Time to get my windows tinted to 20%

[KTM Rider]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/23794020/detail.html

[jkhonea]

What I find disturbing is they passed the law, yet there is this little sentence at the end.

"Legislators promised to amend the law next year to address concerns about enforcement, according to Channel 2’s Tom Regan."

OK, so let's pass yet another law without thinking it through fully. What the **** CAN the government, state or federal do right? Jesus. :rolleyes:

[LadyJaye]

After the idiot on the cell phone stopped at a green light in front of me in the pouring ass rain last Friday, I'm a big fan of banning cell phones and texting in the car!

[ga_skyline_rydr]

I have a car with tint at 30% and what a difference it makes for comfort. What always gets me is that cop cars have alot more tint, because as one cop said they are authorized. Okay with that in mind will cops be able to text while driving as they do now.

[ramm]

I have a car with tint at 30% and what a difference it makes for comfort. What always gets me is that cop cars have alot more tint, because as one cop said they are authorized. Okay with that in mind will cops be able to text while driving as they do now.

They should ban cell phone use, headset only. Like in New York,

[ugar-6]

That's a peon penalty for the under 18 law. 90 days license suspension, IF they cause an accident??? Come on.

[jkhonea]

Y'all seem to be missing my point. I have no problem with this law. What I do have a problem with is the fact that they are "revising it" next year, meaning they haven't even thought it through. In other words, half assed it.

[Ibleedgreen]

Just a ridiculous way of introducing the law, just ban all phone use already!

Hell, yesterday at an intersection near my house the person in front of me was stopped in the middle on the phone. Right in the middle, no cars could even pass and they were honking like mad. I thought for a second there might be something wrong so I got out to see if I could help. Maybe an elderly person you know. Hell no, it was a woman in her 40s. I tapped on the window and she actually rolled it down and said can I help you. I said huh, you are in the middle of the road, not a parking lot!! She was like oh my and ran the red light nearly running my foot over.

WTF, Seriously!!!

[ga_skyline_rydr]

Y'all seem to be missing my point. I have no problem with this law. What I do have a problem with is the fact that they are "revising it" next year, meaning they haven't even thought it through. In other words, half assed it.


Come on John our good state folks are just like the feds, half ass everything, ie Obama health care.:crackup:

[jkhonea]

Just a ridiculous way of introducing the law, just ban all phone use already!

Hell, yesterday at an intersection near my house the person in front of me was stopped in the middle on the phone. Right in the middle, no cars could even pass and they were honking like mad. I thought for a second there might be something wrong so I got out to see if I could help. Maybe an elderly person you know. Hell no, it was a woman in her 40s. I tapped on the window and she actually rolled it down and said can I help you. I said huh, you are in the middle of the road, not a parking lot!! She was like oh my and ran the red light nearly running my foot over.

WTF, Seriously!!!

She may have had a phone, but I imagine her stupidity went MUCH deeper than that. :D

[jkhonea]

Come on John our good state folks are just like the feds, half ass everything, ie Obama health care.:crackup:

And what a good job of it they do, too.

[SquireSCA]

I wonder where the government gets the legal authority to even make laws banning tinted windows.

With all the crap that needs fixing in our country, this is what they worry about? What percentage of tint your window has?

[Ibleedgreen]

I wonder where the government gets the legal authority to even make laws banning tinted windows.

With all the crap that needs fixing in our country, this is what they worry about? What percentage of tint your window has?

Well even though it's not even close to what the thread is about they did it for LEO protection. They can't see what's going on in the car with that dark of tint. You can get a pass on it if you have a certain eye condition or sun issues.

[SquireSCA]

Well even though it's not even close to what the thread is about they did it for LEO protection. They can't see what's going on in the car with that dark of tint. You can get a pass on it if you have a certain eye condition or sun issues.

I understand why they want to do it, I just don't see where the government has the legal right to dictate to free citizens, how dark they can tint their windows. It's my car, I am not hurting anyone, I don't see why they can tell me what I can or can't do with my windows.

[Ibleedgreen]

I understand why they want to do it, I just don't see where the government has the legal right to dictate to free citizens, how dark they can tint their windows. It's my car, I am not hurting anyone, I don't see why they can tell me what I can or can't do with my windows.

Ah yes typical Dave point of view......

