Vehicle tint laws for civilians vs government vehicles

[Fordfella]

How'd you say it? Something like, "rules for thee, but I'll do what the hell I want because I'm better than you, peasant", or something along those lines.

Nope...Made my case that I qualified for an exemption. Didn't want anybody to see what I was hauling in my truck. When I had a vehicle with a tonneau cover it wasn't an issue. Now that I have a SUV the circumstances have changed.

 

[charlie12]

Why aren't the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries vehicles exempt?

 

[GunRelated]

Nope...Made my case that I qualified for an exemption. Didn't want anybody to see what I was hauling in my truck. When I had a vehicle with a tonneau cover it wasn't an issue. Now that I have a SUV the circumstances have changed.

Think you may have mis took what I was getting at. Either way, you should not have to make a case for needing something that other are allowed to have when it doesn't negatively affect anyone else anyway.

 

[GunRelated]

I'm exceptionally familiar with the tint laws in Louisiana.

I've always had SUVs, so I can have any darkness tint on the back windows (including the rear windshield). The front side windows can have 40% tint. I've always had 25% on the front and it's only slightly darker than 40%. Also never been stopped for it.

Modern ceramic tint at 40% is fine for heat blocking. Upgrading to darker ceramic tint doesn't really do much more besides look better.

I've driven fully blacked our cars with windshield tint. It sucks. A lot. Hell, I've had problems seeing out of my rear windshield at night and the only way I've not hit things backing in is due to a backup camera.

At night on the interstate with 10% rear windshield tint, I'm barely seeing car headlights behind me at a moderate distance.

I stand by my statement that driving with a blacked out front windshield is dangerous and an average civilian has no use for it. Plus, nowadays you can add a clear ceramic tint to the front windshield that is basically invisible but still aids in heat mitigation.

We can certainly assume our own risks, so long as they don't subjugate others to undue risk. For example: You may choose to drive drunk and accept the risk. But it's illegal to do so on the chance that you kill someone else. The same is true for fully blacking your car out making it much harder to see out of.

You may want to check the tint laws, they do not allow any darkness on the rear windows or rear windshield. Again, nice to have and, especially with the aforementioned, don't negatively affect anyone else. Don't need to see out of rear windows at all to drive safely on the highway, and you can always roll windows down and use back up cameras for reverse. Some vehicles do not even have a back glass at all, yet if you do have one, better make sure that it's no darker than 12% or you are not legal, 25% for rear windows.

You keep saying "blacked out windshield", and I don't necessarily disagree with you on that but even at 35% (I think this is what my coworker has), it makes a huge difference when combined with the rest of the windows being tinted and you can still see out of it pretty great. I will go back to what I have said previously also - if it is unsafe for me or you to drive with tint, then it is also unsafe for government vehicles.

 

[paddle007]

As a motorcyclist I am not a fan of dark tint. I want to make eye contact with the driver. I know that's a false hope but it "might" help.
Also after driving customers cars in the rain at night time I found it crazy difficult to see out of.
Not a fan boy unless it is medically necessary

 

[KDerekT83]

What's the case where it makes sense for an average joe to have a blacked out windshield and front seat windows?

Drastically helps the AC for starters. second, it nobody's business what I'm doing or what is in my car.. also, and this is subjective to opinion, but looks.

 

[GunRelated]

Comparing tint to concealed carry is a false equivalence. Those are not equal and someone could easily be for on but not the other, for both, or against both.

On the contrary, both examples are widely, and safely used by a large number of people. Some people argue against carrying weapons in public because they think it makes officers' jobs more difficult and dangers other people, some people argue against window tint because they think it makes officers' jobs more difficult and it danger others.

 

[GunRelated]

Drastically helps the AC for starters. second, it nobody's business what I'm doing or what is in my car.. also, and this is subjective to opinion, but looks.

Waiting for the "you are not guaranteed privacy in your vehicle" response.

I wonder how many government employees that enjoy the tinted windows on their government vehicle also enjoy window tint on their personal vehicles without worrying about getting harassed or getting a ticket?

