Who do you think is responsible?

@jillhill (37384)
United States
May 21, 2008 4:31pm CST
Monday morning a gentleman I work with got an escort to work by a Minnesota State Trooper. He bought a pick up...one of those souped up ones that had tinted windows just two months ago. Well the state trooper checked and the tinting was too dark according to the law. He bought the pick up with the tinting on the windows. How was he supposed to know they were not legal? Well he didn't get a warning...but a ticket for $122.00. I would contest it. The pickup was actually done that way when he got it. And I think a warning ticket would have been more appropriate here. What is your feelings on this? Do you think he deserved a ticket or a warning?
5 people like this
21 responses
@tyc415 (5706)
• United States
21 May 08
It seems to me that the gentleman should have gotten a warning instead of a ticket. We used to have a mustang that had tinted windows and my son was pulled over one time and given a warning, then we ask a different policeman about the windows and he said they were fine and they had the mark on them that showed they were legal tint. I hope he does contest it also and that he wins his day in court.
3 people like this
@tyc415 (5706)
• United States
21 May 08
I failed to mention that the warning my son got was a verbal and not a written warning.
3 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
That's what I thought...a warning not a ticket!
2 people like this
@Hatley (164652)
• Garden Grove, California
22 May 08
the state trooper should have let him off with a warning instead of giving him a ticket, I Think. That way he would know that the windows are tinted too dark and been ableto do something about it.
3 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
I think you are right!
1 person likes this
@minnie_98214 (10574)
• United States
21 May 08
Well that just sucks. I bet if he was a pretty girl he would have gotten a warning lol. I mean really a warning would have been enough i would think. So is he gonna have the tinting removed?
3 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
I think you are right...and he removed it the next day so not to get another ticket!
2 people like this
@palonghorn (5486)
• United States
21 May 08
He had had the truck for 2 months, and sorry, but most guys, if they know anything about vehicles also know that window tinting can only be so dark and then it's illegal. Also, I'm thinking that the choice of giving him a warning or a ticket could have had to do with his attitude towards the officer, after all you have to take into account all the 'stories' officers hear when they make a traffic stop. I'm not sure that contesting the ticket wouldn't just cost him more in fees and such, best thing, pay the fine, and get the tinting off the windows.
3 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
Good point....being a woman I never thought of that...because there is no way I would have known it was even illegal!
2 people like this
@grammasnook (1877)
• United States
22 May 08
Hmmm I am curious of one thing. In mass we need an inspection sticker and if the tint was too dark they should not pass it, at least that is what I would assume. Do you need the inspections sticker where you are? I would definately fight that one.
2 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
No inspections here...but today I found out he is going to contest it....It shouldn't have been sold when it was not legal!
1 person likes this
@lilybug (21148)
• United States
28 May 08
I was just thinking the same thing about inspections when I read your response. Here in Missouri we have to get safety inspections on out vehicles before they can be registered.
1 person likes this
@cjgrooms (4456)
• United States
21 May 08
If he bought the truck new HE deserved NEITHER as the company he bought it from should know what is legal in that spacific state and should be responsible for making sure their vehicles meet those requirments. If he bought it used then sadly it is buyer beware, if he had had the truck 30 days or less i feel that he should have recieved a warning, but after that.............
2 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
It was used..but still should meet state law before being sold!
2 people like this
@cjgrooms (4456)
• United States
15 Jun 08
Thank you for the best response.
@ellie333 (21029)
21 May 08
I think in this instance a warning would have been more appropiate but the law is the law and if the tinting is illegal then perhaps he should appeal and the previous owner held responsible for selling an illegal car and made to pay the fine instead. Ellie :D
2 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
That's what I think....it shouldn't have been sold if it wasn't up to standards of the law!
2 people like this
• Canada
21 May 08
I think he deserved a warning, not a ticket. I dind't know there was a law about tinting, so I wouldn't expect him to know either. I personally would not buy a vehicle with tinted wintows, but people do. If someone is going to sell a vehicle, it's up toe the seller to make sure the vehicle is up to code.
