Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 7/17/2010 2:44:41 PM EST
http://jalopnik.com/5589270/maryland-judge-decrees-pontiac-g8-gt-tail-lights-illegal

Went to court for my clear tail lights on my car and was found guilty!

The judge actualy told me she didn't care what the manufacturer said, what the federal govt said, what the DOT # stamped onto my taillights said if the officer says my lights aren't legal then they're not legal. I took the G8 sales brochure in along with pics of my car and other G8 GT's and the VIN trace by 3 different dealers saying my lights were factory none of it mattered she found me guilty of failing to display or reflect red light on the rear of the car. Didn't matter the reflecters were in the bumper, didn't matter where the light is has that little red circle, the whole lens isn't red so they're not legal. Also where the back-up and turn signals are should be the reflectors according to the cop so the V6 cars lights aren't legal either.

Judge stupid went on to tell me that maybe I should consider trading in or selling the car since its not legal in MD and that I'm going to continue to get the $60 tickets till I get rid of the car.

So I contacted Pontiac's 1-800 # and I have an apt next friday to have my car looked at by them and see if they can help or at least repay me the $85.50 fine and court costs.

I honestly don't know what else I can do. The cop was ALL smiles afterwards and winked at me! WTF! Now I'm screwed! How do I go to work now? I drive right thru where he works!! So this ass nuget can make up **** randomly for any car he gets a hard on for and nothing can be done to fight it!

This is BS.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:46:38 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 2:48:15 PM EST by Bloencustoms]
Can't have ordinary citizens driving around in nice looking cars now, can we?


ETA:

You might be able to remove the bulbs from the tail light housing and spray some red tinted lacquer in there.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:47:39 PM EST
I would start by contacting your local newspaper or news station with your story.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:48:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By badeffect10:
I would start by contacting your local newspaper or news station with your story.

Make sure you spell the cop and judges names correctly for the reporters.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:48:47 PM EST


I think conTActing GM is your best bet.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:48:51 PM EST
Originally Posted By badeffect10:
I would start by contacting your local newspaper or news station with your story.


this
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:49:01 PM EST
1. rack up as many of these tickets as possible

2 appeal

3. win

4. sue the state of MARYLAND for costs/time/travel costs/attorney fees

5. $$$ retire
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:49:20 PM EST
Oh this isn't about me. Some poor sap is having to deal with it.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:50:39 PM EST
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:50:54 PM EST
The op isn't who this happened to. Definitely a load of BS, but if you read how many other violations the guy involved admitted to in a public forum, he has a lot more trouble coming his way.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:55:31 PM EST
I drive a G8 GT with the exact same tailights.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:57:35 PM EST
BTDT with my ex gf's mini about 6 years ago. The fact that the parts were marked DOT approved and factory installed did not matter, had to be red plastic, red bulbs didn't count.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 2:59:30 PM EST
Originally Posted By badeffect10:
I would start by contacting your local newspaper or news station with your story.



reporters love fucked up stuff like this
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:01:39 PM EST
Holy shit what a bunch of bullshit, i used to get nailed on my motorcycle for aftermarket turn signals and i thought that was b.s this takes the cake.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:02:34 PM EST
If I were him, I would first contact GM and obtain the DOT certification for those lights. I would then appeal (with a reputable attorney). If appeals for traffic citations aren't permissible in his jurisdiction, I would contact every local media outlet.

As a former cop, I say that is pure BS. If they're the factory tail lights, they should be DOT-approved and 100% legit, regardless of lens color. I wonder what state law says regarding this issue.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:04:45 PM EST
From the comments on the post link:

BTW, he's screwed. Look at this admission of breaking other laws on the web board....

"God Damn am I pissed!!! I mean never said **** about my window tint, no front tag, or painted over front amber markers, or blacked out side turn signals, noooooo...... "
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:05:21 PM EST
rack up as many of those BS tickets as you can with officer Handjob and then sue for harassment.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:05:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By ARJJ:
If I were him, I would first contact GM and obtain the DOT certification for those lights. I would then appeal (with a reputable attorney). If appeals for traffic citations aren't permissible in his jurisdiction, I would contact every local media outlet.

As a former cop, I say that is pure BS. If they're the factory tail lights, they should be DOT-approved and 100% legit, regardless of lens color. I wonder what state law says regarding this issue.


There might be some idiotic phrasing in the state law that makes them illegal. Shouldn't be but sometimes it works out that way...


Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:07:02 PM EST
Originally Posted By jimtash9:
http://jalopnik.com/5589270/maryland-judge-decrees-pontiac-g8-gt-tail-lights-illegal

Went to court for my clear tail lights on my car and was found guilty!

