Not unless you like champagne mid-90s Maximas.
i lol’d :lol
:lmao
yeah CMON VOT
:rofl :rofl
Yeah i saw a maxima with gearheads and knew it was you. We were in my buddies volvo picking my frined up from the airport. I was drinking the entire time.
Thanks, Olaf.
Everytime I see/hear “Gearhead Jointz,” I lol.
I dont have time to read all three pages atm… so i will put my 2 cents in anyway… like I allways do. lol
I went through the same shit. I went to the station for a poliece report about a firehydrant buried under the snow that i backed into fucking up my jeep, and left with and unsafe backing and a window tint ticket. Mother fuckers, if they want to be dicks they will… simple as that.
Like you said if they guy was smart, he would come up to you and imediatly ask you to roll your shit up. Then hand you the ticket for that. Then ask why your phone was in your hand, and give you the texting ticket. Since if he knows the law 110% like someone mentioned, that would be the correct procedure of events. But since you knew the law too, and kinda pushed his buttons (I would have done the same thing too 
) you caught him in his error and he back tracked.
But yeah your going to get the window tint ticket, and just print off your phone records for the time period that you recieved the ticket. If the ticket says 1:30PM, get the records for phone calls/texts from 1:15PM -1:30PM. It will prove he was incorrect with his assumptions and that will be dropped.
You might loose the my word vs his, with the he asked me about texting first, then I mentioned he cant do that without a initial offense thats when e wrote the tint. Unless your uber respectfull to the da/judge and they are too on your side, I see the tint sticking sorry to say.
Guys. I’m not denying that I had my phone out. I DID.
The problem I have…is that he had no reason to pull me over in the first place (since he clearly didn’t notice my tint till he started fishing for something to get me on). I wasn’t speeding, I wasn’t swerving, I driving the way I was supposed to be driving. Only thing is, I had my phone out. And only when I gave him shit about not knowing the law, did he decide to write me a ticket for tint.
I’m NOT complaining. I just find it funny. That was the sole purpose of the thread.
:facepalm
I’ve been through courts before, I know how it all works. I’m fine and dandy. I’ll either just pay the fines, or have them reduced. No big deal for me. I just don’t like it when people try to get one over on me or anyone else I know. If you’re going to stop me for something, make sure it’s legit to begin with (meaning know your damn law book that sits in your car with you while your on the clock).
How did he not have any reason for pulling you over??
I wasn’t doing anything wrong (according to the law). You can argue the ‘texting impairs your ability to drive’ card all day, but the point of the matter is, according to the law book in his car…I was not committing a primary offense and therefore he has no grounds to pull me over AT THAT TIME. Simple as that.
And if you’re going to say I had tint and that makes me wrong/me doing something wrong, then you’re just playing devils advocate. I’m going to venture and say 60% of the cars around me at the time had tinted windows.
Okay I don’t know if this was touched on yet as I have not read everything.
Ilya, you thinking that the cop having no reason/right or however you put it to pull you over for texting (secondary offense) was your first mistake. Johny big dick law can and will pull you over for whatever reason he/she wants and can issue you a ticket for a secondary offense without issuing a ticket for a primary offense. They can make up whatever the fuck they want as a primary offense to pull you over and then issue you a texting ticket. YES “Technicaly” there needs to be a primary offense for them to write you a ticket for texting, but THEY DONT HAVE TO WRITE YOU UP FOR THAT PRIMARY OFFENSE. They’re supposed to have a reason for stopping you int he first place other than the phone, such as speeding etc.
The reason he pulled you over besides seeing your phone was probably your tint, he considered that the primary offense, had you kept your mouth shut he wouldent have written you a tint ticket and just issued a ticket for being on the phone
As you say you “dont care” about paying for a tint ticket thats cool, makes you look like more of a jackass for not caring that you may have to cough up $150 bucks becuase you dont know how shut your mouth to someone whos got a bigger dick than you.
Yes you were, you were driving in a vehicle that was not up to NYS Law. Regardless of our cars and how we feel about it in the laws eyes none the less the cops eyes you were doign something wrong and it was the perfect reason to pull you over and then get on you about texting.
Anyways read above post.
Anyway to sum up this fail of a thread.
Jokes on you buddy, you got the tickets.
lock 1
lock 2
lock 3
Lock 4
rofl:rofl
+rep
nvm i gotta spread it around first
lock 5, mods do ur jobs
What I REALLY don’t like here is this blanket bowing down to police as if they shouldn’t be held accountable like any other human being performing any other profession. More on that later, more of a side issue not my main point. I would personally call the game where the officer said “Yes and then you put it up to your ear…” Right there. And clearly his windsheild is not tinted at all, his signature pic shows this. The officer could see what he was doing. This is a lie to try and get somewhere.
Now for the disclaimer. I will side with others here I have been in a couple sticky situations and I think because of my utter respect, compliance and submittal I got away scot-free or almost and quite luckily. I’ve nothing but a front plate ticket to show for 5 years of driving. I would and will always act in this way. Just my nature. I don’t have that much cojones.
However, I’d like to have witnessed this whole thing. I’d like to know what the officer was thinking. If indeed the tint didn’t come into play until later, then I’m with the OP 100%.
I have very mixed feelings on tint. From the LEO’s perspective it’s scary and can veil threats. Bad. So IF indeed it wasn’t his primary concern (and maybe we’ll never know) then why not? This is less of a threat than someone holding a phone out at arms’ length and not driving erratically? Then we could argue over the law itself and well should we ban using mp3 players too? Holding a map etc…whatever.
To my other point…my PD3 class last semester (im majoring in Computer Sys. Engineering) talked about how “as engineers we are allowed a pedestal by society in the form of escalated earnings and trust that we uphold the code of engineering ethics”. What about when 6000 pounds of concrete come crashing down on a vehicle in a tunnel in Boston? What about when a walkway in a Hyatt hotel collapses sending people plunging stories helplessly? I think we do (and should) allow LEO’s a similar “respect” but there has to be accountability. I’m sorry, but I believe in a “healthy disrespect of authority” or however the saying goes.
Maybe I actually hate our lawmakers for enacting rules that are nothing more than revenue generators in disguise. Tint is not one of those. Cellphone use I believe is. And I don’t like that “the LEO is always right”. Maybe that’s the best/safest/most efficient way of doing things, doesn’t mean I have to like it. As a strong Conservative, as someone who doesn’t like how in 200 years our nation has gone from the spirit of escaping a strong central government to, in many ways, trying to imitate that which we escaped, I can only see that mentality as the same thing.
Just my opinion, and I have a right to express it here, whether or not it’s funny, agreed upon, or mono-toned in expression or not. Just like PJB has the right to be Eyore if he wants to. I don’t see Admins complaining about a waste of space from such posts. For every PJB post, for every Ilya post there are many many more parroting the same or similar criticism of the original post. 
Just a thought.
+1
you can’t beat NYS