pulled by police
10 September 2006, 07:32 PM
#31
BANNED
do you remember them tall helmets the police used to wear?? i was once chased by a copper for asking him if his head reached the top 
and got a telling off from a female officer for saying" nice helmet, want to see mine". i was drunk though!!
and got a telling off from a female officer for saying" nice helmet, want to see mine". i was drunk though!!
10 September 2006, 08:20 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Worcs
Posts: 1,770
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So sorry that it has come to this.
I bet if you were a lesbian Muslim with 1 leg from Guptastan, they wouldn't dare have done this to a defenceless woman with kids.
Sad day for Plod and his credibility.
Hope you and your Family are OK.
I was thinking of having Tints done on my Scoob,
this has put me off.
However, I quite often have my 2 Bulmastiffs with me, BONZO & MORAG in the Scoob.
Sorry once again for you. Rant over.
Alan MaC.
I bet if you were a lesbian Muslim with 1 leg from Guptastan, they wouldn't dare have done this to a defenceless woman with kids.
Sad day for Plod and his credibility.
Hope you and your Family are OK.
I was thinking of having Tints done on my Scoob,
this has put me off.
However, I quite often have my 2 Bulmastiffs with me, BONZO & MORAG in the Scoob.
Sorry once again for you. Rant over.
Alan MaC.
10 September 2006, 08:35 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Harwich, Essex
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The police are the biggest waste of tax payers money!!!
Where were they when my car had all the stereo ripped out???
Where were they when my car was keyed all down one side and the bonnet???
It seems to me they can only catch somone if it happens under thier nose.
I have no respect for the police or the law who are both in favor of the criminal and never ever the victim.
Where were they when my car had all the stereo ripped out???
Where were they when my car was keyed all down one side and the bonnet???
It seems to me they can only catch somone if it happens under thier nose.
I have no respect for the police or the law who are both in favor of the criminal and never ever the victim.
10 September 2006, 08:41 PM
#35
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Essex
Posts: 2,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are probably better off without the illegal side tints.
If you had an accident in your car, the other party could use your tints as part of a legal case against you.
God forbid if someone was killed, for example hitting a motorbike at night you could be in serious trouble with illegal side tints.
Your insurance company may not represent you at all?
Essex police are hot on this.
If you had an accident in your car, the other party could use your tints as part of a legal case against you.
God forbid if someone was killed, for example hitting a motorbike at night you could be in serious trouble with illegal side tints.
Your insurance company may not represent you at all?
Essex police are hot on this.
10 September 2006, 08:54 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: West London
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by might wrx
The police are the biggest waste of tax payers money!!!
Where were they when my car had all the stereo ripped out???
Where were they when my car had all the stereo ripped out???
Originally Posted by might wrx
Where were they when my car was keyed all down one side and the bonnet???
Originally Posted by might wrx
It seems to me they can only catch somone if it happens under thier nose. I have no respect for the police or the law who are both in favor of the criminal and never ever the victim.
However, the police in my experience do care about the victim, but the law and people making the law care more about demonstrating that the police are doing their jobs by giving them meaningless targets to hit than allowing them to do their jobs. The net result of this is that there are less police on the streets stopping incidents like you describe from happening.
Sickening as it upsets the people who should rely on them and be their greatest supporters.
PS: I am surprised about the incident that started this thread, that sort of discretionless attitude, especially with kids on board, really gives the police a bad name. Just my twopenceworth.
10 September 2006, 09:12 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Harwich, Essex
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Listener
Probably filling in another stupid form for another needless law that has been passed by the government to tie their hands
Probably checking the forms checklist to make sure they had filled in the right forms.
I do agree with you that the law does seem weighted in favour of the criminal.
However, the police in my experience do care about the victim, but the law and people making the law care more about demonstrating that the police are doing their jobs by giving them meaningless targets to hit than allowing them to do their jobs. The net result of this is that there are less police on the streets stopping incidents like you describe from happening.
Sickening as it upsets the people who should rely on them and be their greatest supporters.
