Got roped for my tail light tints
Thread Starter
|
1st Gear
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: South Florida
Got roped for my tail light tints
So I had this light grey film on my GP's tail lights that matched the color of the thunder blue paint almost perfectly. It really looked incredible. Just a very light smoke film. You could still see the brake lights from a mile away. We the other day I got pulled over (on my birthday). The highway patrolman claimed that actual taillights must be red even when the lights are off during the day. And it didn't matter how light the tint was, if the it changed the color of the actual plastic casing from red then it was illegal. Classic case of yet another ignorant uneducated cop. 2 minutes later an Infinity SUV drove by with silver tail lights from the factory. Apparently infinity didn't get the memo. To make it worse the cop said that if I tore them of the fine would be less. So I tore my beloved film off and my fine dropped from $110 to $95. Wow terrific. Does anyone know if this is a moving violation?
I don't know why you took them off. Go to court and have it tossed out. Just bring photos of factory cars with white lenses. If you lose, at least you tried. The law probably is specific in reflectivity and other things. It very well may say red, but may be refering to the bulbs. You have to research the exact wording of the statue you were sited for. You can find that online easily.
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 11,899
Likes: 2
From: Fredericksburg, VA
Regardless of what other factory vehicles have installed, state law determines what is and what is not legal.
Florida statute, with accented applicable points:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...316/Sec234.HTM
Florida statute, with accented applicable points:
316.234 Signal lamps and signal devices.--
(1) Any vehicle may be equipped and, when required under this chapter, shall be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of the vehicle which shall display a red or amber light, visible from a distance of not less than 300 feet to the rear in normal sunlight, and which shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake, and which may but need not be incorporated with one or more other rear lamps. An object, material, or covering that alters the stop lamp's visibility from 300 feet to the rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a stop lamp.
(2) Any vehicle may be equipped and, when required under s. 316.222(2), shall be equipped with electric turn signals which shall indicate an intention to turn by flashing lights showing to the front and rear of a vehicle or on a combination of vehicles on the side of the vehicle or combination toward which the turn is to be made. The lamps showing to the front shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable and, when signaling, shall emit white or amber light. The lamps showing to the rear shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and, when signaling, shall emit a red or amber light. Turn signal lamps on vehicles 80 inches or more in overall width shall be visible from a distance of not less than 500 feet to the front and rear in normal sunlight, and an object, material, or covering that alters the lamp's visibility from a distance of 500 feet to the front or rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a turn signal lamp. Turn signal lamps on vehicles less than 80 inches wide shall be visible at a distance of not less than 300 feet to the front and rear in normal sunlight, and an object, material, or covering that alters the lamp's visibility from a distance of 300 feet to the front or rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a turn signal lamp. Turn signal lamps may, but need not be, incorporated in other lamps on the vehicle.
(3) A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
(1) Any vehicle may be equipped and, when required under this chapter, shall be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of the vehicle which shall display a red or amber light, visible from a distance of not less than 300 feet to the rear in normal sunlight, and which shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake, and which may but need not be incorporated with one or more other rear lamps. An object, material, or covering that alters the stop lamp's visibility from 300 feet to the rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a stop lamp.
(2) Any vehicle may be equipped and, when required under s. 316.222(2), shall be equipped with electric turn signals which shall indicate an intention to turn by flashing lights showing to the front and rear of a vehicle or on a combination of vehicles on the side of the vehicle or combination toward which the turn is to be made. The lamps showing to the front shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable and, when signaling, shall emit white or amber light. The lamps showing to the rear shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and, when signaling, shall emit a red or amber light. Turn signal lamps on vehicles 80 inches or more in overall width shall be visible from a distance of not less than 500 feet to the front and rear in normal sunlight, and an object, material, or covering that alters the lamp's visibility from a distance of 500 feet to the front or rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a turn signal lamp. Turn signal lamps on vehicles less than 80 inches wide shall be visible at a distance of not less than 300 feet to the front and rear in normal sunlight, and an object, material, or covering that alters the lamp's visibility from a distance of 300 feet to the front or rear in normal sunlight may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a turn signal lamp. Turn signal lamps may, but need not be, incorporated in other lamps on the vehicle.
