When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Wasn't speeding or doing anything stupid in either state. Just driving along and they stopped me for no front license plate and window tint. Nothing else was brought up.
Some states don't even issue a front plate, no way the missing front plate can be enforced. Same with tint, if its legal in your state and you're passing through there's nothing a cop can do either....
After reading posts further down you were not legal in your state either, still pretty far fetched that a cop can enforce a state law across state lines. Not something I'm worried about at all and probably something you could have fought in court, or just a ticket you could have ignored....
The problem I have with tint is not being able to see at night. The 2012 F350 when I bought it had tint on the windows, and I had to remove it because, living out in the country, I could not see anything out the side windows, which meant I could not see the mirrors and nearly backed into a tree I couldn't see, so off it came.
I used to have a black Ford Flex Titanium, the only thing on it that was not black was the Limited plaque on the tailgate. I called it Darth Vagon because the front grille and lights looked like the helmet worn in the later Star Wars movies. I put limo tint on all the back windows and that car looked Fooking GREAT, but was totally illegal! You could NOT see inside let alone see outside through the back.
The problem I have with tint is not being able to see at night. The 2012 F350 when I bought it had tint on the windows, and I had to remove it because, living out in the country, I could not see anything out the side windows, which meant I could not see the mirrors and nearly backed into a tree I couldn't see, so off it came.
I used to have a black Ford Flex Titanium, the only thing on it that was not black was the Limited plaque on the tailgate. I called it Darth Vagon because the front grille and lights looked like the helmet worn in the later Star Wars movies. I put limo tint on all the back windows and that car looked Fooking GREAT, but was totally illegal! You could NOT see inside let alone see outside through the back.
You're located in IL right? You can make the rears as dark as you want, spray paint them, and its legal. It's the fronts that you can only tint so dark to be legal.
You're located in IL right? You can make the rears as dark as you want, spray paint them, and its legal. It's the fronts that you can only tint so dark to be legal.
Illinois Window Tint Law
Windshield: Non-reflective tint is allowed on the top 6 inches of the windshield.
Front Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Back Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Rear Window: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
The stuff I put on was 5% light.
SUV can be dark tinted though, but the FLEX was a CUV and fell into the Sedan category.
Windshield: Non-reflective tint is allowed on the top 6 inches of the windshield.
Front Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Back Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Rear Window: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
That"s odd since the factory privacy glass on the rear of most cars and trucks is right around 20% VLT. So they would be illegal, stock, right off the lot.
Here in California there is no limit on the rear glass, but the fronts have to be minimum 70% VLT. That also happens to be the VLT% of non tinted glass.
I don't understand why we are ragging on this guy about his tint. The dude has a medical condition. If he feels comfortable being able to see out of the truck, that's good for him. I know a couple of older people near me that have tint that dark on vehicles due to eye issues, and having a "doctor's excuse" so-to-speak, keeps them from getting tickets as well. I'm sure there are a lot of states with exemptions like this.
Because one of the primary reasons for tint laws is the safety of LEOs. If the guy has an eye condition, he could wear glasses. That cures his issue and keeps LEOs safe if they have a need to pull the vehicle over. I can't believe any state would allow two layers of 5% tint. That just blows my mind. Furthermore, it's dangerous for other motorists at night. NO WAY he can see out of that truck safely at night. If a guy hit my truck and he had two layers of 5% on his glass you better believe he'd be getting a phone call from a lawyer.
Because one of the primary reasons for tint laws is the safety of LEOs. If the guy has an eye condition, he could wear glasses. That cures his issue and keeps LEOs safe if they have a need to pull the vehicle over. I can't believe any state would allow two layers of 5% tint. That just blows my mind. Furthermore, it's dangerous for other motorists at night. NO WAY he can see out of that truck safely at night. If a guy hit my truck and he had two layers of 5% on his glass you better believe he'd be getting a phone call from a lawyer.
If you are innocent until proven guilty how can an LEO claim your dark windows are making him unsafe? That is about the dumbest argument for LEO safety I've heard yet. He has to assume you are doing something wrong to feel unsafe.
Windshield: Non-reflective tint is allowed on the top 6 inches of the windshield.
Front Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Back Side windows: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
Rear Window: Must allow more than 35% of light in.
The stuff I put on was 5% light.
SUV can be dark tinted though, but the FLEX was a CUV and fell into the Sedan category.
Interesting, I thought it may be a SUV. It also makes no sense that a car has those requirements while a SUV and Van have these requirements: Windshield: Non-reflective tint is allowed on the top 6 inches of the windshield.
Front Side windows: Must allow more than 50% of light in.
Back Side windows: Any darkness can be used.
Rear Window: Any darkness can be used.
There are no mention of trucks on the website I found, where do those fall?
If you are innocent until proven guilty how can an LEO claim your dark windows are making him unsafe? That is about the dumbest argument for LEO safety I've heard yet. He has to assume you are doing something wrong to feel unsafe.
"innocent until proven guilty" is a judiciary principle, not a law enforcement principle.
I think you are misunderstanding what the previous poster wrote which was the law on tint level is based, in part, on LEO safety concerns. It was not, as I read it, written to mean the LEO could pull you over simply because the tint made them feel unsafe. The LEO can observe that the window tint is darker than allowed by law, pull you over and give you a ticket for it. The LEO may verify with a tint level meter. You can go to court and plead not guilty. Then law enforcement would have to present their evidence to prove your guilt. If they are not able to do that to the judge's satisfaction, then you are off the hook (innocent until proven guilty).
If you are innocent until proven guilty how can an LEO claim your dark windows are making him unsafe? That is about the dumbest argument for LEO safety I've heard yet. He has to assume you are doing something wrong to feel unsafe.
If the cop can't see in the side window, he/she can't tell if the occupants have a gun pointed at them when they walk up.
If the cop can't see in the side window, he/she can't tell if the occupants have a gun pointed at them when they walk up.
What about armed occupants in the back seat? Many states, even those that don't allow dark tint on the fronts, do allow unlimited on the rears. Are we to take that as meaning rear seat occupants are not a threat? Only driver and front passengers pose a threat I guess. The officers can ask that you roll the windows down, prior to, or as they approach. Just as they do and would without tint.
The laws, and reasoning behind them are pretty weak. I don't doubt that officer visibility of the driver is reason, with dark tint they can't see if your seatbelt is on, or if you're holding your cell phone, or some sort of non officer related safety concern. But are they legitimate concerns. States that allow front and rear tint, are they seeing a meaningful number of assualts on officers or traffic incidents because of the tint? Personally, I doubt it.
Interesting, I thought it may be a SUV. It also makes no sense that a car has those requirements while a SUV and Van have these requirements: Windshield: Non-reflective tint is allowed on the top 6 inches of the windshield.
Front Side windows: Must allow more than 50% of light in.
Back Side windows: Any darkness can be used.
Rear Window: Any darkness can be used.
There are no mention of trucks on the website I found, where do those fall?
It was a 60 year old lady at the time working at the courthouse not a gearhead. The risk was worth the ticket. Both are victimless crimes.
You have to be kidding. First you knowingly have illegal tint on your truck then you illegally put your truck’s plates on another truck to scam a courthouse employee. If I were your judge you would be facing jail time and a heavy fine, victimless crime or not. [/b]