A man in Maine, Peter Starostecki, recently found himself in a situation where he was forced to remove his personalised license plate from his car.
The Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) sent him a letter in January demanding he replace his number plate, “LUVTOFU,” on account of it being deemed potentially vulgar.
State officials claimed that two letters in the numberplate could be “interpreted as vulgar.”
Starostecki, a vegan, argued that the license plate was not meant to be vulgar and that he had no ill intentions.
He claims that the license plate refers to his passion for tofu and his vegan lifestyle. (LUV-TOFU)
The car owner even had stickers on his car that indicated his vegan lifestyle, which, he argued, meant that the license plate was not intentionally vulgar.
Despite his argument, Starostecki’s appeal was rejected, and he was forced to remove it.
The state officials at the hearing were not convinced, and Starostecki felt that their minds were made up from the beginning.
However, he agrees with the state that vulgar license plates should not be allowed on cars.
Starostecki believes that the banning may be a violation of his freedom of speech, but the Director of Communications for the Secretary of State, Emily Cook, explained that “The license plate is owned by the state, and there is no right to force the state to have these sort of words and slogans.”
According to the Associated Press, Maine has recalled 274 plates so far this year and has rejected every single person’s appeal to keep their personalised plate.
Starostecki was offered a new number plate reading “V3GAN,” but he declined the offer and has reverted back to a non-personalised one.
However, he noted that he wouldn’t rule out creating a unique one again in the future.
While Starostecki may feel that his rights to freedom of speech have been violated, he is not alone in this experience.
Personalised number plates are subject to scrutiny, and what may seem innocuous to some may be deemed vulgar or offensive to others. As Cook explained, “The state has a responsibility to ensure that personalised plates do not contain language or slogans that are vulgar, offensive, or contrary to the public interest.”
In conclusion, the case of Peter Starostecki’s recalled license plate serves as a reminder that personalised number plates are subject to regulation and scrutiny. While Starostecki may feel that his freedom of speech was violated, the state has a responsibility to ensure that personalised plates are not vulgar, offensive, or contrary to the public interest. Ultimately, it is up to the state to decide what is deemed appropriate and what is not when it comes to personalised number plates.
