omfG37

Perhaps 99% is an exaggeration given that many people live in states with different laws. In Cali it is my understanding that it is illegal to have any sort of tint on the front windows, hence my 99% claim since I assume that most ppl on this forum tint their windows (but not all are from cali).

In regards to the back window, not only is it not illegal but I will reiterate my point earlier: BACK UP CAMERA. I see you got the navi package chekov so let me ask you something: how could you possibly back up into something with that camera?

Chekov

There are many scenarios where the backup camera would do you no good. The first one that comes to mind is misjudging how close another driver is behind you if you have to come to a sudden stop. In such a case the camera is not even on. Another, albeit less likely, is backing into some hanging object for which the camera is aimed too low, such as a tree limb.

And I still doubt, as you persistently maintain, that 99% of people on this forum tint other than their front windshield regardless of State or illegality.

omfG37

If I get rear ended because a guy behind me is driving too close then that is not my fault. He hits me, hopefully he has insurance, but me having my rear windshield tinted did not effect that situation at all. Furthermore, if I have to come to a very sudden stop (say a child runs in front of my car), why would I care how close the guy behind me is following me? He is a bastard if he's tailgating but I still have to come to a sudden stop. AGain the blame is on him and AGAIN the tinting of my rear windshield plays no role in that. Absolutely horrible argument.

The only thing that is slightly more difficult if you have a rear tinted windshield is backing up at night time, and this one challenge is negated if you have the backup camera. This is point #1

I don't understand your second statement. "people...tint other than their front windshield" Nobody anywhere tints their front windshield. I don't know what you were attempting to say. And I maintain that the majority of the people on this forum have all four windows front/rear passenger/driver windows and the back windshield tinted. And the former is illegal in California at any percentage. This is point #2.

Snareman

I'm in Ohio where you have to have a front plate. I for almost 5 years with my G35 with no plate and almost 2 in my 335 with no plate. I finally got pulled over one nicht at 3am on a back road solely for having no front plate. Just got a warning. Basically an index card sized thing saying fix whatever we pulled you over for. I've talked to some state troopers and local cops. Most of them have said that they don't care about front plates, but the night guys have to log just as much activity as the day guys, so they'll pull people over for no turn signal useage, no plate, etc.

Lije Baley

Actually, the night guys are using the turn signal, tail light, license plate, license light, and many other reasons to stop your car, not so much to pump up their stats, but to see if you are DUI (very common in the early morning hours), driving on a suspended license, and a variety of other, bigger violations.

omfG37

That's what I'm afraid of and why I'm gonna end up putting my front plate on. In fact, that's the whole point of the thread!

Chekov

Well, if you don’t mind getting rear ended even though it’s not your fault then there’s nothing more to say in the matter, except that I prefer to exercise good defensive driving to help prevent such things, such as leaving a greater distance in front of me if I’m being tailgated. And contrary to what you believe, a 15% tint on the rear window could have an effect on how you would judge how close that other car is behind you. Also, even though you don’t seem to mind getting rear ended if it’s not your fault, how about being injured or even killed? Doesn’t that prospect enter into this?

I have recently experienced loss of my prized G37 for a week due to a rear bumper replacement because some lady backed into me in a parking lot. It was her fault, but certainly MY inconvenience. I doubt if she had had a backup camera it would have made any difference.

On my second statement, I was responding to your revised insistence that 99% of forum members here tint their side, back and rear windows. Now you seem to be saying just a majority do it. Which is it and do you have anything to back it up? I believe neither is true but am willing to change my position.

omfG37

Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't wanna get into any sort of accident/injured/ or killed and I never said I did. My point is that if you're going to get rear ended, the amount of space in front of you and the tinting of your rear windshield aren't going to help at all. Some drivers, especially senile senior citizens, are just bad and shouldn't be driving .

Sorry to hear about your G , but again some people are bad drivers. I do believe if she had the backup camera you would have had a better chance of not suffering your inconvenience. She would have seen your car and stopped backing up like most people with common sense would.

Like I said in a post earlier, 99% was an exaggeration. Your comment in the previous post still made no sense but is probably just an error in syntax. Nevertheless I will ask now: readers of this post: how many of you have all your windows tinted (not including front windshield)?

shumby

iTrader: (3)

me.

Chekov

I got your drift on the senior citizen comment. All I can say is that I’ve lived this long because I didn’t make too many irresponsible choices in my youth, especially when it came to automobiles. I really hope you too reach my age and can advise your children in the same way. We have a saying in the flying community: There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. But there are no old-bold pilots.

As far as your asking how many here have tints, I fully expect the responses will be mostly from those who have tints, and certainly not from 99% of members. So any data so collected will be worthless. But nice try though.

Chekov

This is not a fight. It’s a civil discussion on an issue of interest to forum members. Such things can happen here.

davidology

iTrader: (1)

You are definitely giving 5-0 more reason to pull you over. It just takes one cop who's looking for a reason to pull you over, or one just having a bad day who doesn't like you in your fancy sports car ignoring the front license plate law. I always feel as if you don't want your car to stand out when it comes to cops. As far as whether it's worth it, only you can answer the risk part of the equation though.

As far as tickets go, though, you're much more likely to get nabbed by parking enforcement if you're in L.A. If you park in an area that has frequent enforcement, you can almost count on it.

Also, if you get a photo light ticket, they'll ticket you for both the red light AND not having a front plate.

Anyway, those are the risks as far as I know. TBH, I think having it on your dashboard looks worse than just putting it on the front bumper. I'm dreading my plates coming in, and am definitely going to wait the full 90 days before I put them on. When the time comes, I'm just going to take it to Infiniti and tell them to put the plate kit on. For me, I just don't want the hassle. :/

omfG37

^^Agreed. I don't like having my front license plate on the dash. In fact I'm going to remove it right now since it hasn't been 90 days. But when the time comes I will install the stillen mount so I don't have to drill holes in the bumper.

Brush

isnt there a remote plate where it sits under your car and when u press a button it rolls out from under the car?? Ive seen it on the vetts

billgti

one thing you should know is that in the recent years parking enforcement has been tasked to ticket cars with no front license plates in LA (not sure if this applies to all of CA). i definitely got quite a few when i had to park on the street in west LA.