing to do with superstition? Read the first 10 posts after your OP

lanber man

I thought this was just there to distinguish between late registered cars and early registered cars. I for onr think its a good idea. Now maybe it coming up to 2013 made the government hurry up with these changes but I thought that was just coincidental. I could be completely wrong in everything i just said, and if so im sure I'll get a bashing

Prima Nocte

Dodge wrote: »

Are you deliberately not reading the posts that explain it has nothing to do with superstition? Read the first 10 posts after your OP

No

joydivision

Prima Nocte wrote: »

how has it not anything to do with superstition?

Its hoping that to keep up with the joneses idiots will buy a 131 car then 6 months later have to have a 132 car .

28064212

Prima Nocte wrote: »

section 40 subsection 6

...no, there is nothing in the legislation which contravenes this subsection in any way whatsoever. Try again. And this time, try and construct an actual consitutionally-based argument instead of just pointing to an irrelevant subsection

Tom Cruises Left Nut

This is why the country is going down the drain.

If people took the time to research things we would all be better off :mad:

Skid

Prima Nocte wrote: »

what if i refuse to buy a car thats is labeled 131 one because it is not labeled 13 my favourite lucky number?

Then you will be getting the bus everywhere, presumably.

They are changing the Number Plate Registrations in 2013 and all subsequent years to increase the level of trade in the second half of each year.

It's not triskaidekaphobic, and you really need to improve your knowledge of Constitutional law, judging by the thread title.

Penn

Prima Nocte wrote: »

how has it not anything to do with superstition?

Superstition might have been used as the 'jumping off' point or kickstarted the debate, but the reason for the change is to try and increase car sales throughout the year and have two high-sales periods rather than one. Superstition is no longer the reason for the change. As said previously, this new practice will continue into 2014 and likely beyond that

yop

Prima Nocte wrote: »

I thought it was a joke until I saw a car showroom on RTE getting ready for the new year. Instead of plate numbers being numbered 13-D they were numbered 131-D. Tbh I am shocked and appaled that in the 21st century that the state is enforcing a peasant like superstitious belief on the rest of the population.
Surely this must be unconstitutional for the state to enforce a superstitious belief on the rest of the population by creating number plates in this way. If for instance, the number 12 was held in the Islamic faith to be unlucky and the countries number plates had to be changed to accommodate this superstitious belief would this not amount to state enforcement of Islamic beliefs on the rest of the population?
If so, doesn't the same logic apply to beliefs held by poeople with regards to the number 13.

And i thought this was a joke when I read the post!!!
Its for solely marketing reasons!!! Sweet divine if this is all that appalls you will you open the curtains!

Jev/N

minidazzler wrote: »

To rational people....

This thread is irrational

munchkin_utd

irish-stew wrote: »

Its simply been used as an excuss to help the motoring industy, and have two peak selling periods a year, rather than one. To cover it up further, it will continue for 2014 and beyond.

+1

if you look at the car sales stats you'll see that its bonkers how much the sales are so front loaded to January/ February and a massive part of that is the pointless idea of having a year in the reg plate in the first place.

although maybe that was to allow new cars to be seen as premium products over near new UK imports ? Who knows.

cuculainn

does it not just mean the car sales will be spread out over the year and the same number of people will buy new cars?

Also for the second hand market it wont make a bit of difference as the buyer knows from the registration what part of the year the car was first bought...

Dodge

cuculainn wrote: »

Also for the second hand market it wont make a bit of difference as the buyer knows from the registration what part of the year the car was first bought...

Well they can guess, but now what will be more expensive; a 131 or a 132 reg car (same make etc)?

As it is a 2012 car has roughly the same value whether it was bought in March or October

I'm not saying thats the way it should be, but it undoubtably is IMO

I am sure the number 13 is lucky some where in the world

Penn

"My hotel doesn't have a 13th floor because of superstition, but come on man, people on the 14th floor, you know what floor you're really on. "What room are you in?" "1401" "No you're not! Jump out the window, you will die earlier!"" - Mitch Hedberg

Mint Sauce

Prima Nocte wrote: »

section 40 subsection 6

What, now you just being silly and making stuff up. 40:6 is simply being allowing to form and give ones opinion peacfully and respectfully.

You did that by giving your comments about number plates and the number 13, and thats all. Although I never recall hearing anything about superstition deciding the rules of the Constitution, unless your substituting it for the word religion.

El Weirdo

Locked - OP is a re-reg troll.