Vehicle tint laws for civilians vs government vehicles

[GunRelated]

I consider the two issues to be one. It’s a privacy issue that cops don’t want to deal with and so safety concerns are cited. They don’t want anyone being able to maintain a certain degree of privacy while in their car because they can’t see what’s going on.

But yet, we must allow them their privacy. 2 groups of people, neither are criminals, both have the ability to be, but only one is assumed to be.

Rules for thee, but not for me.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

But yet, we must allow them their privacy. 2 groups of people, neither are criminals, both have the ability to be, but only one is assumed to be.

Rules for thee, but not for me.

Redundantly creating whining posts on Bayou Shooter doesn't exactly change your imagined problem. Why not call your legislator, who can actually effect change, and try and get it changed ?

 

[GunRelated]

Redundantly creating whining posts on Bayou Shooter doesn't exactly change your imagined problem. Why not call your legislator, who can actually effect change, and try and get it changed ?

Where in this thread did I state that the purpose of creating this thread was to change the law?
I did say, however, maybe if there were enough people who felt the same way I do about this subject, maybe there would be a chance of changing it but that is highly unlikely even if every other citizen felt the same because the law does not exist for the citizens, it exists for the state.

 

[GunRelated]

Redundantly creating whining posts on Bayou Shooter doesn't exactly change your imagined problem. Why not call your legislator, who can actually effect change, and try and get it changed ?

If you don't like the redundant post, maybe you should participate in another thread because this thread has already come around full circle 2 or 3 times. It will continue to do so because all roads lead back to the same answer of why this law even exists in the first place.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

Where in this thread did I state that the purpose of creating this thread was to change the law?
I did say, however, maybe if there were enough people who felt the same way I do about this subject, maybe there would be a chance of changing it but that is highly unlikely even if every other citizen felt the same because the law does not exist for the citizens, it exists for the state.

Why not try calling. Maybe there are more people like you that are mad that L.E. gets exemptions.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

If you don't like the redundant post, maybe you should participate in another thread because this thread has already come around full circle 2 or 3 times. It will continue to do so because all roads lead back to the same answer of why this law even exists in the first place.

Not saying I do or dont like them. You just keep repeating the same stuff over and over with no solution but to cry about it, and hate L.E.

 

[GunRelated]

Not saying I do or dont like them. You just keep repeating the same stuff over and over with no solution but to cry about it, and hate L.E.

I'm not crying or whining, and I don't hate LE. I'm not sure where that is coming from. I am 110% not a cryer or a whiner, I've experienced far too much in this life to cry or whine over absolutely anything, you definitely got the wrong one.

Aside from that, I am not one to just be ok with certain things because they have always been status quo. That does not mean that I believe any change will come from voicing my opinion, nor does it mean that I care enough to actually lead an effort to make those changes.
This country was founded on freedom; a country for the people, by the people, where the people reign over the government and not the other way around. That's where my stance will be on any issue, regardless of how big or how small, regardless if it's about firearms, speech, privacy.
A lot of people are ok with things the way they are. Maybe they are content, maybe they are scared to speak their mind, maybe the system has programmed them well enough that they don't even see any wrong in it's design and implementation. I am not one of those people. You may choose to be one and that is ok, but I cannot be - it's just not in me.

 

[GunRelated]

I'm not sure why I failed to remember this before but since it came to mind, I'll share.

About 10 years ago, I rented a vehicle to go on a trip to the east coast. It was a Chevy HHR (cringe), rented from Enterprise in Denham Springs. I left my house later in the night, myself and a friend of mine. We passed through Alabama around 3 in the morning, where we were stopped by Alabama state police. I was doing the speed limit, with no other driving errors. Officer approached the car, asked the usual questions and asked for usual identification. I provided and answered all questions politely. I then asked him what was the reason for the stop. His answer, "your tint is too dark on the rear windows".
This is a rental, with factory tint, so obviously, the tint was not illegal, nor was it the reason for the stop.
He then proceeded to ask me if he could search my vehicle, to which I replied, "no, thank you. It's freezing outside, it's 3 AM, I'm tired, and I just want to get to where I'm going. There is nothing illegal in this vehicle".
So, of course, he made me stay there and wait for a K9. They walked the K9 around the car, slapping it and giving commands to the dog. So of course, what happens... The dog hits the car just like he was trained to do.
So we had to sit outside in below freezing temps, for almost an hour, while they stripped the car apart for nothing. No citation, no drugs ever in the vehicle.
So any of you that will sit here and say that cops will not use small infractions, like tint, or seatbelts, or even make something up like in this case; you can blow that smoke up someone else's poo shooter because I know better, and so do a lot of other people.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

I'm not sure why I failed to remember this before but since it came to mind, I'll share.

