Question about why I was stopped

[Cobra Jet 429]

I just got my car on the road and it had tints from previous owner.
The inspection station guy metered the tint at 36% and 35% is legal in Ma.
I got pulled over and was told that I had to remove the tint...
I tried explaining to the LEO, and he didn't seem to care that it was legal.
I even carry the inspection papers saying the tint is legal.
So now I have to goto court over tint that is legal.
Any advice here?
should I just bring in my inspection sheet that says the tint is legal?
Also the tint is only on the side windows, and rear.
nothing on the windshield. Pretty sure everything is legal since the inspection station passed it...

 

[Quik Z06]

The thing to remember is anytime you are knowingly violating the law you are creating P.C. for a traffic stop.

I totally agree. Which is why I love the fact that I no longer drive a bright RED Vette, with a loud blower anymore They tend to pay alot less attention to me now that I cruise around in an Escalade :dancenana:

 

[FordSVTFan]

Why is it necessary to write a ticket on it at all?

Because some departments require strict enforcement of certain violations. Additionally, it is a state law and requires enforcement. The same could be said for leash laws and many other civil violations. That being said most officers will use their discretion when allowed. If you read a lot of the posts here the tint ticket is either not issued or is issued in lieu of another more expensive/point ticket.

The officer can always tell the driver that the tint is illegal and to have it removed. And tell the driver that a "note" will be placed in his "file" and if he is pulled over again with darkly tinted windows THEN he will be cited.

In most cases that would be a lie. Most departments dont have a system in place for recording and pulling up warnings.

This will in most cases get the desired result. The tint will be removed. And you won't have one more driver out there that has just developed a less that favorable opinion of "The Law"

I seriously doubt it, just look at the posts here where people speak of getting the ticket and then finding a way to get it signed off or removed and then reinstalled.

 

[FordSVTFan]

I just got my car on the road and it had tints from previous owner.
The inspection station guy metered the tint at 36% and 35% is legal in Ma.
I got pulled over and was told that I had to remove the tint...
I tried explaining to the LEO, and he didn't seem to care that it was legal.
I even carry the inspection papers saying the tint is legal.
So now I have to goto court over tint that is legal.
Any advice here?
should I just bring in my inspection sheet that says the tint is legal?
Also the tint is only on the side windows, and rear.
nothing on the windshield. Pretty sure everything is legal since the inspection station passed it...

Here is the Mass. Tint Law

MOTOR VEHICLES

Chapter 90: Section 9D. Windshields and windows obscured by nontransparent materials


Section 9D. No person shall operate any motor vehicle upon any public way or upon any way to which the public shall have the right of access with any of the following affixed thereto:

(1) a sign, poster or sticker on the front windshield, the side windows immediately adjacent to the operator’s seat and the front passenger seat, the side windows immediately to the rear of the operator’s seat and the front passenger seat and the rear window in such a manner so as to obstruct, impede or distort the vision of the operator.

(2) nontransparent or sunscreen material, window application, reflective film or nonreflective film used in any way to cover or treat the front windshield, the side windows immediately adjacent to the right and left of the operator’s seat, the side windows immediately to the rear of the operator’s seat and the front passenger seat and the rear window, so as to make such windshield and said window glass areas in any way nontransparent or obscured from either the interior or exterior thereof.

This section shall not apply to:

(1) motor vehicles manufactured with windshields and window glass areas equipped in accordance with specifications of 49 Code of Federal Regulations 571.205 as authorized by 15 USC 1407.

(2) the use of draperies, louvers, or other special window treatments, except those specifically designated in this section, on the rear window, or a side window to the rear of the driver if the vehicle is equipped with two outside mirrors, one on each side, adjusted so that the driver has a clear view of the highway behind the vehicle.

