You forgot one:
. It's always better to look cool than to be safe

 

I refuse to wear a seatbelt, too. Would you care to preach to me about how it is illegal and unsafe?

I was in a major accident in 2003, when my car hydroplaned off the interstate in a spot where many people have done the same thing, and, just two weeks prior, someone died in the same spot. I wasn't wearing my seatbelt, but, had I been, i most likely would have died because I blacked out in the process of my car spinning and my vehicle landed upside down in water, yet I wasn't trapped under water and came too right side up.

I suppose my tires caught a pocket of water due to my illegal tint, but I can't speak for the other who also wrecked there. My insurance company didn't deny my claim, either.

Seatbelts are "safer" in some circumstances, but not all. I'll take my chances with them. Yes, I've received tickets for no seatbelt, but my life is worth more than $50, so I don't mind paying it. I've been pulled over for tint, as well, but never forced to remove it.

We'll just agree to disagree. I know that I don't have a problem seeing out of my windshield, and you think I do. In the meantime, you just keep checking the news for the day that careless guy with illegal tint killed someone due to his inability to see. Maybe we can be pen pals when I'm in jail?

 

^^ Dude, please stop digging

 

mmmjtwa,
You refuse to wear a seat belt? OK, I give up. There’s no further point in arguing anything more with you. Perhaps you’re saying all those things just for shock value; I’m not sure. At any rate, in your illogical world of tempting fate, I hope somehow you live long and prosper.

 

What next? You're going to tell me that I need to use my windshield wipers in the rain? This is getting ridiculous, Dad!

 

You know, I think that's the most intelligent thing you've said yet.

 

You have to love the forums. New members with chip's on their shoulder, ready to stir the pot and provoke the crowd.

 

I suspect possible troll activity.

 

I can see that as a possibility. His arguments are quite interesting. Most accidents don't end in a body of water. His example is far from your traditional car vs car accident, where a seatbelt is typically a matter of life and death.

My best advice for him is to drive more cautiously in these "well known hydroplane off a cliff areas". He made it very clear that he was aware of this areas history. Hydroplaning is dependent on many factors, most of which are in control of the driver...

 

This thread has turned into such a joke. It's one thing to not wear a seat belt; it's your life that's at risk, not mine. Do what you want. It's another thing to put someone else's life at risk by having 35% tint in your windshield. Really, do the benefits outweigh the cons that much that you're willing to do this, or is it just self-righteous douchyness that justifies putting others at risk? anyway, totally OT at this point.

 

i agree. if he were to be driving on a private driveway, i couldn't care less. but on a public road, thats a different story.

 

I tend to agree also. He was going out of his way to justify his position, including an accident where he was better off without seat belts, his insurance company not denying his claim, not having to remove or pay a fine for his tint after being pulled over for it, and, of course, having no problem seeing out of his 35% windshield. These stories are just too convenient to be 100% true.

 

You didn't just walk right into that, you just keep on walking.

 

Hey guys! new to the site. In regards to the tints I have a white coupe got 40% on the windshield 20% on the sides and 35% on the back live in MD. The 40% does not hinder my vision at night also have a light colored interior which helps the tint not look as dark during the day

 

Here we go again--if you're serious. You do not have superhuman anatomy and are subject to the laws of physics like the rest of us. Therefore, cutting down the amount of light through a 40% windshield DOES hinder your vision at night. If there was no such obstruction, then most auto makers would offer 40% windshields as a legal accessory. As far as your light interior is concerned, that’s a new one; just more nonsense to justify a pointless premise.

Like some other illegal tint zealots, you are kidding yourself for the express purpose of having a “cool” looking car, and road safety at night be damned.