Multiple Tint Violation tickets..
05-24-2007, 08:01 PM
#41
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL USA
Posts: 243
I just have to chime in on this topic...
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged? I mean, if a certain % tint is illegal in a particular state, shouldn't it be patently illegal for *any* shop in that state to sell it to their customers? in any case, isn't it preferable to hold the *professionals* who should know better accountable instead of the end user? you could still ticket the end user if they did the tint themselves or got it done out of state, but the first thing a cop should ask, AFTER TESTING the tint and PROPERLY determining its' legality (they shouldn't be allowed to give you a ticket based on a mk1 eyeball judgement - it gives them too much leeway for abuse/unlawful persecution - and we ALL know cops LOVE to do that) is 'what shop did the job? I need the receipt' and then go bust the shop.
thats just my opinion of course...
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged? I mean, if a certain % tint is illegal in a particular state, shouldn't it be patently illegal for *any* shop in that state to sell it to their customers? in any case, isn't it preferable to hold the *professionals* who should know better accountable instead of the end user? you could still ticket the end user if they did the tint themselves or got it done out of state, but the first thing a cop should ask, AFTER TESTING the tint and PROPERLY determining its' legality (they shouldn't be allowed to give you a ticket based on a mk1 eyeball judgement - it gives them too much leeway for abuse/unlawful persecution - and we ALL know cops LOVE to do that) is 'what shop did the job? I need the receipt' and then go bust the shop.
thats just my opinion of course...
05-24-2007, 08:20 PM
#42
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 929
cops who give fix it tickets are there to do that for a reason, when people say shouldnt you be out catching bad guys the answer is no they are assigned to give traffic tickets, I know because I have family in the force and get crap from them all the time about my car. There are ones assigned to traffic only and ones assigned to other duty only thats why some cops dont pull you over when you know you are illegal, they arent on that assignment at the monent.
05-25-2007, 05:18 AM
#43
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 247
Originally Posted by RIPMKIV
oh yeah, and was it also the door windows? or was it just the rear windows?
05-25-2007, 06:54 AM
#44
Originally Posted by Shaka_Z
I just have to chime in on this topic...
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged? I mean, if a certain % tint is illegal in a particular state, shouldn't it be patently illegal for *any* shop in that state to sell it to their customers? in any case, isn't it preferable to hold the *professionals* who should know better accountable instead of the end user? you could still ticket the end user if they did the tint themselves or got it done out of state, but the first thing a cop should ask, AFTER TESTING the tint and PROPERLY determining its' legality (they shouldn't be allowed to give you a ticket based on a mk1 eyeball judgement - it gives them too much leeway for abuse/unlawful persecution - and we ALL know cops LOVE to do that) is 'what shop did the job? I need the receipt' and then go bust the shop.
thats just my opinion of course...
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged? I mean, if a certain % tint is illegal in a particular state, shouldn't it be patently illegal for *any* shop in that state to sell it to their customers? in any case, isn't it preferable to hold the *professionals* who should know better accountable instead of the end user? you could still ticket the end user if they did the tint themselves or got it done out of state, but the first thing a cop should ask, AFTER TESTING the tint and PROPERLY determining its' legality (they shouldn't be allowed to give you a ticket based on a mk1 eyeball judgement - it gives them too much leeway for abuse/unlawful persecution - and we ALL know cops LOVE to do that) is 'what shop did the job? I need the receipt' and then go bust the shop.
thats just my opinion of course...
05-25-2007, 06:56 AM
#45
Senior Member
Team ScionTific
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Shaka_Z
I just have to chime in on this topic...
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged?
doesnt it seem more logical that, instead of ticketing offending drivers wilth tint violations and such, the shop that *provided* the illegal tint in the first place should be charged?
