Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on September 29, 2005

Click here to view bill details.

These penalties are much too harsh. I have windows with illegal tint, and they are about as dangerous as me not wearing a seatbelt. But, our government isn't always interested in our safety. This bill seems like a way for state programs to make up for a tight budget.

on our wallets. Why is this even deserving of a ticket? In Florida it's legal to tint your windows and I don't remember hearing about any highway carnage down there. Ontario, same thing! It's time for a part time legislature. These folks are either delusional or have way too much time on their hands. Let's see them try to earn an HONEST living in the real world.

Good idea. Should increase police safety. Add a rider to include smoked or colored covers over license plates,or frames that make the plate difficult to read and sprays that are designed to prevent cameras from photographing plates.

Why increase the penaltys? The present law isn't enforced. Would higher penaltys result in increased enforcment?

This is a good revenue generator it should be left alone and not criminalized to a misdemeanor. Keep it a civil infraction and raise the ceiling for the fines. I have talked to people with tinted windows and they get 3 to 4 tickets per year and just pay the fine. This generates money for our strapped budgets. Making it a misdemeanor shouldn't be done.

I don't think the idea is for the law to be a revenue generator, but to allow police officers to view occupants during a stop etc. Those people who can afford to pay the fine, including drug dealers and other criminals, will flout the law unless some other penalty is imposed. Making the infraction a misdemeanor may also allow law officers to inspect the vehicle closer and find out what the occupants are really trying to conceal. It could be argued that the blacked out windows also protect the occupants, such as the elderly or females from being identified by predators, but I have real doubts that is the reason for the majority of blacked out windows. I imagine someone will present the argument that the blacked out windows reduce the car air conditioning load, thus saving fuel, pollution, the environment and reducing global warming.

All houses should be required to have transparent glass walls. Draperies are prohibited. Night time interior illumination is required. This way, police and government officials will feel safer. After all, if we could save just one cop or government official, wouldn't it all be worth it?

Why treat those who choose to tint their windows as criminals? What about those convicted drunk drivers that are still out there driving without a license? Maybe this state needs to start focusing on them - I do personally know for a fact that this happens all the time! Now you want to send me to jail because I choose to tint my windows to keep the sun out of my 4 year old and 1 year old children's eyes? In case you want to sterotype me, I'm not a drug dealer or trying to hide something - I'm a 34 year old female with no criminal background - not even a speeding ticket! Leave us alone and focus on those drinking and driving - they are the ones that could kill someone!! Lastly, other states can legalize window tint with no problems - why such a problem in this state?? Nothing better to do I guess.......

The window tint restriction is in place for two reasons: driver's night vision foward and to the sides, and to allow the coppers to see who is driving. Rear sidelights and the backlight are not addressed by window tint legislation. I think the primary reason for enforcement is based on the desire of the police to see the driver and what's going on in the vehicle; nevertheless, the safety concern is legitimate. The increase in the penalty seems a bit overkill, however. With regard to sprays and covers over license plates...and this is the basis for my title...they have nothing to do with safety. Before they were sued repeatedly and finally wised up, the manufacturers of these systems actually advertised the revenue aspect. They even did studies to determine how shortening the duration of the yellow could increase the number of red-light-runners. Now, a jurisdiction could always just lengthen the duration of a yellow a bit in order to increase safety. Instead, the temptation to collect more fines is too great. So they often shorten the yellow. Guess what? When the systems are treated as revenue generators, they can actually make the intersection more dangerous. This is true for two reasons: (1) The system teaches driver's to lock 'em up in order to stop for the fast yellow. This results in more rear-enders by drivers who wouldn't reasonably expect the car ahead to suddenly stop. (2) The driver who is unfamiliar with these systems doesn't anticipate the short yellow, so he proceeds through the intersection (not wanting to be in Group 1, above). He thinks he's safe, but whoops...the yellow trips to red in a quick moment. Not only has he just been made a criminal, cross traffic has started and the other guy who was timing the light T-bones him. To those using sprays and shields to defeat this bit of government monitoring - good for you.

