The product itself is not illegal; using it on a highway (as defined in the Motor Vehicle Act) is.

u cant dispute that can u?

I think that's the key: the Act doesn't state that most of these products themselves are illegal or prohibited; it only prohibits or limits their on-road use. Window tint is a good example: the tint itself is perfectly legal, but only on certain areas of the glass, and only for vehicles licensed for road use. You can completely black-out all the windows of a show car that's going to get trailered to events and never driven on the public roads; thus, TECHNICALLY, it's hard to hold the tint shop that did the job responsible if they did the job in good faith that it was not going to be driven on the road (of course, if the guy drove it in to the shop to get the job done, that's a whole other story).

Same goes for the driving lights you can get at Canadian Tire: the Act doesn't prohibit them, it simply limits them to off-road use only and states that they must be covered by an opaque cover when the vehicle is on public highways. Likewise license plate frames, which are not illegal if used on a trailered-only show car... unless a Canadian Tire employee physically follows the purchaser home to ensure the frame isn't being installed on the guy's daily driver, it's hard to hold them liable. Heck, I have three or four plate frames sitting here that were given to me as gifts, that I use simply as wall decorations... how would you hold the store liable for selling them to the gifters, or the gifters for giving them to me?

so has anyone gone to CT and gotten a refund? what did they say?

The problem with "proving an officer wrong in the field" is that the MAJORITY of the time when people argue with a police officer over something they KNOW is wrong, they are actually wrong themselves. Many people think that by reading one section of the MVA or CC makes them an expert, but they do not understand that there are 10 other sections in that, or another act or piece of law that can effect or provide an exemption/addition to that paragraph of law.

This being said you have freedom of speech and you are allowed to say almost anything you want to a police officer, as long as you are not silly and threaten them or something. If you do happen to take this route don't be pompus or the officer will likely return the same attitude right back at you. Be polite, present your concerns as questions and not acquisitions of wrongdoing and you will likely get a lot further with your concerns, and will likely get an answer that is more satisfying; however, this answer will likely bring you back down to earth and let you realize your 20minutes on RS did not make you a lawyer.

He would have to spend at least one night at a Holiday Inn Express to be fully qualified as a RS Lawyer...THEN he gets his law degree. The only problem with this law degree is that is is not recognized by Cops at roadside court sessions...or in traffic court...but here on RS, many use theirs with great skill...or so they believe. :)

Although I feel others here have answered these I will way in on the banter....

" My other questions still remain unanswered though, what do I do when an officer is obviously abusing his power...."

It may seem and (I will agree on rare ocations it is true) an officer is abusing his power by enforcing a law or regulations you disagree with does not mean he is abusing his power. It may simply be his interpretation of it or how he was trained to deal with it. You can quote a section to them (unless they are a traffic member or well prepared I would doupt they have the actual act with them so it would be hard to check), even then at road side you are not likely to change his mind but maybe.... Your options are as always, if you think the member is abusing his power, complain the the department or go to court. Once there make sure you have refrences to the relevant sections (all of them not just one that bolsters your case as often there are several that would pertain to an item). Be professional and respectful to both the officer and the judge. Ultimately it is the judges discrestion on how or in what manner a law or regulation is interpreted...

I have several members that enforce regulations in a manner that I do not neccessarily agree with as I do not interpret them in the same manner. I will not take the same enforcement action they would and if some one complains to me (I'm the boss) about it I will provide them with the required sections and even my interpretation but I also explain the members as it is not neccessarily wrong just not how I look at it.

I think a lot of RSers (and their non-RS ricer brethren) have a skewed view of what constitutes "abuse" of police power. Just because you've been through a dozen road checks and never been dicked for your 5% windshield tint, doesn't mean the next cop is "abusing" his power when he writes you a VI for it and has you towed. In fact, it simply means he's enforcing the law as he and any other cop should, and all the ones you've come across until then have simply been far more lenient (whether that's out of being nice or busy or just lazy is another matter).