. You can legally have front tinted windows as long as you have a prescription from a doctor or the vehicle is used for off-road purposes. The catch-22 is the tint shop, by law, is not allowed to ask for proof of a prescription, so they have to operate under the assumption that the driver has one if they specifically requested their front windows to be tinted.There is yet another catch-22: law enforcement funding. 15% to 50% of funding for local California law enforcement comes from traffic tickets which keeps us from paying higher taxes. If we didn't have people like stCx86, or other people with illegal mods, we would have a shortage of funding which would prevent cops from "doing something better with their time". It's a traffic cop's job to enforce the law and to make revenue from those driver/owners that don't follow the law... it's a perfect use-based tax. Prosecuting shops would decrease revenues from illegal modification fines, and eventually cause a decrease of business tax revenues from those shops.
The simple solution is to be an adult and understand the concept of personal responsibility. One could a) not make any illegal mods to one's car, b) be responsible for one's own actions and deal with the consequences of illegal mods, or c) move to another state.
05-25-2007, 06:58 AM
#46
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA
Posts: 132
tint
...dude i kno how you feel i got my ticket and it was non- correctable too...that sh*t cost me $112.50....that's the bad thing....good thing i got to keep my tint....hopefully i won't get caught again...btw im in Cali...and 5% tint all around...just loving the look..you kno.!
05-25-2007, 09:33 AM
#47
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL USA
Posts: 243
Disclaimer... Don't take any of what I write below *too* seriously. My thoughts on the matter are serious, but not intended to sound pretentious or whatnot:
now isn't that just a cop-out for the tint shop? basically absolving them and the manufacturers of any responsibility? While one could use the argument that gun manufacturers are not generally held responsible for gun crimes, and the same principle applies, I would suggest that guns are not intrinsically illegal... merely highly regulated. Window tint beyond %xx *is* illegal, thus does not fall under the same legal position that guns do. in addition, officers are too often allowed to make eyeball judgements in cases of this nature, when they should be *required* to measure the tint using a properly calibrated instrument - any decent photographic incident meter will do the job fine. last I checked, the burden of proof that you are commiting a crime rests on the accuser... if a cop can't *prove* he is right, he shouldn't even bother stopping you for tint - or anything else - in the first place.
I also happen to like the idea of the accuser (government in cases like this) being held financially responsible for the legal fees of people who get ticketed, challenge it in court, and win. if the government falsely accuses someone of something, or fails to prove their case, why should the accused suffer the financial consequences regardless?
only problem is that things are arbitrarily being made illegal for the explicit purpose of generating revenue from ticketing. the extra enforcement burden requires more officers and a larger bureaucracy to support them which demands more things to ticket. All I see is an ever growing pile of poop on the taxpayer. if the only things cops had to deal with were *real* criminal offenses like DUI, murder, other crimes with victims etc., funding wouldn't be such a problem that up to 50% of the revenue needs would have to be met by tickets in the first place.
this all stinks of being a government-sponsored racket to me.
no... the simple solution would be to minimize the ticketing burden by *properly* regulating the industry, and making things as transparent as possible to the end users, thus eliminating unnecessary bureaucracy... of course this would put alot of lawyers out of business, but they don't contribute any real productivity to the economy anyway... unless you count all the paper they use. oh i forgot... it is the natural tendency of all governmental agencies to seek their own growth at the expense of the governed.... I must be the worst possible criminal then - I DARE to want the govenment as small and efficient as possible 
I am simply coming from the point of view that if something is illegal, it should be illegal. if the government doesn't want people to have dark tint, then ban it altogether, make the fine both steeper, AND applicable to manufacturers and dealers/installers before it ever gets applied to the end user. and dont bring up prohibition... tints don't have anywhere near the customer base that alcohol does, so it wouldn't be at all profitable for criminals to smuggle it.
in reference to the argument that dark tints are a danger for cops... what about limos? how the hell does a cop know that the passengers of a limo aren't gonna shoot him? by that reasoning, Limos should be subject to the same restrictions as all other cars, yet they aren't. the argument is specious at best.[/quote]
Originally Posted by 2fast4you
It is solely the owner's responsibility to know what the law is (in this case CVC 2670. You can legally have front tinted windows as long as you have a prescription from a doctor or the vehicle is used for off-road purposes. The catch-22 is the tint shop, by law, is not allowed to ask for proof of a prescription, so they have to operate under the assumption that the driver has one if they specifically requested their front windows to be tinted.