PS: I am surprised about the incident that started this thread, that sort of discretionless attitude, especially with kids on board, really gives the police a bad name. Just my twopenceworth.
Probably checking the forms checklist to make sure they had filled in the right forms.
I do agree with you that the law does seem weighted in favour of the criminal.
However, the police in my experience do care about the victim, but the law and people making the law care more about demonstrating that the police are doing their jobs by giving them meaningless targets to hit than allowing them to do their jobs. The net result of this is that there are less police on the streets stopping incidents like you describe from happening.
Sickening as it upsets the people who should rely on them and be their greatest supporters.
PS: I am surprised about the incident that started this thread, that sort of discretionless attitude, especially with kids on board, really gives the police a bad name. Just my twopenceworth.
Unlike me who always sees red
10 September 2006, 09:54 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love these threads.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
10 September 2006, 10:01 PM
#39
BANNED
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kippax Massive.
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Eagle
I love these threads.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
10 September 2006, 10:22 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Shell Petrol Stations mainly
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Eagle
I love these threads.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
My sentiments exactly.
We know were doing wrong with tints, speeding, using mobile phone etc and we complain when we get caught for it..........
If I get caught then its my fault. Not the Police that stop me. I may not be happy but to coin a phrase, such is life.
10 September 2006, 10:28 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Alan MaC
Sorry, meant to say that with the 2 dogs in the Scoob, they might have second thoughts?
Alan Mac
Alan Mac
10 September 2006, 10:35 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Harwich, Essex
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Eagle
I love these threads.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
Next we'll have someone advocating:-
getting rid of the MoT test because it deprives them of their human rights to have a car on the road;
getting rid of speed cameras because it stops people having the freedom to go as fast as they want;
not allowing the rozzers to stop vehicles in which they believe the occupants are suspicious (baseball hats etc) because the rozzers should be catching rapists, burglers and/or muggers;
all number plates are to be to any size and design the driver wishes (for artistic independence);
the darker the tints, the better (for privacy and anonymity);
three course meals are to be consumed while driving, with extra points for simultaneous smoking, talking on a mobile and changing a cd.
If we are going to spout utter nonsense, peurile drivel and prejudicial dogma, it seems this is the best place to do it, as is clearly evident from this and other posts recently.
The best entertainment by far. Thanks Scoobynetters.
10 September 2006, 10:51 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love these "OMG I BROKE THE LAW NOW IM BEING PUNISHED BY THE PIGS!" threads.
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
10 September 2006, 11:09 PM
#45
BANNED
but dont you think the law should leave it to the m.o.t testers??? if you have dark tint your car fails its m.o.t, if you have neons your car fails and so on????? i know peeps will take them off before m.o.t and put them back after but it would be expensive (tints)and time consuming and people would get fed up of puting on and taking off and in the end they would just leave rhem off!!!! and make m.ot twice a year but at half price off cource. plus we would know twice a year that our beloved cars are safe and road worthy!!! what do you think????
10 September 2006, 11:11 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: birmingham
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im not an idiot im just saying the matter could have been dealt with better by the copper
i think a delayed prohibition notice would of been better here
rather than ripping them off at the side of the road,upsetting my kids
from what my wife has told me he sounds like a power freak
give them a uniform and they think they own the place
young woman with kids in the car that could have been a carjacker or worse
feckin pigs i hate them when they behave like this
and how would i know if tints are illegal as its only just passed the mot
surely that should be part of the test if tints are fitted and passed or failed accordingley
some of people on here are law breaking by running full decats thus voiding their insurance
bet the pigs wouldn't take that off at the side of the road would he
steve
i think a delayed prohibition notice would of been better here
rather than ripping them off at the side of the road,upsetting my kids
from what my wife has told me he sounds like a power freak
give them a uniform and they think they own the place
young woman with kids in the car that could have been a carjacker or worse
feckin pigs i hate them when they behave like this
and how would i know if tints are illegal as its only just passed the mot
surely that should be part of the test if tints are fitted and passed or failed accordingley
some of people on here are law breaking by running full decats thus voiding their insurance
bet the pigs wouldn't take that off at the side of the road would he
steve
Originally Posted by Ste_TYPE-R
I love these "OMG I BROKE THE LAW NOW IM BEING PUNISHED BY THE PIGS!" threads.