[bigb996]

i vote public hanging for first offenders!

[02ep3]

What always gets me is that cop cars have alot more tint, because as one cop said they are authorized.

I've often wondered about this too. Seems like a load a crap to me. What's good for the citizen should be good for the cop.

[NiceGuysFinishLast]

I've often wondered about this too. Seems like a load a crap to me. What's good for the citizen should be good for the cop.


Generally, during a routine traffic stop, the citizen doesn't (shouldn't?) have to worry that the cop may be pulling out a gun or other lethal device to harm them.

The cop DOES have that worry about EVERY single person they pull over.

[jkhonea]

Generally, during a routine traffic stop, the citizen doesn't (shouldn't?) have to worry that the cop may be pulling out a gun or other lethal device to harm them.

The cop DOES have that worry about EVERY single person they pull over.

Now c'mon Nick, we don't have room for that logic stuff here. You'll have to leave now. :crackup:

[RydeBye]

Generally, during a routine traffic stop, the citizen doesn't (shouldn't?) have to worry that the cop may be pulling out a gun or other lethal device to harm them.

The cop DOES have that worry about EVERY single person they pull over.

I agree window tint law is retarded, just make it required that if you have tint that you have to roll down all windows when getting pulled over

[02ep3]

Generally, during a routine traffic stop, the citizen doesn't (shouldn't?) have to worry that the cop may be pulling out a gun or other lethal device to harm them.

The cop DOES have that worry about EVERY single person they pull over.

I'm familiar with the reasoning. And I didn't say that people should be allowed to have super dark tint. Heck, it's even annoying for fellow motorists e.g., it's tough to see where the driver of that darkly-tinted driver is looking.

My point is that it I'd think it better form if the police decided to lead by example and forgo the dark window tinting if they believed it such a menace to their own and public safety. It's a do-like-I-say-not-as-I-do-type thing.

[JSKeezy]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/23794020/detail.html

Beat you to it....:lol:

[KTM Rider]

beat me to what?

[JSKeezy]

beat me to what?

Windows tinted!!! Ive always had my windows tinted cause of wandering eyes and all..I just feel more protected than anything...People cant see what you go but would be hesitate to rob a car with tinted windows than without them

[KTM Rider]

oh ok. well in that case, a lot of people beat me to it:lol:

i was planning to get it done only because of this new law.:up:

[JSKeezy]

oh ok. well in that case, a lot of people beat me to it:lol:

i was planning to get it done only because of this new law.:up:

Damn texter :rofl:

[KTM Rider]

i dont have a problem with anyone who drives well, regardless of what else they are doing in their car:up:

what's next? ban eating while driving?

[JSKeezy]

i dont have a problem with anyone who drives well, regardless of what else they are doing in their car:up:

what's next? ban eating while driving?

I thought getting falacio while driving :rofl:

[gomerpyle]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/23794020/detail.html

NOTHING in the link [story] mentions anything about window tint, just texting.


You got different link?

[Mongo]

I think the point is the tint will help hide the texting.

[KTM Rider]

yes. i dont text per se when I drive but I occasionally google to get a phone number. the tint will make my actions in my car MINE.

[gomerpyle]

I think the point is the tint will help hide the texting.

GOTCHA !,,,,,, yea, that thought occurred to me AFTER I posted up, but let it ride anyway.............

STUDY after study has proven that driving while talking on the phone, hands free or otherwise, is just as deadly as drunk driving!

Taking your eyes off the road to TEXT, is Criminally INSANE !!!...or should be.

[Mongo]

It is dangerous, unless you're Frank - he's good enough he doesn't need to watch the road.

[gomerpyle]

then "Frank" is a ****ing MORON !

[Georgiacbr]

yes. i dont text per se when I drive but I occasionally google to get a phone number. the tint will make my actions in my car MINE.

Go buy a car with voice command texting on your navigation system it's safer and talk's to you like KIt (LOL)

[KTM Rider]

It is dangerous, unless you're Frank - he's good enough he doesn't need to watch the road.

some of us multitask better than others


then "Frank" is a ****ing MORON !

since you dont me i will give you a pass on the personal attacks this time:up:


Go buy a car with voice command texting on your navigation system it's safer and talk's to you like KIt (LOL)

not interested in buying a car to do what i can do now with the push of a couple buttons on my phone. thanks for the advice though.