. You can legally have front tinted windows as long as you have a prescription from a doctor or the vehicle is used for off-road purposes. The catch-22 is the tint shop, by law, is not allowed to ask for proof of a prescription, so they have to operate under the assumption that the driver has one if they specifically requested their front windows to be tinted.I also happen to like the idea of the accuser (government in cases like this) being held financially responsible for the legal fees of people who get ticketed, challenge it in court, and win. if the government falsely accuses someone of something, or fails to prove their case, why should the accused suffer the financial consequences regardless?
There is yet another catch-22: law enforcement funding. 15% to 50% of funding for local California law enforcement comes from traffic tickets which keeps us from paying higher taxes. If we didn't have people like stCx86, or other people with illegal mods, we would have a shortage of funding which would prevent cops from "doing something better with their time". It's a traffic cop's job to enforce the law and to make revenue from those driver/owners that don't follow the law... it's a perfect use-based tax. Prosecuting shops would decrease revenues from illegal modification fines, and eventually cause a decrease of business tax revenues from those shops.
this all stinks of being a government-sponsored racket to me.
The simple solution is to be an adult and understand the concept of personal responsibility. One could a) not make any illegal mods to one's car, b) be responsible for one's own actions and deal with the consequences of illegal mods, or c) move to another state.
I am simply coming from the point of view that if something is illegal, it should be illegal. if the government doesn't want people to have dark tint, then ban it altogether, make the fine both steeper, AND applicable to manufacturers and dealers/installers before it ever gets applied to the end user. and dont bring up prohibition... tints don't have anywhere near the customer base that alcohol does, so it wouldn't be at all profitable for criminals to smuggle it.
in reference to the argument that dark tints are a danger for cops... what about limos? how the hell does a cop know that the passengers of a limo aren't gonna shoot him? by that reasoning, Limos should be subject to the same restrictions as all other cars, yet they aren't. the argument is specious at best.[/quote]
05-25-2007, 03:34 PM
#48
Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 33
If you can't do the time don't do the crime! If you want your windows to be illegally tinted be prepared to pay the fines and quit complaining about the police doing the right thing (upholding the law) when you knew you were breaking the law.
05-25-2007, 03:53 PM
#49
Member
SL Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lodi - New Jersey
Posts: 71
i agree with the guy before, they rarely chase after cars with tints... i drive around with my neons on and thennnnnn those ____ers make me raise my windows 
sucks but i can care less what they say 
sucks but i can care less what they say
05-25-2007, 03:55 PM
#50
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Anaheim, CA; Parker, AZ
Posts: 248
Check this... yesterday I was on the 241 toll road heading toward So. OC and got pulled over for... are you ready for this one.... smoked tail lights. Yes kids, smoked tail lights. But, what started it was that I did not have my toll transponder mounted in my windshield. My car is a whopping 1 week old, so no velcro yet from the TCA.
As I drove through the toll plaza, the officer was sitting on the side of the road checking cars as they went through to verify they had transponders, well he couldn't see mine... so as I passed him he came onto the roadway, as he pulled along side of me I held up my transponder for him to see. Well he saw it alright, and my tails too and pulled me over.
Now, I will say that he was a very pleasant officer, informed me that my transponder is to be affixed to my windshield (which I aready knew) I explained to him that the car was merely days old... anyway, he asks for my license, peels my reg off the window and takes my ins info. After running my license he came back and educated me on my tail lights and how illegal they are. BUT for once in my life (the very first time ever) I was NOT written a ticket! Needless to say, the tails will be resmoked only much lighter this weekend to avoid any future interation with the LAW over that one.
With regards to the question on the tint, they can write the ticket a couple of different ways, and one of them a non correctable and will cost ya, abit more than that $10 fixit fee I can assure you of that.
I did not read the whole thread, so please forgive me if I repeat stuff already in here, but you need to remember something, you have a car with black interior, that will make it more difficult for officers to see in the car and will darken the tint (thus making it more noticible). When I tinted my tC I went medium, I did not want to but I don't like visits with the PoPo. Its just easier to comply (or push the envelope just a tiny bit). I also drive around with the sunshade open on the sunroof to add more visability in the car.