(3) federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, watch guard or patrol agencies licensed under the provisions of section twenty-five of chapter one hundred and forty-seven and college, university and hospital police agencies appointed under the provisions of section sixty-three of chapter twenty-two C utilizing K-9 teams in a motor vehicle while in the regular performance of their duties provided said motor vehicle is equipped with two outside mirrors, one on each side, adjusted so that the driver has a clear view of the highway behind the vehicle.

(4) the use of nontransparent or sunscreen material or window application which has a total visible light reflectance of not more than thirty-five per cent or a visible light transmittance of not less than thirty-five per cent on the side windows immediately adjacent to the right and left of the operator’s seat, the side windows immediately to the rear of the operator’s seat and the front passenger seat or on the rear window if the vehicle is equipped with two outside mirrors, one on each side, adjusted so that the driver has a clear view of the highway behind the vehicle.

(5) the use of any transparent material limited to the uppermost 6″ along the top of the windshield, provided such strip does not encroach upon the driver’s direct forward viewing area as more particularly described and defined in applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

(6) a vehicle registered in another state, territory or another country or province.

(7) the use of nontransparent or sunscreen material, window application, reflective film or nonreflective film used in any way to cover or treat the side windows immediately to the rear of the operator’s seat and the front passenger seat and the rear window so as to make such window glass areas in any way nontransparent or obscured from either the interior or exterior thereof of a private passenger motor vehicle registered under the provisions of this chapter for public livery and hired for that purpose for any period of time which exclusion shall not include a taxicab.

(8) special window treatment or application determined necessary by a licensed physician, for the protection of the owner or operator of a private passenger motor vehicle who is determined to be light or photosensitive. Applications for such exemption based upon such medical reason or reasons shall be made in writing to the medical advisory board established under section eight C. All applications must be supported by a written attestation of a physician licensed to practice in this commonwealth of the necessity thereof. Upon granting of such exemption by the board, the registrar shall issue a sufficiently noticeable sticker to the applicant which shall be affixed to the side window immediately adjacent to the operator. The registrar shall keep a record of all such exemption stickers so issued.

The registrar shall, in accordance with the provisions of section thirty-one, establish rules and regulations to provide standards to measure the aforementioned percentage of reflectance and transmittance of light, and shall provide for testing of any motor vehicle glazing alleged to be in violation of this section. A statement from the registrar attesting that such glazing treated or covered with nontransparent or sunscreen material window application or reflective film is in compliance with the provisions of this section shall be prima facie evidence of such compliance in any prosecution thereof.

No person shall manufacture, sell, offer for sale or trade, equip or operate a motor vehicle in the commonwealth in violation of the provisions of this section; provided, however, that nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the manufacture or sale of reflective or nonreflective film in the commonwealth.

Violations of any provisions of this section shall be punishable by a fine of not more than two hundred and fifty dollars. Upon a third or subsequent conviction of a violation of the provisions of this section, the registrar shall suspend the operator’s license of a person so convicted for a period not to exceed ninety days.

The two highlighted areas seemingly conflict with each other. The first section indicates that if the tint causes the interior of the car to be obscurred from the outside it is a violation even though the tint may be of lawful light transmission.

The second highlighted area indicates the tint you have is of legal light transmission. However, I would assume the officer will likely hang his hat on the first section saying that his vision into your vehicle was obscurred.

Therefore if you go to court take a lot of pictures from the inside and out, with the windows up, at the same time of day as your traffic stop. Make sure there is a time and date stamp on the pictures. This way you can show the judge the officer's view was not obscurred.

Good Luck.

 

[FordSVTFan]

I totally agree. Which is why I love the fact that I no longer drive a bright RED Vette, with a loud blower anymore They tend to pay alot less attention to me now that I cruise around in an Escalade :dancenana:

I drive a bright red C6 and I have not been stopped in it.

 

[Machdup1]

Here's a polite question for the LEO's on this subject: In addition to the LEO's generally enforcing the tint law (as they would any other law), do LEO's take special notice of dark tint because it poses an impediment to their ability to safely conduct their duties?

