Guess what? Smoked tails are legal.

[dusred]

My former thread was locked (Thanks Charlio) but Mr1der told me to let you all know what happened.

So I went in and paid my other tickets and asked the clerk about the tail light warning and she pulled up the AZ and UT laws and said there was nothing in them that said anything about smoked being legal as long as the light can be seen and there is a reflector on them somewhere. So I was all feeling proud of myself for fighting the power and what not and then taking a closer look at them and found that they do say DOT APPROVED right on them. So that settles that.

Smoked tails are legal so you can kiss my bare white a**, Charlio. The ignorance of some people. . . first owned by Nala and now by dusred.

[Dattebayo]

...in Arizona.

[PEZi]

...in Arizona.

and UT and CO....

i think its safe to say any non-hippie state

[dusred]

They have DOT APPROVED stamped right on them with a number. Not AZ DOT or UT DOT or NV DOT or CA DOT (get my point?). They are approved by the Department Of Transportation.

[dusred]

...in Arizona.

and UT and CO....

i think its safe to say any non-hippie state

[Dattebayo]

legal as long as the light can be seen

That's still highly subjective. Gotta love the way the law is like that sometimes.

[poems2beats]

Would you like a cookie now?

[dusred]

Would you like a cookie now?

I want a whole damn sandwich.

[ADDirishboy]

So you're aftermarket tails that you ordered PRE-tinted are legal. Hooray. Every idiot who blacks out their tails is most likely not legal though. But Dave is right, this is all HIGHLY subjective.

....... and they still look like crap.

[poems2beats]

How about some cheese for your whine
lol

[dusred]

So you're aftermarket tails that you ordered PRE-tinted are legal. Hooray. Every idiot who blacks out their tails is most likely not legal though. But Dave is right, this is all HIGHLY subjective.

....... and they still look like crap.

Yeah bro. I preordered them smoked. They're not blacked out just lightly "smoked". I hate the kind that look like someone took a sharpie to them.

Meh. I think they look fine. I have this "dare to be different" attitude about everything on my truck. There are 100 just like it in this same town so I want mine to look different.

[Red coupe]

Awesome. Your stupid looking less effective lights are legal.

[dusred]

Awesome. Your stupid looking less effective lights are legal.

Less effective? Plz explain.

[Dattebayo]

Awesome. Your stupid looking less effective lights are legal.

Less effective? Plz explain.

Really? Even I'm willing to bet that the lights you have now produce less lumens then the stock ones did. Actual measured units from the outside of the housing at close and at distance.

[Red coupe]

Awesome. Your stupid looking less effective lights are legal.

Less effective? Plz explain.

Turns out less light goes through tint then a clear lens.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Add OR to the list.

[RCA]

My former thread was locked (Thanks Charlio) but Mr1der told me to let you all know what happened.

One of the best feelings, proving yourself correct after people say you're not. Power to you.

[Bubba1]

My former thread was locked (Thanks Charlio) but Mr1der told me to let you all know what happened.

So I went in and paid my other tickets and asked the clerk about the tail light warning and she pulled up the AZ and UT laws and said there was nothing in them that said anything about smoked being legal as long as the light can be seen and there is a reflector on them somewhere. So I was all feeling proud of myself for fighting the power and what not and then taking a closer look at them and found that they do say DOT APPROVED right on them. So that settles that.

Smoked tails are legal so you can kiss my bare white a**, Charlio. The ignorance of some people. . . first owned by Nala and now by dusred.

Dusred, BZZZZZT. you are incorrect. The correct statement is CERTAIN smoked tail lens are legal in CERTAIN states. Each state sets it's own standards as to how much tint is acceptable. DOT ratings by themselves to not make it 50 state legal. Nala got ticketed not because his gay tinted tail lens' were tinted, but because they were tinted way too dark.

But the bigger question is why would you NOT want you brake lights to operate as brightly as possible. Using tinted tail lens increases the odds of you getting rear ended, as people may not see your brake lights when you apply them. Before bragging that people that hit the rear end are considered at fault, remember that the car you're driving has less book value than you think, so it won't all take much of an accident for an insurance company to declare your car totalled even if it's not your fault. You're pretty much hosed either way.

Just as I had suggested to Nala before he got several tickets, you should put the stock lens back on your car and move on.

[dusred]

Okay. Just in case you guys missed the first thread here it is: smoked-tail-lights-illegal-t506557.html

There are no "DOT APPROVED" tail and marker lights. A DOT symbol appearing on an item of lighting equipment represents its manufacturer’s certification of compliance with U.S. Federal requirements. It does not represent any "approval" by DOT. The DOT has no authority to "approve" or "disapprove" vehicles or equipment. Therefore, their legality are not implicit with the statement "DOT APPROVED". Simply because they are no legal implications in Arizona, it does not mean that they aren't any in other states.