About 10 years ago, I rented a vehicle to go on a trip to the east coast. It was a Chevy HHR (cringe), rented from Enterprise in Denham Springs. I left my house later in the night, myself and a friend of mine. We passed through Alabama around 3 in the morning, where we were stopped by Alabama state police. I was doing the speed limit, with no other driving errors. Officer approached the car, asked the usual questions and asked for usual identification. I provided and answered all questions politely. I then asked him what was the reason for the stop. His answer, "your tint is too dark on the rear windows".
This is a rental, with factory tint, so obviously, the tint was not illegal, nor was it the reason for the stop.
He then proceeded to ask me if he could search my vehicle, to which I replied, "no, thank you. It's freezing outside, it's 3 AM, I'm tired, and I just want to get to where I'm going. There is nothing illegal in this vehicle".
So, of course, he made me stay there and wait for a K9. They walked the K9 around the car, slapping it and giving commands to the dog. So of course, what happens... The dog hits the car just like he was trained to do.
So we had to sit outside in below freezing temps, for almost an hour, while they stripped the car apart for nothing. No citation, no drugs ever in the vehicle.
So any of you that will sit here and say that cops will not use small infractions, like tint, or seatbelts, or even make something up like in this case; you can blow that smoke up someone else's poo shooter because I know better, and so do a lot of other people.

Cause there is NO WAY someone used a rental car before you to move drugs. It had to be the dog that's not properly trained (which is documented for court scrutiny in big cases). Couldn't have been residual scent. Those damm cops and their entrapment.

Cool story bro.

 

[MOTOR51]

Cause there is NO WAY someone used a rental car before you to move drugs. It had to be the dog that's not properly trained (which is documented for court scrutiny in big cases). Couldn't have been residual scent. Those damm cops and their entrapment.

Cool story bro.

Bingo. Poor fella actually believes the drug dogs are trained to randomly alert on cars. That would be counterproductive to how they are trained. Like I said earlier, this place is a gold mine for entertainment and laughs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Fordfella]

I'm not sure why I failed to remember this before but since it came to mind, I'll share.

About 10 years ago, I rented a vehicle to go on a trip to the east coast. It was a Chevy HHR (cringe), rented from Enterprise in Denham Springs. I left my house later in the night, myself and a friend of mine. We passed through Alabama around 3 in the morning, where we were stopped by Alabama state police. I was doing the speed limit, with no other driving errors. Officer approached the car, asked the usual questions and asked for usual identification. I provided and answered all questions politely. I then asked him what was the reason for the stop. His answer, "your tint is too dark on the rear windows".
This is a rental, with factory tint, so obviously, the tint was not illegal, nor was it the reason for the stop.
He then proceeded to ask me if he could search my vehicle, to which I replied, "no, thank you. It's freezing outside, it's 3 AM, I'm tired, and I just want to get to where I'm going. There is nothing illegal in this vehicle".
So, of course, he made me stay there and wait for a K9. They walked the K9 around the car, slapping it and giving commands to the dog. So of course, what happens... The dog hits the car just like he was trained to do.
So we had to sit outside in below freezing temps, for almost an hour, while they stripped the car apart for nothing. No citation, no drugs ever in the vehicle.
So any of you that will sit here and say that cops will not use small infractions, like tint, or seatbelts, or even make something up like in this case; you can blow that smoke up someone else's poo shooter because I know better, and so do a lot of other people.

When can drug dogs violate your rights?

The U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Still, everyday Americans have their rights violated

www.carlsonattorneys.com

"An officer may not prolong a traffic stop for an unreasonable amount of time to wait for a K-9 to arrive."

I'm not calling anybody out. You're experience happened before this court case was decided. I remember it because the evening before it was announced, my driveway was blocked by a truck while waiting on the dog to get there. They took a young man away that night, and I'm assuming they had to let him go because they had to wait for the dog.

 

[GunRelated]

Cause there is NO WAY someone used a rental car before you to move drugs. It had to be the dog that's not properly trained (which is documented for court scrutiny in big cases). Couldn't have been residual scent. Those damm cops and their entrapment.

Cool story bro.

Maybe it did, maybe it did not. I've personally never seen, in any other case, where an officer goes around slapping the vehicle and giving commands while walking the dog around it. From what I have seen, they let the dog do what it is trained to do, walk around, sniff, and alert when something gives him reason, something other than the commands of the officer. But what do I know, I'm not a cop so I have no idea about how they never try to illegally gain access to private spaces.

And nevermind the illegal stop that gave them reason to make contact in the first place.

 

[GunRelated]

When can drug dogs violate your rights?

The U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Still, everyday Americans have their rights violated

www.carlsonattorneys.com

"An officer may not prolong a traffic stop for an unreasonable amount of time to wait for a K-9 to arrive."

