Here in Cali, that would probably get you arrested, and your car crushed.

 

I hate to say it (but being older and sometimes grouchy, I can), dark tint on the windshield does look good, until you run into something, or somebody walking across the street. Having worked as an ER tech for a few years, I've worked on more than my share of car vs. pedestrian situations. Even at normal city street speeds, the injuries are pretty awful, and they last a long time. I find it selfish when a driver feels that his style needs trumps someone's need to live.

Just my opinion, but I'm sticking to it.

 

Ped vs car.... someone's at fault. either the ped was crossing illegally or the car was driving illegally. how does tint have to do with this?

 

Depending on the legal climate of the state you live in, even if the pedestrian was at fault, a good attorney will get the jury to blame the person driving the car with dark tint even if had nothing to do with the accident. Remember the jury that blamed McDonald's for the idiot who burned her legs (and awarded her $1,000,000) for driving with a cup of hot coffee between them?

 

In most states, it up to the driver to avoid the pedestrian. Dark tinting reduces the amount of light, reducing what you see, reducing the time to take action. It's easy to see something light colored moving slowly, but the opposite with something darker moving quickly because you can't see it early enough. Remember you've got only a fraction of a second to do 5 things: Notice an object, identify the object, decide what it's doing, decide what you're going to do and finally, take action. The more time you give yourself, the better the outcome will be. Besides, do you really want to be the driver looking at someone as they crumple over your hood?

Very true, Cionide, about the jury. But remember that was in the 80's during the sue everyone craze (known by my lawyer friend as "The Age of I Did it But it's Not My Fault") and things have changed a bit since then (thankfully). Juries now are a lot less forgiving of stupidity, and less likely to award damages. The only award those people should get would be a mention in the annual Darwin Awards.

 

I know I live in a state that only contains 10% of the nations population, but I can tell that you must not have lived here recently, because that "sue happy" mentality has never been higher in California than it is now. With the poor economy, everybody is looking for the ***** Wonka golden ticket, and juries are just as happy to award it as they ever were in the 80's (I'm 45, so I know of what I speak). If you hit somebody, make sure you take them out, so that they can't sue you.

 

You'd think that people would get a grip and take some responsibility for their own actions. Like the insurance companies just get money from nowhere. Yeah right; you and I are the ones that have to pay for it! Even for me, out in the middle of the Pacific. Our juries have gotten a little smarter, awarding smaller amounts or outright rejection of stupidity lawsuits (our politicians have not, *sigh*).

 

It's actually one of the primary reasons that our insurance rates have all gone up so much... somebody has got to pay for all this, and it certainly won't be absorbed as corporate losses by the insurance companies.

I think we've gradually drifted pretty far off from the thread...

 

Look, with limo on the windshield, you are a danger to everyone in inclement weather and at night, period...

This is coming from someone, who when they where in their early 20's, did the same thing. We all have to grow up someday.

It took me almost killing myself once, to rip the tint off.

 

I'm from NY and lived there all my life, I now live in Miami Florida for the past year. Between NY and here i have not gotten pulled over for the tint. I drive normal so i don't draw any attention to me or the car. Also do to the fact that my mom has lupus and cant be in heavy sun i have a letter saying why my tint is so dark and they can not ticket me either way. My mothers truck is the same just her front windshield is 35% and not 5% like mine

 

To me its very easy to see weather it be day or night.. I will take some good pic's of the inside looking out so you can get an idea....

 

Only Reason why i have a tinted front is my mother has Lupus and other medical problems and the sun is very dangers for her. Was not done too look cool or be the talk of my friends but for the safety of my mothers health. I see a lot of older people here in FL with tinted fronts and all have them, do too the fact that the sun is very strong.



This is always gonna be a win-loose ConVo

 

This is what I was waiting on so I could call BS. You said your mothers windshield is 35%, and yours is 5%. You are using that letter, to skirt the law and have tint that is unsafe and unneeded. Your car would be fine with 35%, especially if your mom's own car has it.

About as bad as people having a handicap sticker in their car because they drive around a handicap person once per week.

 

You can call BS all you like, my mother is unable to drive herself around and she's always in my car. Sadly her illness has gotten worse, I needed to go darker cause now she has imaclety degenration and her eyes need to be protected more than ever....Trust me my friend I much rather have my mother healthy than have my windows tinted........

 

I must correct my tint just found my paper the sides are 5% and the windsheild is 20 % not 5% I was wrong..... I had redid the sides and left the front at 20%...