Question about why I was stopped

[FordSVTFan]

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?

As noted not every stop requires P.C. to effectuate the stop. To issue the summons there must be P.C. In this case their is evidence of illegal window tint.

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?

It is different because in your open carry situation the officer would be forcing you to commit the unlawful act. In the tint situation, the officer didnt put the tint on the window. He had reasonable suspicion to believe there was window tint likely based on the rear windows being tinted.

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),

That is an issue for the legislature to address and amend the statute if they find it so appropriate. However, as written, the law does not account for that.

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

You can refuse, but the officer can then charge you with obstruction and he will roll up the windows anyway.

Who says i even have side windows? They not legally required like a front windsheild.[/QUOTE]

If your rear window is tinted that is enough P.C. for the stop.

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

Yes.

 

[FastEddie09]

If your rear window is tinted that is enough P.C. for the stop.

Its not illegal for the rear windows to be tinted.

 

[20psirabbit]

Its not illegal for the rear windows to be tinted.

yet they will find a reason to make it ok. because what are we gonna do about it? that's what it boils down to :nonono:

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

Will find a reason to make it ok?News flash,it IS illegal to have the rear window tinted to a certain %.35% is the lowest in NC

 

[20psirabbit]

Will find a reason to make it ok?News flash,it IS illegal to have the rear window tinted to a certain %.35% is the lowest in NC

ok, but here in CA it's not. you can vinyl your rear windows black if you want. but i've still been in a car, stopped, and ordered to roll the fronts up just to see if there was tint on the fronts. if you don't think that's slightly ridiculous then i don't know what to say.

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

No reason to argue that fact.Laws are different of course state to state.

 

[20psirabbit]

absolutely i agree, i wasn't really trying to speak for anywhere else for the record. sorry for the misunderstanding :beer:

 

[FordSVTFan]

Its not illegal for the rear windows to be tinted.

It creates Reasonable Suspicion for a stop to investigate whether the other windows are tinted illegally.

 

[olefafl]

It creates Reasonable Suspicion for a stop to investigate whether the other windows are tinted illegally.

So can a LEO pull you over if he sees smoke coming from inside your car to see if its weed? :shrug:

 

[FordSVTFan]

So can a LEO pull you over if he sees smoke coming from inside your car to see if its weed? :shrug:

Is that what I said? I dont think so. I said if the officer has R.S. to believe a crime is being committed he can conduct an investigatory stop. Just to clarify things for you, if an officer see smoke and it smells like marijuana he can make the stop.

 

[20psirabbit]

Is that what I said? I dont think so. I said if the officer has R.S. to believe a crime is being committed he can conduct an investigatory stop. Just to clarify things for you, if an officer see smoke and it smells like marijuana he can make the stop.

no but it sounds like exactly the same thing :shrug:

 

[FordSVTFan]

no but it sounds like exactly the same thing :shrug:

Exactly the same thing?

One is smoke, smoke without more can come from numerous substances. The other is visible window tint, that is exactly what is being investigated. I can see your confusion

 

[20psirabbit]

again while cute, no.
tint in the rear lets you assume there's tint in the front?
what keeps you from assuming that any smoke is illicit substance?
btw i love the patronizing attitude. i just asked a question, i wasn't being an ass. and cops don't know why people don't like cops

 

[txyaloo]

again while cute, no.
tint in the rear lets you assume there's tint in the front?
what keeps you from assuming that any smoke is illicit substance?
btw i love the patronizing attitude. i just asked a question, i wasn't being an ass. and cops don't know why people don't like cops

How often, even in a state such as California, does a person tint just the rear glass of the car? I would suspect that most don't. A LEO, based on their experience and training, would have RS that the front windows would be tinted if the rear was also tinted. The standard is what would a reasonable person think/do in said situation. Most reasonable people would assume one window tinted = all windows tinted.

 

[FordSVTFan]

again while cute, no.
tint in the rear lets you assume there's tint in the front?
what keeps you from assuming that any smoke is illicit substance?
btw i love the patronizing attitude.

Based on training, education, and experience where there is rear window tint there are other windows tinted. In court it is called a logical inference. However, it would not be a logical inference to conclude that where one sees smoke it is likely marijuana.

