any leos in here???

[Bass]

:nonono: Any LEO's in here? i have five percent tint on all windows on my notch. i was pulled over at 1230 am leaviing work and got cited for ONLY my rear window.

Officer sats in mass you cant have ANY tint on the rea window

Is this true? i am fighting it if course but i thought th rear window was either 35% or no limit because they cant measure it.

thoughts?

 

[brys00gt]

Mass law states that you can not have less than 35% light transmittal on any window including the rear. The front can not have any tint lower than the as/1 line. Hope this helps.
Just wondering why you think they can't check the rear window?

 

[My2003Mach1]

Hey there Mike

You know If it was their family member or their friend I garuntee you that he would not have busted balls.
(Or if you were a hot chick)

I'd be like, I'll take this tint off when you stop being a hypocrite lol

 

[notchstang92]

There are meters now to check rear windows even though they are curved. I wouldn't ask a cop a question about laws. You would be surprised how many don't know them like the cop you encountered. There are ways around it, but it requires a doctors note that is approved by the state or registering your car in another state.

Check out the mass.gov site or the RMV if you want the specific writing of the law. If your car is registered in MA you have illegal tint on it. The cop

 

[brys00gt]

Here is a link to tint laws for all the states. Auto Window Tint Laws | TintCenter Window Tinting Most surrounding states to Mass whave very similar laws. RI is even stricter saying that it cant be less than 70% light transmittal. The slight blusih tint that comes factory for AC actually already limits our windows to around 71%
If you do get a doctors note for tint, it may preclude you from driving any vehicle without tint. Most states make this a requirement if you get the waiver as well as a sticker on the vehicle telling who installed it and the transmittal level.

 

[rondog622]

Its mgl 90 / 9d. The above have posted the correct info. But the chap section clearly says it shall not apply to the rear windshield if the veh had side mirrors that have a clear view of behind the veh. And i am leo. I would not write for that. I would fight it. Bring the print out of the chap and section to court. Also if u have been passing inspection. They go by the same things so make that a point. Was it a trooper or local?

 

[brys00gt]

The one you reference says that it needs to have mirrors and you can have it but also references the light transmittal being not less than 35%. OP clearly states it is 5% which is still illegal. Here is the statute section

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.

 

[rondog622]

well if he is only letting 5% thru all the way around, why only cited for the rear windshield? that makes no sense what so ever. I mis read it initially.

and another tidbit. This chap and sec is open to interpretation by a lot of LEOs. Prior to me becoming a leo I was stopped by a trooper on the pike. I had a 4 door focus at the time. I had the 2 fronts legal and everything behind me darker. well he cited me and he told me my rear windshield was fine. All others had to be made legal. OK fine...now prior to this stop about a year or so, I was stopped just thru the tolls at 128 on my way to work by a trooper. He stopped me for my windows. Now he told me I was ok the way I was as long as I had side mirrors. And no joke, 10pm that same night stopped by another trooper in my town for the same thing. He said he stopped me for my windows, I said you want to hear something funny, I was stopped exactly 12 hours ago for the same thing by another trooper and I told him what he told me. He let me go. So just goes to show you not everyone sees it the same. I know I dont.

 

[ChromeSnake98]

Well we do state inspection stickers at my shop and you can't have anything darker than 35% on any window. This used to be only on side windows and you could tint the back as dark as you'd like as long as you had side view mirrors. I know this because I "used" to be able to get a sticker. Not any more!

 

[Bass]

Its mgl 90 / 9d. The above have posted the correct info. But the chap section clearly says it shall not apply to the rear windshield if the veh had side mirrors that have a clear view of behind the veh. And i am leo. I would not write for that. I would fight it. Bring the print out of the chap and section to court. Also if u have been passing inspection. They go by the same things so make that a point. Was it a trooper or local?

it was a local. hopedale to be exact, they are known for pulling EVERYBODY. i appreciate the response and incite and will definitely be fighting this one. thanks again guys:beer:

 

[Bass]

the officer also said the reason i was originally pulled over was because i had NO brake/tail lights, when i asked if i could get out and see for myself was told no. After driving away stopped and you guessed it all lights working fine. it just sucks because i have to drive through the town at least twice a day. looks like ill be driving the truck more

 

[rondog622]

Sent u a pm

 

[BADASS03SVT]

Well we do state inspection stickers at my shop and you can't have anything darker than 35% on any window. This used to be only on side windows and you could tint the back as dark as you'd like as long as you had side view mirrors. I know this because I "used" to be able to get a sticker. Not any more!

used to be when? and why did you change your ways bc the law hasnt changed?



OP...fight it

 

[FromGTtoSVT]

used to be when? and why did you change your ways bc the law hasnt changed?



OP...fight it

Ok, now I am curious. I was always told law in MA was 35% all around?
Is that not the case?

 

[BADASS03SVT]

Ok, now I am curious. I was always told law in MA was 35% all around?
Is that not the case?

its 35% all around as long as you have two side view mirrors. I say fight it bc if he has a good record it will most likely come down. Asking a question like that usually means you dont get pulled over much so I guess im assuming...

 

[ChromeSnake98]

It is 35 all around. A few years back you were allowed darker on the rear window only, and that's if you had side mirrors. I've fought tint tickets with no problems in the past you just need proof you removed the tint and they will throw out the ticket. A picture of my car windows visibly see through and untinted worked for me.

 

[BADASS03SVT]

It is 35 all around. A few years back you were allowed darker on the rear window only, and that's if you had side mirrors. I've fought tint tickets with no problems in the past you just need proof you removed the tint and they will throw out the ticket. A picture of my car windows visibly see through and untinted worked for me.

like I asked before....when? the law has not changed

 

[MTBSully]

**** tint laws. I have 5% all around. Looking to get 35% on the windshield as well. Whenever I see a cop I just roll them down. Had 10% on my Camaro before that too and never had a problem. If I want to drive around naked I should be allowed to do so in the privacy of my own vehicle.

 

[BADASS03SVT]

**** tint laws. I have 5% all around. Looking to get 35% on the windshield as well. Whenever I see a cop I just roll them down. Had 10% on my Camaro before that too and never had a problem. If I want to drive around naked I should be allowed to do so in the privacy of my own vehicle.

you can on your property...but when you pay for that plate to legally drive on public, state / town owned roads, you agree to abide by their laws. If you dont then you get fined. Its your right to own it, not to drive it on everyones property.

 

[ChromeSnake98]

like I asked before....when? the law has not changed

Like I said before, a couple years ago at least 2 or 3. I don't know if the actual "law" change in the book but the registry gave us the new safety requirement booklet stating the differences.