I suggest anyone who has a problem with this bill write to all the state senators and voice your opinion. Here is the list, you can copy and paste in your Email "TO" line: SenRBasham@senate.michigan.gov , SenVBernero@senate.michigan.gov , SenPBirkholz@senate.michigan.gov , SenMBishop@senate.michigan.gov , SenLBrater@senate.michigan.gov, SenCBrown@senate.michigan.gov, SenNCassis@senate.michigan.gov, SenIClark-Coleman@senate.michigan.gov , SenHansenClarke@senate.michigan.gov , SenACropsey@senate.michigan.gov , SenREmerson@senate.michigan.gov , SenVGarcia@senate.michigan.gov , SenTGeorge@senate.michigan.gov , SenJGilbert@senate.michigan.gov , SenMGoschka@senate.michigan.gov , SenBHammerstrom@senate.michigan.gov , SenBHardiman@senate.michigan.gov , SenGJacobs@senate.michigan.gov , SenRJelinek@senate.michigan.gov , SenSJohnson@senate.michigan.gov , SenWKuipers@senate.michigan.gov , SenBLeland@senate.michigan.gov , SenMMcManus@senate.michigan.gov , SenDOlshove@senate.michigan.gov , SenBPatterson@senate.michigan.gov , SenMPrusi@senate.michigan.gov , SenASanborn@senate.michigan.gov , SenMSchauer@senate.michigan.gov , SenMScott@senate.michigan.gov , SenKSikkema@senate.michigan.gov , SenMSwitalski@senate.michigan.gov , SenBThomas@senate.michigan.gov , SenLToy@senate.michigan.gov , SenGVanWoerkom@senate.michigan.gov

Soon, the peoples' right to be free from illegal search and seizure will be crossed, it will be at the threshold of your front door.

Soon? Illegal search & seizure is already happening here now. Check out the Patriot Act.

I can assure you that the present laws are enforced. I have been pulled over 7 times in the last five years for the window tint on my cars.

" don't think the idea is for the law to be a revenue generator, but to allow police officers to view occupants during a stop etc. Those people who can afford to pay the fine, including drug dealers and other criminals, will flout the law unless some other penalty is imposed. Making the infraction a misdemeanor may also allow law officers to inspect the vehicle closer and find out what the occupants are really trying to conceal." Just about every traffic law out there is for revenue only. If they wanted to protect us they could do it alot better. I know one corner where there have been about 10 wrecks a year forever and they still won't put up a light. But almost every evening rush hour you can see one of Redford Twp's revenue agents/cops sitting on the Livonia side with the radar gun going. Traffic Light=Less Crashes, Slower Traffic and LESS REVENUE! Get on the clue bus folks, It Ain't About Your Safety...IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!

After all, if you have nothing to hide, why not let the good officer look into your home. It's starting to get scary.

The 2nd amendment is there. It wasn't for the bad guys, it was because the authors were afraid of a government that would get too big and out of control.

There are different tints that allow more or less light in. I don't understand if you get a lower tint you can still see in a car. Michigan is only one of a handfull of states that don't allow tinting of side windows.

So you could also get at least $100 or jail time fine for a dangling ornament? "A dangling ornament or other suspended object that obstructs the vision of the driver of the vehicle, except as authorized by law." Thats what the bill states.

Dead guys that wrote those documents would not believe what we have let the behemoth become. 45% of this nation is made up of whiny liberal sissies that want government to be everyones nanny. If we don't wake up we have had it. I really feel bad for the kids that will never know freedom and what it was like before the police / revenue state got rolling.

>45% of this nation is made up of whiny liberal sissies that want government to be everyones nanny.< Nah. That’s not the problem. The real problem is that we have a majority combine made up of the Nanny Statists on the left and the bellowing Father Knows Bestists on the right. Tyrants, all. The only perceptible difference between ‘em is which particular individual freedoms they wish to demolish and whose pockets they’ll rob with taxes and fees to pay for implementing their master plan.

rupmzscdw wxpqvzlyg enmtj mhxyngu jvwlb cwzv nblj

Hello! great idea of color of this siyte!

If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site: abuse-here@inbox.ru thank you!

Sorry, but what is mariburjeka? Jane.

Are they crazy???

Sorry, but what is mariburjeka? Jane.

Sorry, but what is mariburjeka? Jane.

Sorry, but what is mariburjeka? Jane.

Sorry, but what is mariburjeka? Jane.