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
Last edited by 5cby; 10 September 2006 at 11:14 PM.
10 September 2006, 11:28 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 5cby
give them a uniform and they think they own the place
steve
steve
10 September 2006, 11:37 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cas Vegas
Posts: 60,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by warrenm2
Give em some kids and they think they can ignore the law! (and its enforcement)
11 September 2006, 12:35 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ste_TYPE-R
I love these "OMG I BROKE THE LAW NOW IM BEING PUNISHED BY THE PIGS!" threads.
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
Just makes me realise what complete and utter mindless ***** ppl can be. The police dont make the laws, they enforce them.
Its illegal for any windows forward of the A pillar to be tinted as quite clearly you knew. You broke the law, pay the fine and move on idiots. Dark tints + rainy conditions + night time = incredibly reduced vision. O and the complaint thing ... LOL you're going to complain because a policeman enforced the law ... nice one, anymore dribble you wish to spout out??
11 September 2006, 11:25 AM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tinted windows look stupid IMO and to have them on the front windows is really stupid as it will probably invalidate your insurance if you have an accident.
You wouldn't drive with sunglasses on at night and yet you have tinted windows. I don't get it I'm afraid, I think the police were right to take them off.
You wouldn't drive with sunglasses on at night and yet you have tinted windows. I don't get it I'm afraid, I think the police were right to take them off.
11 September 2006, 11:35 AM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: never the same place twice
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
has any one confirmed that the fron tinted windows were illegal?
NO they aint, they might well have been on the legal limit, which there is nothing wrong with. Whether you think it looks cool or not, they could have been with in the law, and therefore removing them without testing was a silly thing to do.
NO they aint, they might well have been on the legal limit, which there is nothing wrong with. Whether you think it looks cool or not, they could have been with in the law, and therefore removing them without testing was a silly thing to do.
11 September 2006, 11:46 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by corradoboy
'B' pillar 
The Law:
You are not allowed to tint your windscreen or front windows AT ALL. Anything forward of the B pillar (middle of the car) MUST NOT be tinted in anyway. You are however still allowed to perform any level of tinting on your back windows.
If you've tinted you windows before January that does not mean that you are safe, if the police believe that your tint causes reduced visibility they can issue you with an order to have it removed.
Why was this law brought in?
The reason this law was introduced was that there was a serious accident between a motorbike and a heavily modified car with very dark tints. It was believed that the root cause of the accident was that the driver couldn't see well enough through his tinted windows.
You are not allowed to tint your windscreen or front windows AT ALL. Anything forward of the B pillar (middle of the car) MUST NOT be tinted in anyway. You are however still allowed to perform any level of tinting on your back windows.
If you've tinted you windows before January that does not mean that you are safe, if the police believe that your tint causes reduced visibility they can issue you with an order to have it removed.
Why was this law brought in?
The reason this law was introduced was that there was a serious accident between a motorbike and a heavily modified car with very dark tints. It was believed that the root cause of the accident was that the driver couldn't see well enough through his tinted windows.
11 September 2006, 11:58 AM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: never the same place twice
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ste_TYPE-R
My bad
As above, any tint forward of the B pillar is illegal except for the manufacturers tint applied at the factory. Anything other then manufacturer tint and its illegal. Police officers also have the power to remove the tint at the roadside if its obvious its illegal (see above) and issue a fine upto £2000. A police officer doesnt need to use a light tester to see how much light passes thru the windows if one isnt available, he can use his judgement to determine whether its illegal or not. Reason MOTs dont fail car for tints is because they would need to equipment and apparently it would cost about £90mill to equip all MOT stations.