[Mongo]

some of us multitask better than others



I'd be willing to bet I can multitask as well if not better than anyone on this board (running 2-3 radios at a track along with answering questions in person and working on a computer will do that for you)- doesn't make it any less dangerous to take your attention off of the road.

[Ibleedgreen]

^^^ Oh I'm sure you are right, nobody else here has jobs that require you to multitask. All you do is talk and walk around. :crackup:

[Mongo]

Yep, the part of the job that you see out in the paddock is all I ever do at the track, yep, you got me there...

So what is it you do for a living? The only thing I know that comes close to running control at races is a line cook.

[KTM Rider]

airline pilots are the definition of multi tasking. admittingly i have not been in that environment for a few years and with getting older i am aware of my limitations. that said anyone can mitigate risk by assessing threats. i wouldnt attempt to operate my phone either by dialing a number or googling something during high traffic volume, on surface streets, in poor visibility or any other situation where i felt it unsafe to do so. to the contrary, operating a phone by either dialing a 10 digit number or pressing 1 button for google and then typing in 8 keys and hitting the search button while cruising down the interstate with nobody around you is as safe as it can get. police officers type on their laptops while responding to calls (and dont get me started on their training-if i can run radios, twist dials, move flap handles, run cockpit flows, challenge response checklists all while flying an airplane at 200-300 mph leaving or arriving into Class B airspace in New York I can pass their little EVOC training) and many people operate GPS devices while driving. i am not going to say I am perfect. i am also not going to say that texting and driving or making a phone call and driving or googling and driving is for everyone. i havent had a problem with it and i dont intend to stop if i need to gather some info and i happen to be in my car. i will continue to make good decisions about risk management and i will roll the dice on getting a ticket just like anyone who speeds, or who drives and doesnt follow the law to a "T". unless the people here who are casting stones about my behavior are perfect in every way, then perhaps they should focus on the safe operation of their own vehicles and let me do the same.:up:

[Mongo]

Two words - auto pilot. :D

[TurboTech]

Two more....

Co-pilot, guess thats just one though.

[KTM Rider]

you mean Otto? my swedish buddy? :lol:

the AP works fine and in bad weather or during emergencies or in high density air traffic is a great tool to reduce your workload and prioritize the biggest threat at that moment but even with it engaged, you have to tell it what to do :D you have to set the desired altitude, tell the AP how to get there (lvl change, speed, rate of climb, etc) and in the aircraft i flew without autothrottles, maintain throttle control so as to observe federal speed limits.

take a departure out of Houston IAH for example.....you are at sea level for all intents and purposes. your first stop...4000 feet. after you get the a/c cleaned up on the way out and are accelerating to hold 240kts for the climb you are typically doing about 3-5k feet per minute UP. you cant bust 250Kts below 10000 feet. as you can imagine you are probably about 5-10 seconds away from a level off by the time you get caught up and you have only made one small left turn. the problem is that you are 5-10 seconds away from a level off and you have to kill 3-5k ft/min climb rate and maintain your speed no more than +10/-0 knots so you both dont bust the speed limit on the high end and dont piss off the 757 crew coming up your ass that got shot off behind you that will soon be climbing over you while passing you (damn Boeings:lol:) from behind. oh yeah and you have to do this without bouncing 51 people off the ceiling by violently pushing the nose over and pulling throttle to maintain these 3 dimensional parameters. as you can see the AP wouldnt help here much....because at 5k ft/min UP the software of it cant comprehend the level off. it needs to be more gradual. i have jumpseated this exact departure on the way home from work more times than I care to discuss and I can tell you many people screw it up and thats just Houston. Newark, and LaGuardia along with many others are much worse. If I can successfully handle that as much as I did, I think texting while driving down the interstate at 70 mph is pretty damn easy.

[KTM Rider]

Two more....

Co-pilot, guess thats just one though.

all of that is with a 2 man crew. i would not care to attempt a part 121 airline departure and all in entails single pilot. when/if 1 crewmember becomes incapacitated, the first thing that is done is to declare an emergency not just because of the incapacitated crewmember but also because that way the PIC can deviate from any rule in the book in the interest of airmanship and getting the people on the ground in one piece.

