I had to pickup my girl from the autoshop tonight, and around 11pm I
was pulled over by this cop. I really never paid any attention to the
tint in my new car, which I bought from Florida.

The cop placed this device over the window, and it said my tint was
25%. I live in Georgia, so he said it has to be 32%

http://x.butta.net/monavie/DSC000401.JPG

He said the back window, and the side windows are fine, but the front
windows need to be redone. Now of course, if I change the two front
windows, they will not match the rest of the car, and look completely
stupid. Is there anyway I can go around this?

I actually enjoy having my windows a little dark, it keeps the sun out
of my eyes early in the morning when I am going to school, and work.
Plus, people cannot see what is inside my car, unless they have their
eyes stuck to the glass. I carry my laptop with me, so they cannot see
it.

I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
anyways? just as long as the person can see. The sun just hurts my
eyes.

Thanks

 

mopa wrote:

Plus, ____ people cannot see what is inside my car, ___ Not even the 9mm
Uzzi____unless they have their eyes stuck to the glass.

> I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
> anyways?

___________________

It's so the police can see who / what's inside, and whether their
picture is on the posters at the Post Office. Don't feel singled out.
Its for the protection of everybody.

'Curly'

 

mopa wrote:
<snip>
> I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
> anyways? just as long as the person can see. The sun just hurts my
> eyes.
>
> Thanks
>
can't you just drive with your eyes closed? or have you ever considered
sun glasses? especially at night - it looks phat. but no one can see
how phat you really are if your glass is tinted...

 

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140239268.261912.296030@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>I had to pickup my girl from the autoshop tonight, and around 11pm I
> was pulled over by this cop. I really never paid any attention to the
> tint in my new car, which I bought from Florida.
>
> The cop placed this device over the window, and it said my tint was
> 25%. I live in Georgia, so he said it has to be 32%
>
> http://x.butta.net/monavie/DSC000401.JPG
>
> He said the back window, and the side windows are fine, but the front
> windows need to be redone. Now of course, if I change the two front
> windows, they will not match the rest of the car, and look completely
> stupid. Is there anyway I can go around this?

Having a different level of tint on the front windows does not look stupid,
it blends nicely into the rear windows. The way around it is to keep your
windows tinted the way you have them now, and drive so as not to draw
attention to yourself or your vehicle. If no one 'sees' you, then no one
will write you a ticket.

> I actually enjoy having my windows a little dark, it keeps the sun out
> of my eyes early in the morning when I am going to school, and work.
> Plus, people cannot see what is inside my car, unless they have their
> eyes stuck to the glass. I carry my laptop with me, so they cannot see
> it.
>
> I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
> anyways? just as long as the person can see. The sun just hurts my
> eyes.

The reason is to protect the LEOs when they approach your vehicle and wonder
if you're reaching for a weapon.

 

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1140239268.261912.296030@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

> I had to pickup my girl from the autoshop tonight, and around 11pm I
> was pulled over by this cop. I really never paid any attention to the
> tint in my new car, which I bought from Florida.
>
> The cop placed this device over the window, and it said my tint was
> 25%. I live in Georgia, so he said it has to be 32%
>
> http://x.butta.net/monavie/DSC000401.JPG
>
> He said the back window, and the side windows are fine, but the front
> windows need to be redone. Now of course, if I change the two front
> windows, they will not match the rest of the car, and look completely
> stupid. Is there anyway I can go around this?

yes,get the whole car retinted to what's required for the side windows.

>
> I actually enjoy having my windows a little dark, it keeps the sun out
> of my eyes early in the morning when I am going to school, and work.
> Plus, people cannot see what is inside my car, unless they have their
> eyes stuck to the glass. I carry my laptop with me, so they cannot see
> it.
>
> I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
> anyways? just as long as the person can see.

No,its not that,it's so police can see you when they approach for a traffic
stop,for their safety.


> The sun just hurts my
> eyes.

try sunglasses.
>
> Thanks
>

Florida has a regulation on how dark the front side windows can be(the back
sides and rear windshield can be darker),but it's often ignored,and police
do not often cite people for it.When I got my new 86 Prelude tinted,the
shop put a sticker on the door frame attesting that the tint was within
code.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

>I had to pickup my girl from the autoshop tonight,
Your girlfriend is a mechanic or doing the mechanic? Tell the cop you have
lasik and this is a health necessity.