 

[GunRelated]

As a motorcyclist I am not a fan of dark tint. I want to make eye contact with the driver. I know that's a false hope but it "might" help.
Also after driving customers cars in the rain at night time I found it crazy difficult to see out of.
Not a fan boy unless it is medically necessary

Not everyone likes it, and it takes getting used to. When I darkened my back glass and rear doors, I wasn't sure I liked it at first either, until I got used to it.

 

[AustinBR]

You may want to check the tint laws, they do not allow any darkness on the rear windows or rear windshield. Again, nice to have and, especially with the aforementioned, don't negatively affect anyone else. Don't need to see out of rear windows at all to drive safely on the highway, and you can always roll windows down and use back up cameras for reverse. Some vehicles do not even have a back glass at all, yet if you do have one, better make sure that it's no darker than 12% or you are not legal, 25% for rear windows.

You keep saying "blacked out windshield", and I don't necessarily disagree with you on that but even at 35% (I think this is what my coworker has), it makes a huge difference when combined with the rest of the windows being tinted and you can still see out of it pretty great. I will go back to what I have said previously also - if it is unsafe for me or you to drive with tint, then it is also unsafe for government vehicles.

On the contrary, I would urge you to revisit the window tint laws for SUVs in Louisiana. SUVs and Trucks are allowed to have blacked out rear windshields and can have back seat windows tinted as dark as you would like.

Cars/Sedans are different.

I would also disagree that not being able to see out of a rear windshield is a safety risk. There is clearly a benefit in being able to see out of the rear windshield.

You can see basically the same benefits from a 35% ceramic tint and a 100% (or 90%) ceramic tint. Blacking out the windshield isn't safe.

As for your final point - easy: It's also unsafe to drive at 100 MPH down the highway, but LE vehicles are allowed to do so in some situations. They are legally allowed to accept that risk because the potential outcome outweighs the risk. The benefit of a regular average joe getting an unsafe tint does not outweigh the potential risks. If the average joe is not truly average, there are exception processes to be had.

 

[AustinBR]

Drastically helps the AC for starters. second, it nobody's business what I'm doing or what is in my car.. also, and this is subjective to opinion, but looks.

A clear ceramic tint will also help with the AC.

Privacy with dark tints comes with the cost (increased risk) of not being able to see and getting in a wreck.

Yeah, it looks cooler. I agree. But it's also not safe. Most LE aren't even allowed to have it.

 

[GunRelated]

On the contrary, I would urge you to revisit the window tint laws for SUVs in Louisiana. SUVs and Trucks are allowed to have blacked out rear windshields and can have back seat windows tinted as dark as you would like.

Cars/Sedans are different.

I would also disagree that not being able to see out of a rear windshield is a safety risk. There is clearly a benefit in being able to see out of the rear windshield.

You can see basically the same benefits from a 35% ceramic tint and a 100% (or 90%) ceramic tint. Blacking out the windshield isn't safe.

As for your final point - easy: It's also unsafe to drive at 100 MPH down the highway, but LE vehicles are allowed to do so in some situations. They are legally allowed to accept that risk because the potential outcome outweighs the risk. The benefit of a regular average joe getting an unsafe tint does not outweigh the potential risks. If the average joe is not truly average, there are exception processes to be had.

You are correct about the trucks/SUV, ect. I had skimmed through the law a while back but never made it to that section where it gives exemptions for different vehicles.

There are many vehicles on the road that do not even have a back glass, so I would say that having a back glass black out is a non issue. Does it help to see out of it, sure. Does it make it unsafe, I don't think so.

The heat blocking benefits for darker ceramic tint may not be drastically different, but you also get the added benefit of privacy, and sunblocking.

Pretty much every LE vehicle I see has darker than legal tint on their front doors. There is basically nothing that anyone could possibly say that would change the fact that if they can safely operate their vehicle all day everyday on public roads with tinted front doors and some windshields, then so can others.

 

[rcm192]

Having a full sized SUV with blacked out tint is nice. I enjoy pretty much all the aforementioned perks of it: privacy, heat and sun light reduction.