[Dan43]

I understand why they want to do it, I just don't see where the government has the legal right to dictate to free citizens, how dark they can tint their windows. It's my car, I am not hurting anyone, I don't see why they can tell me what I can or can't do with my windows.You can tint your windows as dark as you like. Make them mirrors if you want to. There is no law that says you can not do that. The law says that you can not operate a vehicle on a public roadway with window tint that does not pass X amount of light. This is no different than requiring that tires have a certain amount to tread on them rather running slicks.

[Dan43]

airline pilots are the definition of multi tasking. admittingly i have not been in that environment for a few years and with getting older i am aware of my limitations. that said anyone can mitigate risk by assessing threats. i wouldnt attempt to operate my phone either by dialing a number or googling something during high traffic volume, on surface streets, in poor visibility or any other situation where i felt it unsafe to do so. to the contrary, operating a phone by either dialing a 10 digit number or pressing 1 button for google and then typing in 8 keys and hitting the search button while cruising down the interstate with nobody around you is as safe as it can get. police officers type on their laptops while responding to calls (and dont get me started on their training-if i can run radios, twist dials, move flap handles, run cockpit flows, challenge response checklists all while flying an airplane at 200-300 mph leaving or arriving into Class B airspace in New York I can pass their little EVOC training) and many people operate GPS devices while driving. i am not going to say I am perfect. i am also not going to say that texting and driving or making a phone call and driving or googling and driving is for everyone. i havent had a problem with it and i dont intend to stop if i need to gather some info and i happen to be in my car. i will continue to make good decisions about risk management and i will roll the dice on getting a ticket just like anyone who speeds, or who drives and doesnt follow the law to a "T". unless the people here who are casting stones about my behavior are perfect in every way, then perhaps they should focus on the safe operation of their own vehicles and let me do the same.:up:If you are multitasking while driving you are not making good decisions about risk management.

[NiceGuysFinishLast]

If you are multitasking while driving you are not making good decisions about risk management.


So you firmly believe that there's NO environment in which a cell phone and vehicle can safely be operated simultaneously? Bet you NEVER speed, you wear full gear EVERY ride, and you floss your teeth EVERY night (hell.. I wish I was that good about that one haha) too. I'm not disagreeing that there are too many distracted, and therefore dangerous drivers on the road. I'm just saying some of us are intelligent enough to know when such distractions are acceptably safe and when they are not. I know you're just going to say "That's what they all think", and nothing I say will dissuade you, because you don't know me, or my level of driving ability, or ability to multitask, or my intelligence. We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying don't ban texting, I'm all for it. Hopefully it will keep the idiots who ARE a very real, very large danger to themselves and others from doing it as much. That being said, if it becomes a law, I'll break it occasionally, just like I do other traffic laws, like when I speed, or when I sometimes don't come to a complete stop at a stop sign, or at a red light before turning right. I'll break it when I personally feel it is safe and responsible to do so, and i'll accept the risk of a ticket, just like I always do.

[Dan43]

So you firmly believe that there's NO environment in which a cell phone and vehicle can safely be operated simultaneously?Sure there is. A straight road, in good weather, driving a well maintained vehicle. Oh and your the only vehicle on the road.


Bet you NEVER speed, you wear full gear EVERY ride, and you floss your teeth EVERY night (hell.. I wish I was that good about that one haha) too. I never claimed that. But I don't do those things and then claim that I was "making good decisions about risk management".


I'm not disagreeing that there are too many distracted, and therefore dangerous drivers on the road. I'm just saying some of us are intelligent enough to know when such distractions are acceptably safe and when they are not. I know you're just going to say "That's what they all think", and nothing I say will dissuade you, because you don't know me, or my level of driving ability, or ability to multitask, or my intelligence. We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think a person with Micheal Schumachers driving ability, Steven Hawkings intelligence or a computers ability to multitask has any business multitasking behind the wheel of a vehicle with other vehicles on the road. There are too many variables that you have no control over.


I'm not saying don't ban texting, I'm all for it. Hopefully it will keep the idiots who ARE a very real, very large danger to themselves and others from doing it as much. That being said, if it becomes a law, I'll break it occasionally, just like I do other traffic laws, like when I speed, or when I sometimes don't come to a complete stop at a stop sign, or at a red light before turning right. I'll break it when I personally feel it is safe and responsible to do so, and i'll accept the risk of a ticket, just like I always do.I am a big supporter of people making choices for themselves, as long as they are willing to accept the consequences of the decisions they choose to make. With that said, I think that the penalties for multitasking while operating a vehicle should be about the same as they are for DUI.

