But that same argument argues to allow harmonization with similar standards. If I wanted to buy, say, a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Scirocco, and have it shipped to the US to drive why shouldn't I be able to. It passes the stringent Euro standards, is based on the same platform as several US-sanctioned vehicles, and uses the same powerplants.
I have friends and family stationed at a US military base in Germany. They really liked the German cars but knew they weren't going to stay. The local dealer has an Americanization option. It basically changes the bumpers, headlights, and pilot lights and the ECU fuel map.
The front bumper requirement explains why American cars don't look as svelte as their european equivalents.
Generally disagree. People react pretty negatively to having stuff that they purchased in good faith being taken away from them. There are limits of course. State inspections (where they exist) tend to keep you from driving a vehicle that's seriously dangerous or polluting but don't require things to be up to all current standards. This seems a bigger deal in general than whether people can buy something that they don't already own given that there are alternatives--which for the majority--are perfectly satisfactory. (Not arguing for silly government regulations of course but, at the margins, I find many more things to get much more annoyed about.)
That is not my argument. I'm saying why am I not allowed to import a vehicle from a country with standards that are at least equivalent, if not more stringent than our own? I'm talking about a new vehicle on sale in a 1st world country. I could even buy the same vehicle in Mexico, drive it across the border, and drive it here legally if I was a Mexican citizen on vacation.
* Well, technically I could import it for "display purposes", but it could not be registered for road use.
