Front window tint *new fines?*

[wing_woo]

Originally Posted by monoxide_tryst

Why not just approach the big bad suv with tint so dark that you cant see through it....like a cube van or other such vehicular unit that has no rear windows.

Cause on the tinted vehicle, the occupants who shot the officer were able to clearly see the police officer and shoot him.

If it was a cube van, both parties can't see each other and if the intent was to shoot the officer, it would have had to be done blindly through the metal instead of just through the window where the person inside can see who he's shooting.

[sebberry]

By permitting cube vans and trucks and other vehicles you can't see through on the roads, combined with allowing for near 0% tint to be applied to the back windows of cars, I don't think our great leaders are too concerned about visibility through a vehicle.

But by god, don't you dare step one foot out of line when it comes to tinting the front side windows even a little bit.

Driving this morning with the sun shining through my front side window I couldn't help think how much safer I'd be if my window was partially tinted and I didn't have to shield my eyes with my left hand, then be blinded as I needed to steer with my left and shift with my right.

[zulutango]

MMMMMMMMMM...Sunglasses....

[sebberry]

Sunglasses that don't interfere with my peripheral vision only provide shading from the front.

[bobbinka]

I'd be a little scared to drive in Vancouver if everyone had front tint.
Those people with the full face masks? (richmond drivers Know ehat im talking about) They'll all get the front tint. Thats a scary thought.

Simple question, would you drive with sunglasses on at night?
Posted via RS Mobile

[sebberry]

Would you be scared if the front side tint allowed you to see into their car?

And no, I don't drive with sunglasses at night, just like I've never suggested that people tint their windshield.

[monoxide_tryst]

Originally Posted by wing_woo

Cause on the tinted vehicle, the occupants who shot the officer were able to clearly see the police officer and shoot him.

If it was a cube van, both parties can't see each other and if the intent was to shoot the officer, it would have had to be done blindly through the metal instead of just through the window where the person inside can see who he's shooting.

I was referring to driving behind them, not coming up to them as an officer

[monoxide_tryst]

Originally Posted by sebberry

By permitting cube vans and trucks and other vehicles you can't see through on the roads, combined with allowing for near 0% tint to be applied to the back windows of cars, I don't think our great leaders are too concerned about visibility through a vehicle.

But by god, don't you dare step one foot out of line when it comes to tinting the front side windows even a little bit.

Driving this morning with the sun shining through my front side window I couldn't help think how much safer I'd be if my window was partially tinted and I didn't have to shield my eyes with my left hand, then be blinded as I needed to steer with my left and shift with my right.

Driving east towards langley in the morning for work is horrible through the front...even with sunglasses.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Driving this morning with the sun shining through my front side window I couldn't help think how much safer I'd be if my window was partially tinted and I didn't have to shield my eyes with my left hand, then be blinded as I needed to steer with my left and shift with my right.

Good lord, you are pathetic. "I don't agree with the tint law, so rather than do something intelligent like flip my visor around to the side like it's designed to do so I can drive safely, I'll just do something UNSAFE and then whine on the internet about how the law is FORCING me to do it."

[HansonBoy]

Originally Posted by monoxide_tryst

Driving east towards langley in the morning for work is horrible through the front...even with sunglasses.

What i do is drive even earlier... like 6am. Beat the sun.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Good lord, you are pathetic. "I don't agree with the tint law, so rather than do something intelligent like flip my visor around to the side like it's designed to do so I can drive safely, I'll just do something UNSAFE and then whine on the internet about how the law is FORCING me to do it."

Once again, you're speaking with no knowledge about the situation. My head is a little more than an inch an a half from the ceiling in my car. Flipping the visor around causes a major obstruction for vision out the side window.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Once again, you're speaking with no knowledge about the situation. My head is a little more than an inch an a half from the ceiling in my car. Flipping the visor around causes a major obstruction for vision out the side window.

And your hand doesn't?

Once again, blaming a law you don't like for your inability to cope with your own poor driving skills.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Soundy

And your hand doesn't?

Once again, blaming a law you don't like for your inability to cope with your own poor driving skills.

What does driving skill have to do with sun glare? Tint would be the lesser of two (or three) evils as it doesn't obstruct visibility like holding up a hand or using the sun visor does.

You can't see through the sun visor, tint you can

[bobbinka]

by that logic, at what % tint is visibility most optimal when driving with the sun in your eye? is what is most optimal for you also the most optimal for everyone else? what if i'm driving facing the sun? should the % be determined based on the amount of light at 8am, 3pm, or 5pm?

subjective, subjective, subjective. stop trying to come up with new scenarios. in the end it all comes down to one thing:

are you saying that what is best for you should also be the standard for everyone else?

[sebberry]

Nope, you're right.

A completely opaque visor that blocks much of the driver's view to the side is a much smarter approach than tint that allows more light to pass than it blocks.

[bobbinka]

in no way was i disputing whether your visor is a better approach or not, not sure why you brought that up.

i was addressing how you would determine what % is optimal for use so that you can "safely" block out the sun.

for someone who was criticizing Soundy's logic, yours is not very up to par either

[sebberry]

I brought up the visor because Soundy decided to once again make an uninformed comment about using it.

I know it might seem like a daunting task for a government that hasn't bothered to set any standards for tint on other windows, but set up a small study group to look at various windows with a variety of tint percentages under varying conditions.

It wouldn't be hard to pick a safe level of tint that way.

And if a light front side tint is so hard for old people with old eyes to see through, why do I see seniors with tinted front side windows? Seniors could probably benefit more as they have a harder time dealing with glare and frequently DO wear their sunglasses at night.

Beyond that, I suppose ICBC, the driving force behind our motor vehicle regulations can ring up any one of the several US states (and Canadian provinces) that permits front side tints to see how they arrived at their allowable level conculsions.

[bobbinka]

You should have definitely started off with that.

That is something I can accept, but in the end, isn't that just doing what the government tells you to do?
Posted via RS Mobile