[NiceGuysFinishLast]

I feel that if you cause an accident while multitasking, definitely, the penalties should rival a DUI (which, in many cases, aren't strong enough, IMHO).

[Wheedle]

I believe they should start popping people for shitty driving in general... and hard...

[KTM Rider]

Sure there is. A straight road, in good weather, driving a well maintained vehicle. Oh and your the only vehicle on the road.

That is exactly how I use my phone while driving and how I will continue to use it. That is managed risk IMO.

[NiceGuysFinishLast]

i believe they should start popping people for shitty driving in general... And hard...


^^this

[Dan43]

That is exactly how I use my phone while driving and how I will continue to use it. That is managed risk IMO.I don't know where you are driving, but I can't remember the last time there was not another vehicle on the road with me.

[MX Tuner]

That would be the middle of Kansas.

[KTM Rider]

I don't know where you are driving, but I can't remember the last time there was not another vehicle on the road with me.


That would be the middle of Kansas.

Actually it is I575 at about 0630 in the morning heading north from Canton to my office. There are other vehicles on the road but they are.5 to 1 mile either in front or behind me effectively making me the only vehicle on the road since it takes me ~30 seconds to 1 minute to cover those distances assuming the other vehicle came to immediate stop which is impossible.

Much the same as when I used to ride a motorcycle on the street, I dont do the "ride around in a group" thing. I am either passing the idiots to drive alone or I am letting them pass me to drive alone. That way all I have to worry about is me and wildlife. Again.....risk management. If I find myself in a situation where I have to ride next to the idiots for longer than it takes to either pass of be passed, then my priorities shift and that is all I focus on.

Like I said...it works for me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and their lifestyles/geographic locations may not permit them to be in the same situations as I routinely find myself in but my opinion is that what I am doing and when and where I do it is no more dangerous than making a phone call. Remember you have to press 10 button to make a phone call which is "legal". How is pressing 10 buttons to get a different type of information any different? People that want to use their phones while driving but want to ban texting are hypocrites.

[Dan43]

Remember you have to press 10 button to make a phone call which is "legal". How is pressing 10 buttons to get a different type of information any different? People that want to use their phones while driving but want to ban texting are hypocrites.I have never drawn a line between different uses of a phone while driving. In fact I have not specified phone use. I object to multitasking of any kind while driving.

[Mongo]

Actually it is I575 at about 0630 in the morning heading north from Canton to my office.

So wait - you need to use google maps to find your office every morning?

As for the calling - I agree, don't like it either.

[KTM Rider]

then remove your radio, your window handles/switches, your air conditioning control knobs, and anything else that you could possibly touch or fiddle with while in the car. i think someone who is either afraid to or unable to operate basic controls of aux systems/devices while moving down a lightly traveled interstate between 60-75mph is more dangerous than someone like me. every day I encounter other drivers who have both hands on the wheel, sitting about 3 inches from the airbag and staring straight ahead in a catatonic state and yes those drivers shouldnt use a cell phone....hell those drivers, whose field of vision when driving is exactly 10 feet in front of them, shouldnt even be driving but they are.

not sure why we are still discussing this actually. GA made it illegal to account for the weakest link in the chain or the lowest common denominator in our society. does that mean everybody is incapable of safely operating a car and a phone? of course not! will i still do it? absolutely. choosing to continue is no different than speeding. unlike speeding though (and with my windows darker :lol:) it will be much harder to get in trouble for this.

[KTM Rider]

So wait - you need to use google maps to find your office every morning?

As for the calling - I agree, don't like it either.

No. I might need a phone number. I might press one, yes exactly one button to have my email pop up so I can see who sent me emails overnight so I can know what to expect when I walk into the office that day. Or any other reason. Why does it matter? Would you ask someone why they speed? Maybe they speed to never have to ride next to the same idiot for more than a few seconds. Maybe they were late. Who cares? If they are maintaining their lane and not driving erratically and therefore not putting me in a position where I feel in danger, just because they might be breaking the law doesnt necessarily mean I give a shit.