They generally won't mess with you if its light enough to see through. I know that is no fun... believe me I feel the same way, but I will tell you having plenty of experience in life, the less you do to invite the police in to your life, the less interaction you will have with them... and I know that this will sound weird but just think about something for a minute, probable cause... trust me on this one, I have recently had an experience occur that drove home the point that traffic stops are a door opener to other more intrusive experiences with the police, and it was a very scary experience, to took 8 months to resolve and cost about 20K, and it was nothing illegal.
Good luck with your ticket, and just remember it could have been worse, he could have gotten ya for speeding!!!
As I drove through the toll plaza, the officer was sitting on the side of the road checking cars as they went through to verify they had transponders, well he couldn't see mine... so as I passed him he came onto the roadway, as he pulled along side of me I held up my transponder for him to see. Well he saw it alright, and my tails too and pulled me over.
Now, I will say that he was a very pleasant officer, informed me that my transponder is to be affixed to my windshield (which I aready knew) I explained to him that the car was merely days old... anyway, he asks for my license, peels my reg off the window and takes my ins info. After running my license he came back and educated me on my tail lights and how illegal they are. BUT for once in my life (the very first time ever) I was NOT written a ticket! Needless to say, the tails will be resmoked only much lighter this weekend to avoid any future interation with the LAW over that one.
With regards to the question on the tint, they can write the ticket a couple of different ways, and one of them a non correctable and will cost ya, abit more than that $10 fixit fee I can assure you of that.
I did not read the whole thread, so please forgive me if I repeat stuff already in here, but you need to remember something, you have a car with black interior, that will make it more difficult for officers to see in the car and will darken the tint (thus making it more noticible). When I tinted my tC I went medium, I did not want to but I don't like visits with the PoPo. Its just easier to comply (or push the envelope just a tiny bit). I also drive around with the sunshade open on the sunroof to add more visability in the car.
They generally won't mess with you if its light enough to see through. I know that is no fun... believe me I feel the same way, but I will tell you having plenty of experience in life, the less you do to invite the police in to your life, the less interaction you will have with them... and I know that this will sound weird but just think about something for a minute, probable cause... trust me on this one, I have recently had an experience occur that drove home the point that traffic stops are a door opener to other more intrusive experiences with the police, and it was a very scary experience, to took 8 months to resolve and cost about 20K, and it was nothing illegal.
Good luck with your ticket, and just remember it could have been worse, he could have gotten ya for speeding!!!
05-25-2007, 07:47 PM
#51
Couple of quick comments to Shaka_Z's post above...
(1) While at one point you recommend less traffic enforcement to reduce costs, in another you suggest that officers be required to have calibrated ($) light meters to read tint transmission.
(2) The idea of the accuser being held responsible for the cost of defense if the offense is dismissed is excellent, but is yet another thing that will increase cost tot he taxpayer.
(3) Tint shops SHOULD be held responsible for placing illegal tint. They should be required to see the paperwork (and retain a copy of it for proof) if someone claims to have legal permission to have specific tint. (There are currently more requirements and regulations for putting nail polish on someone else than there are for doing modifications on a vehicle for pay.)
(4) Finally, the "...if something is illegal, it should be illegal" statement. This has zero to do with the manufacturers of tint or wholesalers of tint. It is not the tint that is illegal - all of it has perfectly legal uses, even in Kalifornia - it is some uses of tint that are illegal.
Installers should be REQUIRED to only do tint if it is legal. Period. If they do illegal tint, they should be held responsible, along with the vehicle owner. That does not mean banning tint, but controlling its illegal use.
Tom
(1) While at one point you recommend less traffic enforcement to reduce costs, in another you suggest that officers be required to have calibrated ($) light meters to read tint transmission.
(2) The idea of the accuser being held responsible for the cost of defense if the offense is dismissed is excellent, but is yet another thing that will increase cost tot he taxpayer.
(3) Tint shops SHOULD be held responsible for placing illegal tint. They should be required to see the paperwork (and retain a copy of it for proof) if someone claims to have legal permission to have specific tint. (There are currently more requirements and regulations for putting nail polish on someone else than there are for doing modifications on a vehicle for pay.)