The cop gave me the ticket BECAUSE THE LIGHTS DIDN'T SAY DOT APPROVED ON THEM and thus meaning they were "illegal". Since you didn't see the other thread I'll forgive your ignorance.

But the bigger question is why would you NOT want you brake lights to operate as brightly as possible. Using tinted tail lens increases the odds of you getting rear ended, as people may not see your brake lights when you apply them. Before bragging that people that hit the rear end are considered at fault, remember that the car you're driving has less book value than you think, so it won't all take much of an accident for an insurance company to declare your car totalled even if it's not your fault. You're pretty much hosed either way.

Also, I'm assuming you didn't follow the other thread. My tails have 21 super bright LED lights in them and are 10x brighter than my others. These aren't your cheap a** chinese knock-off brand. The smoke isn't a deep thick blackening smoke but a light tint and the LED's shine through it like nothing.

Point of thread: smoked tails are legal.

BTW I don't remember asking anyone of their opinion of my smoked tails. Maybe I'll start another thread about it. . .

[Jesda]

HEY LETS JUST MANDATE THESE ON THE TRUNKLID OF EVERY CAR IN AMERIKA:



THAT WILL END ALL ACCIDENTS

RITE GHUYZ



HURRDURR
DERPDERP

[Bubba1]

Okay. Just in case you guys missed the first thread here it is: smoked-tail-lights-illegal-t506557.html

There are no "DOT APPROVED" tail and marker lights. A DOT symbol appearing on an item of lighting equipment represents its manufacturer’s certification of compliance with U.S. Federal requirements. It does not represent any "approval" by DOT. The DOT has no authority to "approve" or "disapprove" vehicles or equipment. Therefore, their legality are not implicit with the statement "DOT APPROVED". Simply because they are no legal implications in Arizona, it does not mean that they aren't any in other states.

The cop gave me the ticket BECAUSE THE LIGHTS DIDN'T SAY DOT APPROVED ON THEM and thus meaning they were "illegal". Since you didn't see the other thread I'll forgive your ignorance.

But the bigger question is why would you NOT want you brake lights to operate as brightly as possible. Using tinted tail lens increases the odds of you getting rear ended, as people may not see your brake lights when you apply them. Before bragging that people that hit the rear end are considered at fault, remember that the car you're driving has less book value than you think, so it won't all take much of an accident for an insurance company to declare your car totalled even if it's not your fault. You're pretty much hosed either way.

Also, I'm assuming you didn't follow the other thread. My tails have 21 super bright LED lights in them and are 10x brighter than my others. These aren't your cheap a** chinese knock-off brand. The smoke isn't a deep thick blackening smoke but a light tint and the LED's shine through it like nothing.

Point of thread: smoked tails are legal.

BTW I don't remember asking anyone of their opinion of my smoked tails. Maybe I'll start another thread about it. . .

I did not see the old thread before I responded on this thread, but I gotta admit Charlie's "beware the golden stream of righteousness" line was funny.


But both Charlie O and Mr1der made a good point, which you have not followed up on. If you're so sure about the legality of your tinted tail lens', why not take it to court and fight it? We're not the ones you need to convince here.

And judging by your photos. that tint looked pretty dark, despite the LED's. I honestly couldn't tell there was a reflector until you showed the product picture. I can understand a cop giving you grief about darkened tail lens, but I'm not sure I understand why the DOT emblem was an issue. I suppose judge is in a better position to answer that than we are. But keep in mind one can easily add additional tint to something that was initially DOT approved rendering it unapproved.

As far as our bringing up the bigger and logical issue of why put them on in the first place, well, that's our perogative. And the consensus here seems to similar to Nala's lens'. They dont improve the looks and you're better off keeping the tail lens' stock.

[Bubba1]

. The ignorance of some people. . . first owned by Nala and now by dusred.

I don't understand "first owned by Nala and now by dusred." Please explain.

In Nala's case, he admitted his lenses were darkened too much, and got a warning (not a ticket) by a nice cop that they were too dark. He immediately labelled the cop stupid. When he asked our advice, the consensus was the cop was right, Nala got a break, and he should put back the stock ones before he gets a ticket. Nala ignored our advice and received several tickets, until he finally replaced them. If there was any ownage in Nala's case, it was self inflicted. And you want to compare yourself to that???

In your situation, you must prove to a judge, not us, that your tail lens' were not too dark, or illegal per whatever local laws. There is no ownage regarding us. There may be some vindication for you if the judge agrees with you and dismisses that one ticket. But if you keep those tailights on, even if you win, odds are the issue will come up again with another cop. So the bigger question remains, is it worth the hassle keeping them on? The consensus here is no. What you do with that advice is up to you.

[Mr1der]

thanks, I could care less now!