I'm not calling anybody out. You're experience happened before this court case was decided. I remember it because the evening before it was announced, my driveway was blocked by a truck while waiting on the dog to get there. They took a young man away that night, and I'm assuming they had to let him go because they had to wait for the dog.

We waited at least 20-30 minutes for the K9

Thanks for posting this though, because I was unaware of this ruling.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

Maybe it did, maybe it did not. I've personally never seen, in any other case, where an officer goes around slapping the vehicle and giving commands while walking the dog around it. From what I have seen, they let the dog do what it is trained to do, walk around, sniff, and alert when something gives him reason, something other than the commands of the officer. But what do I know, I'm not a cop so I have no idea about how they never try to illegally gain access to private spaces.

And nevermind the illegal stop that gave them reason to make contact in the first place.

Correct, you have no idea what you are talking about. Agreed.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

We waited at least 20-30 minutes for the K9

Thanks for posting this though, because I was unaware of this ruling.

"unreasonable" is subjective to the totality of circumstance.

The Larry Lawyers on the internet make me smile.

 

[Fordfella]

"unreasonable" is subjective to the totality of circumstance.

The Larry Lawyers on the internet make me smile.

Perhaps the American Bar Association then:

SCOTUS: Traffic Stop Prolonged for Dog Sniff Violates Fourth Amendment

The Court held in Rodriguez v. United States that absent reasonable suspicion to investigate for drugs, a dog sniff conducted after the completion of a traffic stop constitutes an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

www.americanbar.org

 

[GunRelated]

Bingo. Poor fella actually believes the drug dogs are trained to randomly alert on cars. That would be counterproductive to how they are trained. Like I said earlier, this place is a gold mine for entertainment and laughs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I wouldn't call it random, given all the activity and commands of the officer. However, I cannot say 100% this is fact. I can only state what happened and my opinion based on the circumstances at play.
Again, though, y'all can certainly cherry pick that part of the story, it is the weakest part because not all dogs are trained the same, even though I personally find it odd to train a dog in that manner.
But y'all completely skip over the whole point of sharing the story, given the topic of the thread. I wonder why that is?

 

[GunRelated]

Correct, you have no idea what you are talking about. Agreed.

K

 

[JR1572]

Bingo. Poor fella actually believes the drug dogs are trained to randomly alert on cars. That would be counterproductive to how they are trained. Like I said earlier, this place is a gold mine for entertainment and laughs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I check in every couple of months and this place is still the same.

Oh, I just got my security exemption approved for the outlaw tint too.

 

[Manimal]

There is a notorious Border Patrol Checkpoint in the SW, on I-10 or 20, where my friend and I supposedly alerted their dog (It just walked by like any other time through). They sat us down inside their office, searched the car, and when they came in a minute later they were celebrating and laughing. One of the agents held up my canister of Baking Soda, shook it gently, and smiled at me. "What is this!?", I said it was Baking Soda for brushing my teeth, "OK, we'll see!" My friend and I were laughing amongst ourselves about it, because it was Baking Soda for brushing my teeth. They started talking and came out, what seemed like 5 minutes later, with their heads hanging low and waved us out the door. The agent that shook the canister said "have a nice night" and never made eye contact with me. We laughed about it but it wasn't funny. It was 3am and 2 white men with beards were in a car full of small leather cases and duffels, one of the guys looked like Buddy Christ. If you're going on stereotypes that would be a reasonably safe bet.

Asset forfeiture drives a lot of corruption, has for a long time, and there are a lot of stories and lawsuits over it. They have mostly targeted people who travel with large amounts of cash, or who they may think is doing so, often veterans and immigrants. It's everything though, from rings to cars and houses. What is one person out of hundreds of thousands or millions of contacts? Some of those corrupt people have ruined a lot of lives, and maybe even saved a lot of lives in the scope of their duties, but it's not like all of the corrupt people are void of virtue or virtuous acts. There are people who do both great and horrible things at different times, and sometimes simultaneously. Sometimes someone goes all out and is satisfied with what they make, sometimes they go all out and skim some reward off the top. It's not right on any level, it is corrupt, and it shows the inherent flaw in power through Authoritarianism. Most people mean no harm and are decent, but positions of power tend to attract self interested people and power makes people self interested through the fear of losing power. No one wants a pay cut. The world is complicated, so are people.

I always side with Liberty, because I'd rather a bad guy get away than a good person get harmed. We are not supposed to live in a safe or secure world, we are supposed to make it so through our actions as individuals. We use the tools discussed on this forum and our minds to make it so. We make this world a good place through our actions, not through laws. Upon the spark of life we are instilled with Rights, by Nature's God (the name of the source in the Declaration of Independence), and the Bill of Rights defines limitations on Government, not limitations of the Rights of the People. The Constitution has been butchered, but our Principles do not have to be. God is on the side of Liberty as well, by the very nature of our Free-Will.