[shinobi]

Anybody know any good window tinting places ?
I prefer a place that will give me a lifetime warranty on the tinting if that possible.
Where did everybody get their tints at and how much did it cost ?

 

[shinobi]

any kind of warranty just in case it starts to bubble or something ?

 

[shinobi]

cool, gotta make sure the price right first tho

 

[shinobi]

so i've been looking around and wondering if I should get my front windows tinted. Everybody been saying that it's illegal to get our front windows tinted but in 1999 there was a new law that said we could get our windows tinted as long as it let's 70% of light throught.

Tint Laws for 50 States

There was also a lawsuit involving a guy caught with some marijuana because the officer pulled the guy for tinted windows.

Wallace moved to suppress the evidence found in his car
and the residence, arguing that Leiber lacked probable cause
to stop the vehicle in the first place and that the subsequent
seizure of evidence was the fruit of the unlawful stop. At the
suppression hearing, Leiber testified that the Expedition's
windows were tinted enough to make it "difficult " to view the
occupants inside. Leiber also testified that he had received
and read a flier published by the San Diego Police Depart-
ments's Traffic Division that stated that the California Vehi-
cle Code prohibits any tinting of a vehicle's front side
windows. Leiber testified that he had assumed that the flier
correctly stated the law when he made the stop.

The flier was wrong. California law allows tinting of the
windshield and front driver- and passenger-side windows so
long as the coloring permits a light transmittance of at least
70 percent. See Cal. Vehicle Code S 26708(d) .1
The district court granted the defendant's motion to sup-
press. The court relied on Whren v. United States, 517 U.S.
806 (1996), which held that law enforcement agents conduct-
ing pretextual traffic stops must have probable cause to
believe that a traffic violation occurred in order to detain a
vehicle. The court concluded that Leiber lacked the probable
cause necessary to support the pretextual traffic stop of the
Expedition because Leiber had no "objectively grounded"
legal justification for the stop. The district court reasoned:

[T]he fact that this case involves a pretextual stop
combined with Officer Leiber's (1) repeated mis-
statement of the applicable law regarding window
tinting, (2) failure to even mention the 70 percent
requirement, and (3) failure to explain why the
Expedition's windows were illegally, rather than
legally, tinted, leads the Court to find that Officer
Leiber did not have probable cause to believe that a
traffic violation had occurred.

So with all this done and said, do you guys think 70% is a alright tint ?

 

[shinobi]

blaaah, stupid california.