Limo's have super dark tint, but it is front the driver's shoulder's back, and therefore entirely legal. I disagree with the tinting laws simply due to the fact that I do not think a 35% up front is dangerous. Anything darker than that i dont see being either necessary or safe, but that is just my opinion

Tint laws are flawed.

Rear tint can black out the windows. That creates a reduction in visibility for the driver behind you. It also makes it hard for you to see out of your car at night. There's no reason for anything more than a 75% reduction in light transmission for rear windows, IMO.

Rear side tint exposes rear passengers to supposedly extremely dangerous conditions should the vehicle be in a collision. We're also told that the rear seat is the safest for babies and toddlers.

75% or lighter on the front sides and 35% or lighter on the rest of the windows from the B pillar back should be legal.

I hate following behind a car that I cannot see through or see what the driver is doing. Dark tint makes it hard to see if the driver is paying attention to the road or if I need to leave extra space if the driver is distracted. It also makes it harder for me to watch traffic further down the road.

Here we go again... :banghead::willnill:

That's why ANY rear tint requires the presence of BOTH side mirrors.

How about cube vans and the like, with 100% reduction in rear visibility?

True, that does fly in the face (pardon the pun) of the argument that ANY tint or film adversely affects the "safety performance" of the glass.

Oh pfft. Are you going to eliminate tall headrests as well??

And then limit the maximum height of all cars? How do you ever survive driving behind cargo vans?

Don't forget semi trucks. 100% reduction in rear visibility and they're the biggest things on the road. <sarcasm> HOLY CRAP WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!! </sarcasm>

Plus if sebberry is focused that much on the driver in front, guess what, he's not paying attention to anything else that's going on. By checking if the other driver is distracted, you sir have become distracted.

Forgive me for forgetting here but why is rear tint supposed to be bad? It keeps everything in one piece being that it's on the inside....

Just because some vehicles prevent you from seeing through them (work vans, semis, etc...) doesn't mean you should intentionally block visibility through passenger cars.

As for checking to see if the driver ahead is distracted, that is just part of the many things I watch out for. I want to make sure other drivers around me are paying attention. Should I remove my rear view mirror because I shouldn't be using it to watch the driver behind me? Monitoring drivers who might be distracted allows me to alter my following distance and other aspects of my driving to minimize the possibility of those drivers hitting me.

Besides, isn't that why front side tint is illegal? It prevents other drivers from seeing if the driver behind the tint is paying attention to you.

You should maintain a distance that is safe no matter if the drivers are distracted or not.

I do. But I'd prefer to know who appears to be paying attention and who isn't. If I can see someone in a car near me who is screwing around with make-up or off in la-la land singing along to the radio, I can make a mental note that that driver is one to keep an eye on as we travel along the road.

^Are you related to boxeraddict??

who?