The judge actualy told me she didn't care what the manufacturer said, what the federal govt said, what the DOT # stamped onto my taillights said if the officer says my lights aren't legal then they're not legal. I took the G8 sales brochure in along with pics of my car and other G8 GT's and the VIN trace by 3 different dealers saying my lights were factory none of it mattered she found me guilty of failing to display or reflect red light on the rear of the car. Didn't matter the reflecters were in the bumper, didn't matter where the light is has that little red circle, the whole lens isn't red so they're not legal. Also where the back-up and turn signals are should be the reflectors according to the cop so the V6 cars lights aren't legal either.

Judge stupid went on to tell me that maybe I should consider trading in or selling the car since its not legal in MD and that I'm going to continue to get the $60 tickets till I get rid of the car.

So I contacted Pontiac's 1-800 # and I have an apt next friday to have my car looked at by them and see if they can help or at least repay me the $85.50 fine and court costs.

I honestly don't know what else I can do. The cop was ALL smiles afterwards and winked at me! WTF! Now I'm screwed! How do I go to work now? I drive right thru where he works!! So this ass nuget can make up **** randomly for any car he gets a hard on for and nothing can be done to fight it!

This is BS.


Guess that explains it.

Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:11:17 PM EST
Originally Posted By badeffect10:
I would start by contacting your local newspaper or news station with your story.


This. Let this scumbag judge hang out to dry by any means neccesary.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:12:59 PM EST


I'm sorry, I would really like to subscribe to your news letter, but I just can't seem to get beyond to above text.

WTF is a nuget?

-V
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:13:51 PM EST
Subscribed for home-state 'tardedness.

Kharn
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:14:03 PM EST
Hmm...it pays to read the user comments.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:14:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 3:16:09 PM EST by easy610]
.

Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:14:21 PM EST
The comments say the person did in fact modify his tail lights.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:14:55 PM EST
That's kill dozer level frustration there.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:16:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By jimtash9:
Oh this isn't about me. Some poor sap is having to deal with it.

Then he should appeal the decision and make the judge look like the idiot that they are.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:18:17 PM EST
Maryland, huh?

Prince George county?
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:19:23 PM EST
Originally Posted By ARJJ:
If I were him, I would first contact GM and obtain the DOT certification for those lights. I would then appeal (with a reputable attorney). If appeals for traffic citations aren't permissible in his jurisdiction, I would contact every local media outlet.

As a former cop, I say that is pure BS. If they're the factory tail lights, they should be DOT-approved and 100% legit, regardless of lens color. I wonder what state law says regarding this issue.


In VA that would be totally irrelevant. A parallel situation occurred, where several counties were incorrectly enforcing part of the revenue collection public safety code, and were informed of this. Went to a fairly high up court and they lost, repeatedly.
When asked what they were going to do about the millions of dollars (probably 10s of millions, no exact count was ever admitted to) they stole, they said "haahahhahaha sucker, we've already spent it, and we won't repay it". The judge said "sounds good to me."
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:20:45 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:22:45 PM EST
I would also locate the rep from the DOT http://www.dot.gov/ as a witness.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:23:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By DPeacher:
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

This. Nobody is exactly sure how many laws there are in this country. Nobody. WTF?
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:25:26 PM EST
Lawyer up, then file a lawsuit. Show that bitch judge who's boss.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:26:41 PM EST

Originally Posted By vitalis:

WTF is a nuget?

It's the tasty stuff inside a Three Musketeers bar.


Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:27:00 PM EST
It doesn't suprise, coming from The Free State.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:27:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 3:29:29 PM EST by 82nd_Sapper]
According to the comments this is the guy's car.

"


Yep, that car right there with the illegal tail lights.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:29:53 PM EST
Totally fucked up deal. What a time waster for you on top of it all. You have good right to be pissed.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:30:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 3:31:34 PM EST by Thatdude333]
Beaten to the pic
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:32:17 PM EST
Originally Posted By 82nd_Sapper:
According to the comments this is the guy's car.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll31/madman_jim/340x.jpg"


Yep, that car right there with the illegal tail lights.


If that is the case, he probably is in violation under MD statues.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:32:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By LuckyDucky:
The comments say the person did in fact modify his tail lights.

Indeed.


Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:33:14 PM EST
Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
Hmm...it pays to read the user comments.




Yes it does....
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:33:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 3:35:21 PM EST by 1Andy2]
Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
Hmm...it pays to read the user comments.


Nobody wants to hear your shit, thanks.

eta: And yes, MD can make whatever asinine rules it wants. Yay, tax collection.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:37:05 PM EST
I fucking hate Maryland.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:39:29 PM EST
Iowa Highway Patrol had an issue with my factory tinted windows....
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:40:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
Hmm...it pays to read the user comments.