I transport a good bit of firearms/nfa items and in the event that I have to leave them in the car it's reassuring to know they won't be easily seen or targeted while I'm not occuping the vehicle.

Also the tint is nice for the kiddo so the sun and heat doesn't get to him when we are cruising.

I got pulled over rushing to work one day, yes speeding a bit. And the officer wrote me a ticket on the speeding. And only on part of my windows....get this..I explained to him that I transport firearms/nfa stuff often and sometimes for work related events. I don't have a LSP exemption either. He tells me he understands and is accepting of me having my side and rear windows limo tinted....but oh man that front windshield was the illegal one. What? Lol. I couldn't believe that. I kept my mouth shut and got it squared away. But other than that no issues getting pulled over in about 20 years of driving SUVs with blacked out windows for just tint as the reason anyway.

And yes I have a valid brake tag.

 

[rocxky]

not having super dark tint helps protect our under paid /under appreciated officers

 

[thperez1972]

On the contrary, both examples are widely, and safely used by a large number of people. Some people argue against carrying weapons in public because they think it makes officers' jobs more difficult and dangers other people, some people argue against window tint because they think it makes officers' jobs more difficult and it danger others.

Escalators, doors, electric hand dryers in public restrooms, and on and on are all used safely by a large number of people. Having one thing in common does not make two thing equivalent.

 

[Core]

No, that is not all fine and dandy. I have not been stopped for any reason in many years either but this does not make it ok. This is not how the founders of this country intended for law enforcement to work in my opinion, we have strayed far off that path. Seatbelt laws are also used in this regard, another ridiculous law.



Thanks for posting the links.



This is a ridiculous statement.
I think any reasonable person can agree that something as benign as window tint does not fall under the same category as sirens and emergency strobes.
I would imagine the main reasoning behind tint laws would be for safety of other motorists. This is where the hypocrisy comes into play because if my tint is a danger to someone else then so is the tint on a government vehicle.

EVERYTHING that any form of government has: citizen's should be able ot legally have.

The difference here is when individuals commit crimes: impersonating an officer etc.

The founders did not intend on there being different classes of citizens: even though they had great class status benefits they were working for equality under a tyrant king. You cannot lose sight of this fact no matter how deep we analyze their lifestyles. Women, Slaves, and other social groups were believed to not be fit to engage in meaningful politics in those times. Of course this is absurd and false: however, this was a constraint of the time. The founders were marching in the direction to create Republic of free citizens, with accountability of government!

 

[GunRelated]

Escalators, doors, electric hand dryers in public restrooms, and on and on are all used safely by a large number of people. Having one thing in common does not make two thing equivalent.

None of those things are limited to one group of people.

 

[GunRelated]

EVERYTHING that any form of government has: citizen's should be able ot legally have.

The difference here is when individuals commit crimes: impersonating an officer etc.

The founders did not intend on there being different classes of citizens: even though they had great class status benefits they were working for equality under a tyrant king. You cannot lose sight of this fact no matter how deep we analyze their lifestyles. Women, Slaves, and other social groups were believed to not be fit to engage in meaningful politics in those times. Of course this is absurd and false: however, this was a constraint of the time. The founders were marching in the direction to create Republic of free citizens, with accountability of government!

Careful with all that logic, you might start making too much sense for people to handle.

 

[Jstudz220]

Drastically helps the AC for starters. second, it nobody's business what I'm doing or what is in my car.. also, and this is subjective to opinion, but looks.

I’d also add because I want it and it’s really nobody’s damn business. It should be a decision each driver can make. It would also be nice for times when I’m working and forced to leave my laptop in my car.

 

[thperez1972]

Think you may have mis took what I was getting at. Either way, you should not have to make a case for needing something that other are allowed to have when it doesn't negatively affect anyone else anyway.

You can legally get whatever tint you want on whatever window you want. The law does not cover your actions on your own property. The law only sets a standard for vehicles driven on public property.

None of those things are limited to one group of people.

Neither are concealed carry or window tinting.