Notices
Regional - Great Lakes IL, IN, OH, MI, WI

window tint update?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 22, 2009 | 06:27 AM
  #121  
yellowxhoodie's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member

5 Year Member

Trader
SL Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 13,746
From: LOWLOW Chicago
Default

i heard today that even when the bill becomes law it still wont be put into effect until next year...

is this true?
Old Aug 22, 2009 | 05:02 PM
  #122  
cavalierkid888's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Scion Evolution
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 965
From: Eastern Illinois University
Default

Well if somebody could post up a link to the bill that needs to be printed out when this happens that would be great.
Old Aug 24, 2009 | 09:32 PM
  #123  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

anybody? any info on when this law becomes effective if it passes. any info on where i can find out when it becomes effective. im going to just go to the police station and ask some questions when this gets passed. and ill let you guys know since i know your all a bunch of lazy bums. JK.
Old Aug 25, 2009 | 01:34 AM
  #124  
GQQSE13's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member

5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Decatur, IL
Default

according to the group on facebook that keeps track of this 24-7 it will next week. but what i dont like is looksl ike either 35% all around, or 30-35% in back and 50% in front or darker than 30% = no front window tint. sucks cuz i'm not paying to rip off all my tint
Old Aug 25, 2009 | 05:00 PM
  #125  
burstaneurysm's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,312
From: Forest Park, IL
Default

Should be passed today... it's been 60 days since it's been submitted. Keep your ears open, guys!
Old Aug 26, 2009 | 09:50 PM
  #126  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

Recommends: deleting language providing that "on multipurpose passenger vehicles . . . a nonreflective tinted film originally applied by the manufacturer, that allows at least 50% light transmittance, with a 5% variance observed by any law enforcement official metering the light transmittance, may be used on the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver"; and inserting language providing that "on multipurpose passenger vehicles . . . with a nonreflective tint originally applied by the manufacturer on the windows to the rear of the driver’s seat, the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver may be treated with a nonreflective tint that allows at least 50% light transmittance, with a 5% variance observed by a law enforcement official metering the light transmittance".


what the crap does this mean?
Old Aug 26, 2009 | 09:54 PM
  #127  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

wait, after i read it again is this suggesting that we would only be able to do 50% all the way around?
Old Aug 26, 2009 | 10:35 PM
  #128  
burstaneurysm's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,312
From: Forest Park, IL
Default

No. The language was confusing to the degree that, as the bill previously read, it was illegal for MPVs to have factory tints at all...

The bill was resubmitted preapproved, meaning, as soon as congress has their veto session in October, they will adjust the language of said bill and it will be filed.

Nothing has substantially changed the soon-to-be law.

The only question that remains is for xBs. Since we are classified as a car, but also have factory installed tint, from a legal perspective, we can be viewed as both.

The safe way to handle this is to have the back windows metered. If they meter above 35% +/-5%, you're clear for 35% up front, if they meter below that, it's gotta be 50% up front.
Old Aug 29, 2009 | 08:38 PM
  #129  
Domo's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,006
From: Earth
Default

so this law isnt legal yet..what a shame
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 03:07 PM
  #130  
burstaneurysm's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,312
From: Forest Park, IL
Default

Mid-October. We've waited this long, what's another month and a half?
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 03:06 AM
  #131  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

-update-
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bill...sion=0#actions
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 03:21 AM
  #132  
Keith's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 338
From: Lombard, IL
Default

so umm now what ?? wait till the 14th of oct???


Keith.
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 03:27 AM
  #133  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

What is an "Amendatory Veto"?

In addition to signing bills or vetoing them outright, Illinois' constitution allows the governor to "return a bill together with specific changes" to the legislature (Article IV, Section 9(e)). When a governor issues an amendatory veto, the legislature must decide whether to concur with the changes or to override them. Concurring with an amendatory veto requires a simple majority in both chambers, while overriding an amendatory veto takes a three-fifths vote in both chambers. If the legislature fails to concur with the veto or override it, the bill dies and does not become law.

so on this day they are most likely decide to go with the small changes and make it a law considering they already went with 100% agreeance before,correct?
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 03:29 AM
  #134  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

i just hope for some reason they dont just kill it and forget about it, ive been watching this for far too long.
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 03:56 AM
  #135  
yellowxhoodie's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member

5 Year Member

Trader
SL Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 13,746
From: LOWLOW Chicago
Default

if they forgot about it that would prob actually be a good thing.
it would automatically become law.
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 01:18 PM
  #136  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

well they have to agree on the changes, which im sure they will, but the next question is does this bill then have to go through another process of 60 days that the governor has to sign it, or, since he reviewed it and it gets changed he will know the changes so him reading it will do nothing and it will be automatically approved.
Old Oct 7, 2009 | 01:20 PM
  #137  
GQQSE13's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member

5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Decatur, IL
Default

who knows. he's prob too busy trying to figure out a awy to go ahead with the layoffs and ignore anything else just to make others think he has power.....

what's funny is talking to cops in other states think half of our laws regarding cars are retarded and that they ahve a real job to do rather than harrass car people regarding tint, exhaust, stereos, glow, ect...
Old Oct 9, 2009 | 04:54 PM
  #138  
shakybonez's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 27
Default tint

I will be attending court on the 20th and I will be asking question to the judge and states attorney about the status of the bill/law.

Ill keep everyone posted on what will come out of it....
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 09:28 PM
  #139  
alaskanpeas's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 139
From: Tinley Park, IL
Default

override veto passed. now what?
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 10:41 PM
  #140  
madscionce's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Default

this means the legislature vetoed the corrections that gov. quinn wanted and the bill will remain as originally written. now he will probably veto the entire bill!



All times are GMT. The time now is 10:23 AM.