As above, any tint forward of the B pillar is illegal except for the manufacturers tint applied at the factory. Anything other then manufacturer tint and its illegal. Police officers also have the power to remove the tint at the roadside if its obvious its illegal (see above) and issue a fine upto £2000. A police officer doesnt need to use a light tester to see how much light passes thru the windows if one isnt available, he can use his judgement to determine whether its illegal or not. Reason MOTs dont fail car for tints is because they would need to equipment and apparently it would cost about £90mill to equip all MOT stations.
Rubbish mate, and i seroulsy question your sources
http://www.4youngdrivers.co.uk/pages...ow-tinting.asp
The law is, is that the front SIDE windows have to let 70% of light through.
FACT, the police hate any kind of tints especialy when close to the legal limit, they do not like joe public pushing his luck so to speak
Try looking at VOSA website, there is a small pdf documant there for you if you care to take a look
http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/publicat...0law%20vosa%22
11 September 2006, 01:26 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: If you're not braking or accelerating you're wasting time.
Posts: 2,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aside from the legal issues here,can anyone tell me why you need dark tinted windows on your car?
Who do you think wants to look at you when your in the car?Do you wear a disguise when your not in your car?
Do you wear sun-glasses indoors or at night?
Do you drive around with your front fog-lights on when it's clear?
Anything that impears your vision,even slightly, whilst driving is a hazard.You really don't need a law for that,it's common sense.
I think it comes under the same banner as designer number plates.Look at me ,I am flouting the law(in a very small way).Problem is some guy causes an accident because he can't see clearly & you can't read his number plate to report it.
I just don't get it.
Who do you think wants to look at you when your in the car?Do you wear a disguise when your not in your car?
Do you wear sun-glasses indoors or at night?
Do you drive around with your front fog-lights on when it's clear?
Anything that impears your vision,even slightly, whilst driving is a hazard.You really don't need a law for that,it's common sense.
I think it comes under the same banner as designer number plates.Look at me ,I am flouting the law(in a very small way).Problem is some guy causes an accident because he can't see clearly & you can't read his number plate to report it.
I just don't get it.
11 September 2006, 01:48 PM
#58
You would do well to look up the actual law regarding tints.
Fronts have to be a maximum of 35%
There are guidelines for stopping people and dealing with tints - again look them up but if I recall at 35-50% its a 14 day mot wonder. Above that they can do an immediate prohibition order on the car which means that it cannot be driven on the public highway until the problem is rectified.
Ask over on http://www.5ive-o.org/forum/portal.php or do a search there as I'm sure that the discussion will have cropped up.
Fronts have to be a maximum of 35%
There are guidelines for stopping people and dealing with tints - again look them up but if I recall at 35-50% its a 14 day mot wonder. Above that they can do an immediate prohibition order on the car which means that it cannot be driven on the public highway until the problem is rectified.
Ask over on http://www.5ive-o.org/forum/portal.php or do a search there as I'm sure that the discussion will have cropped up.
11 September 2006, 02:08 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: never the same place twice
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by legb4rsk
Anything that impears your vision,even slightly, whilst driving is a hazard.You really don't need a law for that,it's common sense.
Thats it, how do i go about making snow, fog, heavy rain and really sunny days against the law, they all at least once in my time behind the wheek have impared my vision.
The limit for timted windows has been set for a safe limit, i have noo doubt that this will have been tested at some point.
Tinted windows can make some cars look good. Limo black is always a no no, it looks terrible, but tinted enough to take the eye off the cluttered interior that you see through the windows is an aestheticly pleasing look to some, hence the reason why they tint there windows.
Why do the JDM models come with tinted glass?
Why do Mercedes and BMW tint there cars in the US as standard?
ANSWER, because there is a market for it, as some think it looks good.
11 September 2006, 03:53 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Markyate.Imprezas owned:-wrx-sti5typeR-p1-uk22b-modded my00. Amongst others!
Posts: 8,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EVOLUTION
Why do the JDM models come with tinted glass?
I too am not a fan of tints in the front of the car, it's utterly pointless. And I don't see what then problem is if the cop thought the tints were illegal, take them off now or be impounded. Simple fact is that they shouldn't have been on there and if you get caught then tough titty.