As I recall, there have been a multitude of cases where LEO were murdered from behind tinted windows during traffic stops and in addition to limiting the drivers visibility and creating a public safety concern, these heinous crimes are one of the reasons for tint laws.

If there is any truth to this line of reasoning, would it also be logical to assume that dark windows tint would immediately put the LEO on a higher state of alert and anything that decreases their collective safety would be a valid reason for them to not excerise their descretion to not write a summons for the violation?

 

[Quik Z06]

I drive a bright red C6 and I have not been stopped in it.

As I had never got stopped in mine either, but as you mentioned there was definite P.C. to be stopped and questioned. The blower was very loud, LT Headers (no cats)Cam, etc :uh oh: Point being, I was always pretty nervous when driving it (and did get questioned by a CHP once about the supercharger) but he was being cool about it. So now that im pretty much under the radar in my Escalade I worry alot less :beer:

 

[FordSVTFan]

As I had never got stopped in mine either, but as you mentioned there was definite P.C. to be stopped and questioned. The blower was very loud, LT Headers (no cats)Cam, etc :uh oh: Point being, I was always pretty nervous when driving it (and did get questioned by a CHP once about the supercharger) but he was being cool about it. So now that im pretty much under the radar in my Escalade I worry alot less :beer:

When I had my SN-95 vert I put a Vortech blower on it and I was stopped once and the officer told me about my violation and then on leaving he said I should get me belts checked as my car was making that noise.

 

[Quik Z06]

^ Lol I had to drive through a sobriety checkpoint and the CHP officer told me your going to need to pull over and pop your hood, were looking for illegal modifications. I was like, oh man im screwed. I told him ok, then he laughed and said "nah its a sobriety checkpoint" Oh man, I was like i need to buy a lotto ticket. He asked the normal questions, then said sounds like you got a supercharger under the hood. I said yeah, basic bolt on kit He said cool and have a nice night. Haha, I drove through and turned around and went straight home (when I had just got out there)

 

[FordSVTFan]

^ Lol I had to drive through a sobriety checkpoint and the CHP officer told me your going to need to pull over and pop your hood, were looking for illegal modifications. I was like, oh man im screwed. I told him ok, then he laughed and said "nah its a sobriety checkpoint" Oh man, I was like i need to buy a lotto ticket. He asked the normal questions, then said sounds like you got a supercharger under the hood. I said yeah, basic bolt on kit He said cool and have a nice night. Haha, I drove through and turned around and went straight home (when I had just got out there)

Indeed it was lotto time.

 

[hb712]

Question................If i get pulled over and my windows are down already, and the officer asks me to roll up my window.............can i refuse?

Is there an answer to this question? This is out of curiosity. I have too dark of tint but, I pay my ticket(s) without complaint.

 

[Sonic03SVTCobra]

Letter of the law or spirit of the law. does it matter it`s still the law

 

[LOVESBOOST]

You know there are instances where a little petty stop will actually get a pretty bad criminal off the street. Think back to the Sniper shootings around 02 in the DC area. They were caught sleeping at a rest stop if I recall and thats how they were busted. A personal case. My daughters god father, was an MP in Achorage. Pulled a couple guys over because they didn't turn off their high beams when driving towards him. Pulls them over sees a gun in the car. Bam the guys are wanted for murder and get convicted. What makesthe tint issue any different? If you don't give-em a reason to pull you over they won't.[rant...off]

They were caught in the Meyersville reststop (10mi from my house) because there was a discription of the car, not because they were sleeping there

 

[Outlaw99]

Adam, here is a question...you may be able to shed some light on...reading the OP's problem, I dont know if it is just a NC thing...but an officer cant just pull vehicles over at random...there has to be reasonable suspicion ( wont go into the definition, im sure you know) which inturn leads to probable cause, which you must have both in order to effect a legal stop. with out that, obtaining evidence for a charge such as in this case would not be legal? or could it be implied by the tint itself?

 

[exdeath]

If the windows were down, and you're made to put them up (maybe they are down while on the road because of the tint hmm?) and slapped with a ticket.