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140239268.261912.296030@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>I had to pickup my girl from the autoshop tonight, and around 11pm I
> was pulled over by this cop. I really never paid any attention to the
> tint in my new car, which I bought from Florida.
>
> The cop placed this device over the window, and it said my tint was
> 25%. I live in Georgia, so he said it has to be 32%
>
> http://x.butta.net/monavie/DSC000401.JPG
>
> He said the back window, and the side windows are fine, but the front
> windows need to be redone. Now of course, if I change the two front
> windows, they will not match the rest of the car, and look completely
> stupid. Is there anyway I can go around this?
>
> I actually enjoy having my windows a little dark, it keeps the sun out
> of my eyes early in the morning when I am going to school, and work.
> Plus, people cannot see what is inside my car, unless they have their
> eyes stuck to the glass. I carry my laptop with me, so they cannot see
> it.
>
> I do not see why they have laws on tint, what is the reason for it
> anyways? just as long as the person can see. The sun just hurts my
> eyes.
>
> Thanks
>

 

I know, I know what your are all saying. And yes, it is the law, it is
unfair that we must live in a society where a few bad souls have to
ruin it for the rest of us. I like Florida's law as they have one of
the best laws when it comes to tint, and MI/NY has it the worst. It is
not even allowed, 100% illegal to have any tint.

" Tell the cop you have
lasik and this is a health necessity. "

That is a good one, I should use that. I carry a few thousand dollars
worth of electonics in my car, such as my notebook for school, I work
hard for what I have, and not having people see my things, and why
should "we" as consumers be told we should not be allowed have windows
tinted. Yeah, some people may say, stop your whinning, but really, why
should people have to take all their values out of their car, and place
it in their truch every day, just so some fool does not steal our
things. Like my mom always said "out of view, out of mind" what people
cannot see, they won't try to steal.

I completely agree, but the fact is, even if tinting were illegal would
that prevent shooting? I watch Cop's, I see the shootings, hell, I live
here in Atlanta and we have plenty of it daily, yet none of these cards
I see have tinted windows. This law has been passed since 1987.

Having a window tinted should be considered unconstitutional, so far
the only US Providence that we own that has made this an
unconstitutional law, is guam.

doing the mech? lol. No, my friend had to drop off her car at my
buddies shop on her way to my house, so she dropped it off so when he
go to work in the morning he could replace the CV's, and after I picked
her up on my way back to my place, I was pulled over. Now, my car is
black/black so even if I had no tint, the cop still would not have seen
me. What is amazing to me is that the police department actually issues
its officers little scanners for UVL scaning of tinted windows, to
determ if a car has to dark of a tint.

 

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140544589.982086.270060@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>I know, I know what your are all saying. And yes, it is the law, it is
> unfair that we must live in a society where a few bad souls have to
> ruin it for the rest of us. I like Florida's law as they have one of
> the best laws when it comes to tint, and MI/NY has it the worst. It is
> not even allowed, 100% illegal to have any tint.

Tint is legal in NY. Just not dark tint on the front windows. I think 65%
is the darkest, but don't quote me on that number.

> Having a window tinted should be considered unconstitutional, so far
> the only US Providence that we own that has made this an
> unconstitutional law, is guam.

Exactly where in the Constition is the right to drive on public roads? It
isn't, therefore each state, who owns the roads, and their respective DMV
decides what is acceptable or not. They also require proper lights to be
functional, brakes to work, wipers to work, etc... All with the intention of
the common good.

> doing the mech? lol. No, my friend had to drop off her car at my
> buddies shop on her way to my house, so she dropped it off so when he
> go to work in the morning he could replace the CV's, and after I picked
> her up on my way back to my place, I was pulled over. Now, my car is
> black/black so even if I had no tint, the cop still would not have seen
> me. What is amazing to me is that the police department actually issues
> its officers little scanners for UVL scaning of tinted windows, to
> determ if a car has to dark of a tint.

Without those scanners, how else would they be able to determine if it was
over/under the legal limit? You really want it enforced by the officers
naked eyes?

 

Quoting Brian Smith: " Having a different level of tint on the front
windows does not look stupid,
it blends nicely into the rear windows. "

I am sorry, no it does not look stupid, that is if someone has the same
tint, but on my windows, on the very bottom, I have the mirror effect.
I know I could just remove all the tint, and get the 35%, but honestly,
it is very hard to find someone who can do a great tint job. These
windows were tinted perfectly, and why change something that is not
broken?



Thanks

 

lol, no of course not, these devices must be new, or finally the local
police departments must have now gave it to their offices. In the past
they carried a stick that had different shades of tint, and messured it
the old fashion way.

* NO - No Film is Allowed
" New York
NO / NO/ NO/ NO / Law as of 1993

Note : Very strict law. Replacement glass that is tinted is allowed if
and only if the original windows were tinted as well. Medical exemption
is provided for with permission from Commisioner of Motor Vehicles. "

 

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1140632706.186045.257220@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com:

> These
> windows were tinted perfectly, and why change something that is not
> broken?