2 people like this
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
21 May 08
I think it should be illegal to sell a car that isn't up to code! You are right!
2 people like this
@zeroflashx2 (2491)
• Philippines
22 May 08
It's kinda hard to say. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't know it's illegal. He must have though of it but must not have confirmed it until he got a ticket. As for the ticket, a warning should have been given first. Removing the tint on the spot isn't appropriate. :D
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
I think a warning would have been the fairer decision.
• Philippines
23 May 08
Agreed! :D Now, who will give the warning to that cop?? lol.
@jer31558 (3683)
• United States
22 May 08
I would probably contest it as well, but in a way I could see both sides of this situation though.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
Me too.....if it was too dark they had reason to wonder what was going on....but I think a warning would have been sufficient.
1 person likes this
@jer31558 (3683)
• United States
27 May 08
Sometimes its just according to the officer. If it had been another officer, a warning may have been all he got.
• United States
25 May 08
It is the car dealership's fault. I would contest the ticket And sue the car dealership. And I would go to my local news channel and tell my story.I would sue the car dealership for the amount of the ticket, my lawyer's fees And for replacement windows.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
25 May 08
That's what he decided to do! And I am glad....it should have been up to legal standards before they sold it!
1 person likes this
@Sissygrl (10915)
• Canada
22 May 08
I think a warning would have been better, but maybe the previous owner was warned already, they wouldhave that on file wouldn't they ?
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
Good thinking sissy....he is going to contest it!
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
22 May 08
I think a verbal warning would have been enough - that and the instructions to go to the police dept. to prove that he had the tint replaced with something that was within the law.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
I think that would have been very fair.
@checapricorn (16066)
• United States
22 May 08
wow! I guess for the first offense, a warning is appropriate! PLus,they have to give attention also to the manufacturer of this and monitor them and inform them so that the buyers/customers will not be suffering about this issue!
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
That is sooooo true!
@ersmommy1 (12600)
• United States
22 May 08
My hubby once got a ticket. The cop told him "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Guess we better all go to the library and read up. I would have given him a warning. Maybe it had something to do with quotas.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
I think it does have something to do with the quotas....they are running a safe and sober campaign over Memorial holiday!
@fwddeh (10)
• China
22 May 08
'escort'---guard,guide,convoy aircraft. I do agree with you.In this passage,I have many words to find with dictionary.But I really thank you for your writing.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
AH....thanks for posting.
@jonesy123 (3950)
• United States
22 May 08
If he bought it that way he is still responsible to know the law in his state. Most states have a problem with dark tints on windows. He may want to take it up with the seller, but it will be difficult unless it was a dealership. The seller might not have known the law either. Ignorance of the law doesn't protect from the punishment. Contesting the ticket will achieve nothing but incur more costs.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
It might....or might not. Another gentleman from work had a brother who bought a car and there was something wrong with the muffler....he fought the ticket and the lot where he bought it had to replace the muffler.
@shooie (4988)
• United States
22 May 08
Tinted Windows Law - In most states this isn't a new law. Tinted Windows rule was put into place for safety reason for law enforcement and many other reasons.
I think a warning should of been enough but the thing is if he didn't buy it new off the lot he should of checked things out. I am sure this is not a new law? Not sure where you are from but when I lived in california the tinted on the front and the front two side windows had to be lighter than the rest and the rest couldn't be that dark either. But yes a warning should of been issued first.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
Cool picture! I think a warning would have been fair.
• China
22 May 08
who do the tinting on the windows ? car producer? If so , I think the producer should be reponsible. If no, I think whoever, your friend should be responsible because police don't know who done the tinting.
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
That's true!
@lingli_78 (12845)
• Australia
22 May 08
i still think that your friend who buy the pick-up is the one who is at fault... when he bought the pick-up, he should have checked everything and realise that the tinting in the windows is too dark... you can't hold the seller liable for selling the pick-up... the buyer is the one who has to be more careful especially when purchasing a second hand goods... i'm not trying to pick on your friend... but that is my honest opinion... take care and have a nice day...
@jillhill (37384)
• United States
22 May 08
Thank you! You have a nice day too!