How is that different than carrying a legal open carry holster, and the officer forcing you to put on a coat, then immediately busting you for carrying a concealed weapon when you comply?

These blanket totalitarian laws need to stop. Tint that is too dark should only be handled on a case by case basis when it is actually a factor in something more important and not just a blanket restriction on the 99% of the rest of us that will never be a problem. (eg: dark tint caused reduced visibility and directly caused an accident or ticket for not rolling down tinted windows when stopped and giving cause for concern that you are trying to hide something and provoking a search, but not simply for doing nothing but minding your own business and having the tint, etc),

 

[FastEddie09]

So no answer to my question about refusing to roll up the windows?????

I only drive my Mach in the summer. Windows are always down, until i park. So i put tint on the side windows. ANY level of tint is illegal in IL.

The officer asks me to roll up the window to see if they are tinted........WHY?

-The windows have been rolled down since i pulled out of the garage.

-There is no safety concern.(i turn off the car and keep my hands visible on the wheel for the officer)

-I was pulled over for no front plate(got a $30 ticket)

-So what can he legally do to make me roll up the windows? Who says i even have side windows? They not legally required like a front windsheild.

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

Adam, here is a question...you may be able to shed some light on...reading the OP's problem, I dont know if it is just a NC thing...but an officer cant just pull vehicles over at random...there has to be reasonable suspicion ( wont go into the definition, im sure you know) which inturn leads to probable cause, which you must have both in order to effect a legal stop. with out that, obtaining evidence for a charge such as in this case would not be legal? or could it be implied by the tint itself?

NC law does not require pc for every stop.Evidence on its face[window tint] is all that is needed.There are some states that require more than just one violation[Va for example] I stopped a guy several years ago from Va for a seat belt.He said,"I cant be pulled in Va for just a seat belt".After hearing his excuses and his attitude,I asked him to sign the drivers award and reminded him he wasnt in Va.No,its not the norm to stop cars at random and you need pc unless you have a clear violation.Does that clear it up a little?I rambled on,sorry

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

so no answer to my question about refusing to roll up the windows?????

I only drive my mach in the summer. Windows are always down, until i park. So i put tint on the side windows. Any level of tint is illegal in il.

-You are saying you break the law,so you have to expect some type of ticket for it.

The officer asks me to roll up the window to see if they are tinted........why?

-Is the back window or other windows besides the side tinted?

-the windows have been rolled down since i pulled out of the garage.

-Samething as my license has been revoked since i pulled out of the garage.you are saying you know its illegal but you chose to drive on the streets/hwy where you are held accountable

-there is no safety concern.(i turn off the car and keep my hands visible on the wheel for the officer)

-no safety concern in your eyes,not the officers.

-i was pulled over for no front plate(got a $30 ticket)

-so what can he legally do to make me roll up the windows? Who says i even have side windows? They not legally required like a front windsheild.

-this is similar to getting pulled for any other violation[speeding,seat belt,expried tag]i ask people if they have any drugs-guns- etc in the car.they dont have to allow it but if there is probable cause,smell of marijuana,i can search

 

[Outlaw99]

NC law does not require pc for every stop.Evidence on its face[window tint] is all that is needed.There are some states that require more than just one violation[Va for example] I stopped a guy several years ago from Va for a seat belt.He said,"I cant be pulled in Va for just a seat belt".After hearing his excuses and his attitude,I asked him to sign the drivers award and reminded him he wasnt in Va.No,its not the norm to stop cars at random and you need pc unless you have a clear violation.Does that clear it up a little?I rambled on,sorry

that has sure changed since i went through rookie school

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

outlaw,maybe what Im trying to say is what you are saying...just in a different way."there has to be reasonable suspicion".Yes,there has to be reasonable suspicion.In the example I was providing,a window tint violation is the "pc" and "reasonable suspicion".In other words,plain view such as weed on a table when you walk in a house.We are on the same page