(4) Finally, the "...if something is illegal, it should be illegal" statement. This has zero to do with the manufacturers of tint or wholesalers of tint. It is not the tint that is illegal - all of it has perfectly legal uses, even in Kalifornia - it is some uses of tint that are illegal.
Installers should be REQUIRED to only do tint if it is legal. Period. If they do illegal tint, they should be held responsible, along with the vehicle owner. That does not mean banning tint, but controlling its illegal use.
Tom
05-25-2007, 08:48 PM
#53
Senior Member
Team ScionTific
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Shaka_Z
now isn't that just a cop-out for the tint shop? basically absolving them and the manufacturers of any responsibility? While one could use the argument that gun manufacturers are not generally held responsible for gun crimes, and the same principle applies, I would suggest that guns are not intrinsically illegal... merely highly regulated. Window tint beyond %xx *is* illegal, thus does not fall under the same legal position that guns do. in addition, officers are too often allowed to make eyeball judgements in cases of this nature, when they should be *required* to measure the tint using a properly calibrated instrument - any decent photographic incident meter will do the job fine. last I checked, the burden of proof that you are commiting a crime rests on the accuser... if a cop can't *prove* he is right, he shouldn't even bother stopping you for tint - or anything else - in the first place.
only problem is that things are arbitrarily being made illegal for the explicit purpose of generating revenue from ticketing.
the extra enforcement burden requires more officers and a larger bureaucracy to support them which demands more things to ticket. All I see is an ever growing pile of poop on the taxpayer.
in reference to the argument that dark tints are a danger for cops... what about limos? how the hell does a cop know that the passengers of a limo aren't gonna shoot him? by that reasoning, Limos should be subject to the same restrictions as all other cars, yet they aren't. the argument is specious at best.
05-25-2007, 09:05 PM
#54
Senior Member
Team ScionTific
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Tomas
(3) Tint shops SHOULD be held responsible for placing illegal tint. They should be required to see the paperwork (and retain a copy of it for proof) if someone claims to have legal permission to have specific tint. (There are currently more requirements and regulations for putting nail polish on someone else than there are for doing modifications on a vehicle for pay.)
Tint commission = millions of dollars in tax money per year.
Personal responsibility = FREE
05-25-2007, 09:19 PM
#55
Originally Posted by 2fast4you
Originally Posted by Tomas
(3) Tint shops SHOULD be held responsible for placing illegal tint. They should be required to see the paperwork (and retain a copy of it for proof) if someone claims to have legal permission to have specific tint. (There are currently more requirements and regulations for putting nail polish on someone else than there are for doing modifications on a vehicle for pay.)
Tint commission = millions of dollars in tax money per year.
Personal responsibility = FREE
A smart shop could even have a place on the receipt for the customer to check a box and sign that they have proper permission for otherwise illegal tint. If they check the box and sign, the driver has full responsibility unless they can show the court that permission. If there is not box-check and sig, the shop gets it's share of the fine. Still no increase in government, just small changes in law making folks responsible for their actions.
(BTW, I have zero sympathy for anyone who says the equivalent of "I know it's illegal, but I don't care, I'll do it anyway" or "it's not illegal unless you get caught." Anyone committing ANY unlawful act could say the same as a lame excuse for doing anything. Some punk keyed your car and broke out it's windows? No foul. It ain't illegal less they get caught...) :D
Tom
05-25-2007, 09:27 PM
#56
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 132
the shop you get your tint at -- if it's any good -- will know exactly how dark you can go per whichever state you happen to be in, and should inform you of those details when you're deciding what % to get. if they don't tell you this upfront, then a) they're idiots or b) they're lying; both of which cases should prompt you to go to another shop.
the guy that did mine would do tints darker than legal here (15% front / 30% rear) but said he would only take cash for the job and would not give a warranty on the film (regular tints come with lifetime warranty vs. fading, peeling etc).
i never understood why people b1tch at cops for doing their jobs? if you wanna do some lines on your dash or keep your nine collection stashed under the passenger seat, that's cool with me-- but don't scream at the cop who pulls you over for your 5% limo tint all the way round.
the guy that did mine would do tints darker than legal here (15% front / 30% rear) but said he would only take cash for the job and would not give a warranty on the film (regular tints come with lifetime warranty vs. fading, peeling etc).
i never understood why people b1tch at cops for doing their jobs? if you wanna do some lines on your dash or keep your nine collection stashed under the passenger seat, that's cool with me-- but don't scream at the cop who pulls you over for your 5% limo tint all the way round.
