There are always going to be some people who really don't give a shit and have nothing better to do and IF ICBC will automatically put the other party 100% at fault there goes more than half of the frustration with a car accident.

^ and thats why some people hit their brakes and get bumped to fake injuries. they just havent learned about taillight tint yet?

My tails and headlights were tinted on my old car with lamin-x for 2 years and never had a single problem with the law enforcement.
I highly recommend using it if you do decide to tint your tails. Easy to apply, looks great, and comes right off without leaving any residue.
Here's how it looks



Headlights:

I have attended crashes where cars with tinted and covered brake/tail lights have been rear-ended. I even attended some involving motorcycles with aftermarket illegal brake/signal lights. I ticketed the vehicle owners because they contributed to the crash, where if they had stock systems where the lights were visible I would have charged the 2nd vehicle for following too close. I only did this after personally viewing the lights from the perspective that the following driver had. If the lights were difficult to see then that added to the reaction delay of the following driver. I always added the covered lights in my remarks in the crash report and indicated the following driver as "driver # 1" ( the at- fault driver) on the MV 6020. I was never questioned by ICBC in any case where I did this.

And that's why it's probably a grey area unlike what some have said about 100% at fault to prevent assholes causing accidents on purpose.

I personally wouldn't do it for obvious reasons. It sure looks gangsta or cool though, but come on people, there's a reason why you have head lights and tail lights on your cars. So you can be seen, and see better in the dark. I've seen lots of cars that tinted their lights so dark, you can barely see their tail lights and head lights. Whats the bloody point of having them if they don't serve it's purpose. They might as well black out their side mirrors, and rearview mirrors because it looks cool. Why not tint their instrument cluster, it looks cool. How about tinting their windshields fully, it looks cool.

Get my point guys - it's just plain stupid. It does look good though, but their are other ways of making your cars look better without endangering yourself and others like wheels, lowering it, etc...

"probably a grey area"

Not according to the MV Act Regulations....and likely according to ICBC when a crash is involved.

You stated yourself that you personally judge if it's visible and actually contributed to the accident. If it was a given and guaranteed to have the tinted car at fault I wonder why you're doing this. I sense a bit of contradiction in your own statements.

As part of the investigation I gather all evidence of factors that have contributed to the crash....that includes tinted/covered tail lights. In order to issue a VT for them I have to see for myself how difficult the lights were to see so that I can tell the JP in Traffic Court if it is contested. I also take a look to see if the 2nd vehicle driver is just trying to shift the blame from himself to the car he rear ended. No contradiction there, just doing a proper investigation. In the same way I will order a mechanical inspection if the driver said his brakes failed or that the tyres blew for no reason or that the brake lights did not function at all. If there are allegations of contributing mechanical defects then they should be checked out. I mean it's not like people would ever lie to the cops to escape prosecution would they? :)

zulu, just wondering, do you find yourself giving an equal amount of light tickets for tints as you do something like this?

http://carsfound.com/store/images/557-27703.jpg

The area I worked had more pickup trucks and I saw a lot more of those type covers than I did painted tail lights. If it was removed roadside there was a written warning, if it was not then I issued a VT and the car did not drive away until it was removed.

Just a touch more likely than a cop standing on his (unearned) word in traffic court.

How bout foglights? Is it illegal for me to tint my foglights?

Zulutango, while we're on this topic. Beside the example freakshow asked above.
How do you treat these tail light "guards"....and your experience with them?
http://72.32.124.231:8020/SuperConta...%20by%20Westin
http://www.xanatosautomotive.com/gal...t-Guard-BK.jpg

They don't cover as much light as tint, or the above Dodge example. Or even barely cover any lighting at all. However, they are technically "shielded, covered, or obscured..." Have you ever issued any tickets for these kind of guards?

^ thats where you start getting into an argument about what technically defines "obscured" and also whether or not an officer should be wasting his time pursuing such negligible details.

aren;t those dodge rear tails like that from factory?
and usually colour coded with the exterior paint?

also, would this be considered legal?
the lights were split and chrome housings painted black

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...u/a5fcab94.jpg

...?

Not to mention you will get ICBC on your case if you are in an accident. Those metal frames damage the body in addition to wrecking the lights in an accident. The light still breaks and now you will have extra bonus of the frame ripping @ the mount points. Good luck trying to get ICBC to cover the extra damage.

http://www.revscene.net/forums/answe...ll-t59431.html

And remember, tinting doesn't just reduce the light output from the bulbs... most cars' lights include reflectors in the housings, THAT ARE ALSO REQUIRED BY LAW... tinting reduces their effectiveness even more, because it dims the light entering them, AND the light reflected back.

...?

^ Duh.. yes it's illegal to tint or obscure ANY of your lights which are required by law to be there.

Wait, what!?!? Fog lights are required to be on all cars? How does that work? Aren't there lots of older cars that don't even have fog lights? Moreover, if they are required to be there, then their must be a requirement as to when you HAVE to turn them on.....????

LOL, RevRav, why do you keep failing me? Are you mad because I'm interested in tinting my foglights? Does that bug you?

Be thankful I didn't fail your two posts above...asking the same question nonstop.

Take a look at the first page of this thread. Do a search on "tint".
Or actually take into advise what members above have tried to explain to you.

You're not allowed to tint ANYTHING. Shall it be headlight, taillight, or fogs.

Is it "illegal"? Yes
Do some people get away with it? Yes

If you decided to do so, do it at your own risk. But as far as "can you",
many members here have already answered that question. Let me say it again - NO!

n0ob... i really dont understand why you keep asking the same questions over and over.. its already been said to you
maybe Reading Comprehension owns you?