Nobody wants to hear your shit, thanks.

eta: And yes, MD can make whatever asinine rules it wants. Yay, tax collection.
Not on safety issues, that is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

Link Posted: 7/17/2010 3:41:38 PM EST
The guy is either lying through his teeth OR these are dealer installed tail lights and he just thinks they are factory. Either way this whole mess is pretty dumb.


The guy is dumb because he is afraid he will keep getting tickets. Oh noes, what can he do! Really, it is not hard to switch out a tail light to a legal version.

.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 4:00:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By brass:

Originally Posted By DPeacher:
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

This. Nobody is exactly sure how many laws there are in this country. Nobody. WTF?

There is at least one person on this board who thinks they are almost all necessary to prevent us all from going apeshit and becoming a total anarchy.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 4:05:47 PM EST
ahem: http://www.g8board.com/forums/showpost.php?p=556460&postcount=1

Jalopnik B.S.
Ok this is getting out of hand and I'm tired of trying to post on Jalopnik only to have some of them get up. To set the record straight and shut the JR detectives up who THINK they know better, the pics of my car with the dark tinted tail lights were taken en-route to a car show!!!! Those lights were not, and are not currently on my car!!!! They are sitting on the shelf in my garage, so PLEASE stop as all you're doing is stiring a pot with nothing in it.

The article I was cited for has NOTHING to do with tinted tails even IF they were on the car. This what I was cited for, read it carefully.

22-209. (b) REAR LAMPS - Rear clearance lamps, identification lamps, and those marker lamps and reflectors mounted on the rear or on the sides near the rear of the vehicle shall display or reflect a red color. (An. Code 1957,art 66 1/2 ss12-209; 1977 ch.14 ss 2.)

Thats it! The car has to have RED refleectors on the rear, (IN THE BUMPER ABOVE THE TAIL PIPE TIPS) The tail lights must light up red (DUH!) and if the car has reflectors on the sides near the rear they need to be red! WELL?!?!? WTF are these?



No where in the article OR in comar does it say its illegel to paint the upper edge of the clear leans, no where does it say its illegal to paint the chrome ring black. The article I was cited for was NOT violated by me in any way shape or form!

I took my car to the Anne Arundel co police they took no exception to them.
I took my car to the Maryland State police, they took no exception to them.
I took my car to the Maryland State vehicle inspection station run by the state police and state vehicle inspectors and they took no exception to them.

READ CAREFULLY AND S_L_O_W_L_Y!!!!!

The people in the state who determin what is or is not legal said MY LIGHTS WERE FINE!!!!


NO ONE but this 1 lone cop has EVER said BOO to me about them cause they're NOT ILLEGAL!

For the love of God STOP trying to be JR detectives when you have NO every loving idea WTF you're talking about!

I've already talked to several attornies and I have a meeting with the GM rep,the state inspector and the state police in charge of the inspectors next friday to see what if anything GM can do to help me.


BTW,
According to the state vehicle inspectors even IF I did have the tinted tails on they didn't violate the law cause the reflectors ARE IN THE BUMPER!!

TINTED TAILS ARE NOT ILLEGAL IN MD ON EVERY CAR!! ONLY THOSE THAT WOULD VIOLATE THE ABOVE ARTICLE.

If you're gonna play detective make sure you have ALL the facts, if not DON'T POST! You make yourself look the fool, congrats.


Link Posted: 7/17/2010 4:08:23 PM EST
The light are either legal under state law or not legal under state law. It has everything to do with what the law says. It has nothing to do with if they are factory or aftermarket. Though it would be nice if GM made sure their cars were 50 state street legal. But as always its your responsibility to make sure a product is legal to use in the manner you intend to use it in a given location.
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 4:09:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/17/2010 4:09:43 PM EST by Cypher15]

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
The light are either legal under state law or not legal under state law. It has everything to do with what the law says. It has nothing to do with if they are factory or aftermarket. Though it would be nice if GM made sure their cars were 50 state street legal. But as always its your responsibility to make sure a product is legal to use in the manner you intend to use it in a given location.

22-209. (b) REAR LAMPS - Rear clearance lamps, identification lamps, and those marker lamps and reflectors mounted on the rear or on the sides near the rear of the vehicle shall display or reflect a red color. (An. Code 1957,art 66 1/2 ss12-209; 1977 ch.14 ss 2.)

from my post above.

he wasnt in violation. 3 different places ok'd them
Link Posted: 7/17/2010 4:09:10 PM EST
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
I took my car to the Anne Arundel co police they took no exception to them.
I took my car to the Maryland State police, they took no exception to them.
I took my car to the Maryland State vehicle inspection station run by the state police and state vehicle inspectors and they took no exception to them.


If MSP cleared him, what is the problem?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top