05-25-2007, 10:13 PM
#57
Senior Member
Big Sky Scion
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: six-two-six
Posts: 4,120
My shop DID require me to sign a sheet that stated it was illegal in California.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
05-25-2007, 10:20 PM
#58
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by SciontCya
My shop DID require me to sign a sheet that stated it was illegal in California.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
05-25-2007, 10:33 PM
#59
Senior Member
Team ScionTific
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Tomas
Originally Posted by 2fast4you
Originally Posted by Tomas
(3) Tint shops SHOULD be held responsible for placing illegal tint. They should be required to see the paperwork (and retain a copy of it for proof) if someone claims to have legal permission to have specific tint. (There are currently more requirements and regulations for putting nail polish on someone else than there are for doing modifications on a vehicle for pay.)
Tint commission = millions of dollars in tax money per year.
Personal responsibility = FREE
Tom
Originally Posted by SciontCya
My shop DID require me to sign a sheet that stated it was illegal in California.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
I signed it.
I knew it was illegal.
I got the ticket.
I was ____ed.
I paid it and moved on.
No more tint.
Simple enough, the law sucks, but it's the law and I got busted.
05-27-2007, 01:41 AM
#60
Senior Member
Wagonistas
SL Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 4,080
Ok, I AM A COP...I have been so for 17 years and after reading this entire thread, I was angered by some of the ignorant posts by a couple of you! 
You know who you are so no need to cut and paste your comments...Flame me if you want, I don't care...Everyone over here in the Desert and Salt forum know I'm a pretty cool guy...Been on SL for over two years and have read alot of anti-police posts and/or comments...Most of the time I keep my mouth shut...But, when someone says "i dont care if a cop gets shot in the face" well FU...You are an idiot! 
I know window tint laws vary by state...But what I don't get is that those of you busted for "illegal" tint are mad because you got caught doing something illegal..Granted it's not a "big" crime but none the less when you tinted your windows you knew there was a chance of being pulled over for it...Hell, I have 5% tint all the way around and I know that I too can be pulled over also...Yes, I have received tickets from other cops, so don't go there...
Listen, I have had several "brothers" in law enforcement that have been killed over the last 17 years that died when walking up to a car on a "routine" traffic stop...The term "routine" is used loosely by the media and elsewhere but I promise you there is nothing "routine" about a traffic stop...If you all think you can be a better cop, by all means we hire from the general public...Imagine our world without the ones that choose to protect it...Just like our military!
And thank you to those who stood up for cops with your positive posts...
You know who you are so no need to cut and paste your comments...Flame me if you want, I don't care...Everyone over here in the Desert and Salt forum know I'm a pretty cool guy...Been on SL for over two years and have read alot of anti-police posts and/or comments...Most of the time I keep my mouth shut...But, when someone says "i dont care if a cop gets shot in the face" well FU...You are an idiot! I know window tint laws vary by state...But what I don't get is that those of you busted for "illegal" tint are mad because you got caught doing something illegal..Granted it's not a "big" crime but none the less when you tinted your windows you knew there was a chance of being pulled over for it...Hell, I have 5% tint all the way around and I know that I too can be pulled over also...Yes, I have received tickets from other cops, so don't go there...
Listen, I have had several "brothers" in law enforcement that have been killed over the last 17 years that died when walking up to a car on a "routine" traffic stop...The term "routine" is used loosely by the media and elsewhere but I promise you there is nothing "routine" about a traffic stop...If you all think you can be a better cop, by all means we hire from the general public...Imagine our world without the ones that choose to protect it...Just like our military!
And thank you to those who stood up for cops with your positive posts...