I will stop confusing you with actual fact and logic.

i just asked a question, i wasn't being an ass. and cops don't know why people don't like cops

Actually, you didnt ask a question. You made an off-hand comment that garnered a reply in kind. (See below)

no but it sounds like exactly the same thing :shrug:

 

[mswaim]

again while cute, no.
tint in the rear lets you assume there's tint in the front?
what keeps you from assuming that any smoke is illicit substance?
btw i love the patronizing attitude. i just asked a question, i wasn't being an ass. and cops don't know why people don't like cops

People don't like cops for the same reasons you don't; they blame the police for enforcing laws they don't write - nor do they convict you in the end.

Their purpose is to investigate possible breaches of those laws and bring the alleged violator in front of the appropriate authority, i.e., issue a citation.

If you feel the citation was not legally issued or the evidence-gathering process flawed; make your case to the judge. Debating reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause on this (or any) internet forum is like pissing into the wind. You might make a good case, but you will still smell like pee at the end of the day. :shrug: Unless of course, you are willing to admit you are attempting to debate a subject matter you know little or nothing about. :idea:

And to the poster who only drives his mach during the summer and never rolls up his windows until he parks. I assume you know any officer who observes the vehicle parked can issue a "fix-it" citation for the tint if it is indeed beyond your state's limitations. Just as they can cite it for expired reg. even when parked, cracked or damaged windshields, etc. These are not "moving violations", so your vehicle does not have to be on a public roadway to be in technical violation. Now, will they issue? That is the real question. That is at the officers discretion and/or department policy.

Just another of those reasonable suspicion/probable cause issues most don't understand since they don't work with it every day.

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

IF this and IF that.Some of these comments do not have the proper answer in your opinion.No matter how many cops answer the question with the same answer,you,the person asking,will not be satisfied.You get an answer then carry it over to "what if" these side windows are tinted or smoke coming from the car,"what if" it is/isnt weed?You guys have to come to some type of logic,WE[leo] are people that have pretty much the exact same internals/externals as you[I think]Why come up with such off the wall comments or questions?
This is not SD or the pub,its a forum for questions to leo about incidents that occured or may occur.Every Tom Dick and Harry feel the need to twist the simple answer given into something personal,and you are NOT even involved:bash:.
Some of you dont like leo[obviously] and you might try and try to make a name for yourself by posting in here.So be it.Because "I" am not liked and as many times as you have met me:bs: it proves I am a PIG,I will not sleep tonight:sleeping:

A quick note,before some of the BS comments are typed,check up on your local/state laws.If you want a law to be changed,write your legislature

 

[jshen]

If you want a law to be changed,write your legislature

Exactly...:beer:

 

[SpdPilot]

People don't like cops for the same reasons you don't; they blame the police for enforcing laws they don't write - nor do they convict you in the end.

Their purpose is to investigate possible breaches of those laws and bring the alleged violator in front of the appropriate authority, i.e., issue a citation.

I come to this area of the Forum for Entertainment Purposes. I am surprised anyone but LEO's even post here. Like deer in the headlights, regular civilians still try to reason with all of you. It is very fun to read.

People who work for an organization, government, municipality who have no personal opinion other then what they have been told to believe meet the definition of brain washed individuals. You just keep repeating what you have been told is right. Don't be offended, it is ok and needed to keep order.

The truth is today, there are so many laws on the books, there is no vehicle on the road which is 100% legal. Every vehicle is in violation. By the way, I know you don't agree with this, but your superiors do, which is what drives their budgets and the addition of more laws. If you hold to your statement quoted, everyone but you or other LEO's would realize that you can pull any vehicle over and find a violation. You believe that everyone MUST follow the law and if they do, they will never be ticketed unjustly. This of course is not reality, but I also understand you must believe this or you couldn't do your job.

So every once in a while, I like to step in and let the non-LEO's know, they are just wasting their time trying to argue these points. Your responses are always going to be predictable. A word to my fellow citizens, if you want to fight this crazy legal cash machine, go to the voting booth, voice your opinions to politicians and stop being lazy. You can't stop the arm of someones body from hitting you, it is mindless, you have to talk to the brain that is making it move. Unfortunately, the brain has given the mindless arm authority to act on it's own. A dangerous situation.

I learned a while back. LEO's don't have opinions, they have training.

 

[mswaim]

I'm not sure I agree with your analysis; I've always felt I had an opinion - but you may be right - but then again; it's just your opinion and it carries no more weight here than my does.......if I had one. :shrug:

BTW - Can you tell me which law my wife's completely stock 2007 XLR is violating? I would like to get it fixed before I get a ticket. ;-)