(3) A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
Something similar happened to someone I used to know a long time ago, basically they were pulled over because their front indicator (turn signal) was white and not amber. they argued with the cop, he went back to his patrol car, came back and apologized because he looked it up and got it wrong. where I live, the front signals can be white or amber, back must be red or amber. anyways, good luck, I would fight it if I were you!
OVERDRIVE
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,233
Likes: 128
From: San Francisco
To be legal, you must have red reflectors in the rear. Red reflectors are normally integrated in the red taillight lens, but you can have clear taillight lenses as long as you also have red reflectors somewhere else. The OEM clear taillight retrofit kit includes red reflectors to be mounted on the bumper.
You might still be legal if it can reflect red through the tint (and it must reflect brightly enough).
You might still be legal if it can reflect red through the tint (and it must reflect brightly enough).
4th Gear
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 525
Likes: 1
The law posted by wandrur says red light FROM THE LAMPS at 300 feet. However, the next part will get you. If you can prove that the film does not alter the appearance of your lamps WHILE THE BRAKE IS PRESSED you should be able to get off legally.
good luck
good luck
Trending Topics
OVERDRIVE
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,233
Likes: 128
From: San Francisco
Even with the tint, red light will shine through. If the tint is not too opaque, the lights might even be bright enough, or you can install brighter bulbs.
The more difficult issue is the requirement for red reflectors
You have the same issue as clear taillights. You can have them but may need to add supplemental red reflectors. Law enforcement looks for some red visible at the rear of the car, even when no lights are on.
The more difficult issue is the requirement for red reflectors
316.231 Lamps on other vehicles and equipment.--Every vehicle, including animal-drawn vehicles and vehicles referred to in s. 316.215(3), not specifically required by the provisions of this section to be equipped with lamps or other lighting devices shall at all times specified in s. 316.217 be equipped with at least one lamp displaying a white light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the front of said vehicle, and shall also be equipped with two lamps displaying red light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the rear of the vehicle, or, as an alternative, one lamp displaying a red light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the rear and two red reflectors visible from all distances of 600 to 100 feet to the rear when illuminated by the lawful lower beams of headlamps. A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
5th Gear
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 625
Likes: 6
From: Phoenix Az
Its seems to be a descretionary law here in AZ. Up to the officer of the day.. rarely would you hear of someone getting pulled over for tint or light covers.. ( unless rediculously dark where you can barely see out of the car ) But now with the economy being down, and department budgets being cut, they are making the easy money hits... basicly, when you get these type of tickets, the cop is really just saying " Show Me The Money! ".. save my job!
6th Gear
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,194
Likes: 0
From: Arizona
So I had this light grey film on my GP's tail lights that matched the color of the thunder blue paint almost perfectly. It really looked incredible. Just a very light smoke film. You could still see the brake lights from a mile away. We the other day I got pulled over (on my birthday). The highway patrolman claimed that actual taillights must be red even when the lights are off during the day. And it didn't matter how light the tint was, if the it changed the color of the actual plastic casing from red then it was illegal. Classic case of yet another ignorant uneducated cop. 2 minutes later an Infinity SUV drove by with silver tail lights from the factory. Apparently infinity didn't get the memo. To make it worse the cop said that if I tore them of the fine would be less. So I tore my beloved film off and my fine dropped from $110 to $95. Wow terrific. Does anyone know if this is a moving violation?
Its seems to be a descretionary law here in AZ. Up to the officer of the day.. rarely would you hear of someone getting pulled over for tint or light covers.. ( unless rediculously dark where you can barely see out of the car ) But now with the economy being down, and department budgets being cut, they are making the easy money hits... basicly, when you get these type of tickets, the cop is really just saying " Show Me The Money! ".. save my job!
RATTUS Deserticus
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
From: Chandler, AZ; aka Lesser Phoenix, aka BFE
Even with the tint, red light will shine through. If the tint is not too opaque, the lights might even be bright enough, or you can install brighter bulbs.