So that the police will not cite you for too dark a tint?
At some point,the fines would exceed the cost of a new tint job,not to
mention the hassles of being cited and paying the fines.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"mopa" <buttakid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140633228.734278.42150@g47g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> lol, no of course not, these devices must be new, or finally the local
> police departments must have now gave it to their offices. In the past
> they carried a stick that had different shades of tint, and messured it
> the old fashion way.
>
> * NO - No Film is Allowed
> " New York
> NO / NO/ NO/ NO / Law as of 1993
>
> Note : Very strict law. Replacement glass that is tinted is allowed if
> and only if the original windows were tinted as well. Medical exemption
> is provided for with permission from Commisioner of Motor Vehicles. "

The website you quoted above is not the NY DMV, but rather looks like
someone's personal website (http://home.pcisys.net/~bpc/auto_law/tint/)

Googling further, one finds a business quoting the NY DMV code as 70% (real
close to the 65% I said from memory) (http://www.tintdude.com/ntoo.html)

While I couldn't find it on the NY DMV site as they have no search function,
the Amherst Police quote the numbers on their website as matching the above
stated 70% (http://www.amherst.ny.us/police/faq.htm#tint). What I could
find on the NY DMV website is the form "Application for Tinted Window
Exception" which does quote the legal number for allowable tint also at 70%
BEFORE waiver (http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/forms/mv80w.pdf).

So again, as I stated before, Tint *IS* legal in NY State. Your information
is wrong.









http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/forms.htm

 

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:46:55 GMT, "Seth"
<seth_lermanNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Exactly where in the Constition is the right to drive on public roads? It
>isn't, therefore each state, who owns the roads, and their respective DMV
>decides what is acceptable or not.

You have to be careful with that logic. The government has taken that
to mean you have also given up your bill of rights 2d,(rules
specifically about guns in cars) 4th,(warrantless searches)
5th,("checkpoints" and mandatory breathalizers that force self
incrimination) 6th,(DMV is an administrative agency acting without due
process) 9th and 10th (federal laws controlling state and county
roads). I think it is all unconstitutional.
How can the government say I have the right to ride on a bus, in any
seat I want, but I don't have the "right" to drive a car?

 

<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ilssv11l63lf7qqhvmlj5hbv8e3snjoa28@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:46:55 GMT, "Seth"
> <seth_lermanNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Exactly where in the Constition is the right to drive on public roads? It
>>isn't, therefore each state, who owns the roads, and their respective DMV
>>decides what is acceptable or not.
>
> You have to be careful with that logic. The government has taken that
> to mean you have also given up your bill of rights 2d,(rules
> specifically about guns in cars) 4th,(warrantless searches)
> 5th,("checkpoints" and mandatory breathalizers that force self
> incrimination) 6th,(DMV is an administrative agency acting without due
> process) 9th and 10th (federal laws controlling state and county
> roads). I think it is all unconstitutional.
> How can the government say I have the right to ride on a bus, in any
> seat I want, but I don't have the "right" to drive a car?

You are mistaking rights and privileges. The Constitution says "All men are
created equal". The bus example you use is not that one has the right to
any seat they want per se, but rather that they are to be treated equally
and without discrimination. Riding on a bus is a privilege that can be
revoked with cause.

Driving a car is not a right. It is a privilege that is granted or denied
in a non-discriminatory fashion (i.e. you must pass a proficiency test). To
maintain your privilege to drive a car you have to maintain a certain
standard of behavior (i..e. below a certain level of points, points granted
for infractions of the rules of the roads). Do you want habitual rule
breakers (allegedly posing as a public hazard) driving on the same roads as
you and your family? The privilege to drive is more important than the
safety of said public?

What specifically about guns in cars? All people have the right to bear
arms. Yes, it is governed and registered and one must apply for a permit
for certain guns in certain jurisdictions, but said permits are approved or
denied (with cause) again, in a non-discriminatory fashion. the government
must show cause as to deny your firearms permit. On any give Wednesday
evening I have a firearm in my vehicle as I travel from my home to my Rod
and Gun club where I shoot in a competitive trapp league. If I were to be
pulled over for an infraction and the office asked if I had any weapons in
the car I would answer in the affirmative. This has happened. The officer
asked if he could inspect my vehicle and weapon, again I complied.
Everything being on the up and up I continued on my way with my weapon and
ammunition intact.

Again, driving a car is not a right. It is a privilege. As such, it is
governed as such.