The more difficult issue is the requirement for red reflectors
You have the same issue as clear taillights. You can have them but may need to add supplemental red reflectors. Law enforcement looks for some red visible at the rear of the car, even when no lights are on.
316.231 Lamps on other vehicles and equipment.--Every vehicle, including animal-drawn vehicles and vehicles referred to in s. 316.215(3), not specifically required by the provisions of this section to be equipped with lamps or other lighting devices shall at all times specified in s. 316.217 be equipped with at least one lamp displaying a white light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the front of said vehicle, and shall also be equipped with two lamps displaying red light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the rear of the vehicle, or, as an alternative, one lamp displaying a red light visible from a distance of not less than 1,000 feet to the rear and two red reflectors visible from all distances of 600 to 100 feet to the rear when illuminated by the lawful lower beams of headlamps. A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
You have the same issue as clear taillights. You can have them but may need to add supplemental red reflectors. Law enforcement looks for some red visible at the rear of the car, even when no lights are on.
Option 1: Put two red bulbs in your brakelights that can be seen (as red) from far away
Option 2: Put one red bulb AND two reflectors that can be seen from far away
MPowerMini had two working bulbs. No infraction.
It Works, Lamin-x mades some different tints --> Link
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 11,899
Likes: 2
From: Fredericksburg, VA
The tinting was only at risk of being illegal if it changed the color of the light when lit. Statute 316.231 above basically states vehicles need to do one of the following:
Option 1: Put two red bulbs in your brakelights that can be seen (as red) from far away
Option 2: Put one red bulb AND two reflectors that can be seen from far away
MPowerMini had two working bulbs. No infraction.
Option 1: Put two red bulbs in your brakelights that can be seen (as red) from far away
Option 2: Put one red bulb AND two reflectors that can be seen from far away
MPowerMini had two working bulbs. No infraction.
For example, note the bolded section here: "Every vehicle, including animal-drawn vehicles and vehicles referred to in s. 316.215(3), not specifically required by the provisions of this section to be equipped with lamps or other lighting devices shall at all times specified..." 316.234 refers specifically to requirements for brake lights. 316.231 quoted above does not. As 316.231 states, other "provisions of this section" dictate other requirements for such lights. Ergo, MPowerMini was, in fact, in violation of Florida statute.
RATTUS Deserticus
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
From: Chandler, AZ; aka Lesser Phoenix, aka BFE
Actually, I do have some familiarity with reading statutes, though it is not my primary line of work. I quoted 316.231 as an example and with caveat primarily to address another comment regarding red lenses/reflective surfaces to note them as being required only in specific circumstances. I maintain that, provided the 300 foot visibility and color of the bulb was maintained when LIT as the OP claims, there was no infraction. Now, I would not care to be the test case, but that is how I would interpret 316.231 and 316.234. Obviously, the officer that issued the citation disagrees.
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 11,899
Likes: 2
From: Fredericksburg, VA
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. 
My comment was certainly meant for all, so I hope it wasn't taken as an attack or snippy reaction toward your comment.
The wording of 316.234 states that it cannot alter the visibility, not necessarily requiring the obscuring of it. Dimming, discoloring, or otherwise changing--in any way--the view of the lamp technically qualifies (definitionally speaking). It's likely overbroad, true, but that sort of legal challenge would need to go beyond a ticket challenge, I would think. If it truly made little to no difference, the OP should definitely challenge the ticket under the letter of the law.
My comment was certainly meant for all, so I hope it wasn't taken as an attack or snippy reaction toward your comment. The wording of 316.234 states that it cannot alter the visibility, not necessarily requiring the obscuring of it. Dimming, discoloring, or otherwise changing--in any way--the view of the lamp technically qualifies (definitionally speaking). It's likely overbroad, true, but that sort of legal challenge would need to go beyond a ticket challenge, I would think. If it truly made little to no difference, the OP should definitely challenge the ticket under the letter of the law.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
igzekyativ
MINIs & Minis for Sale
34
Jul 16, 2020 12:54 PM
cm.d
1st Gen Countryman (R60) Talk (2010-2015)
4
Aug 19, 2015 08:51 AM