G8 GT Tails illegal in MD? [Archive] - NJFBOA - Home of New Jersey's Camaros and Firebirds

BurninrubberGT

07-19-2010, 02:28 PM

he didnt have the tinted tails on when he got the ticket
they were all stock except the chrome ring was painted black

so yes, they werent 100% oem, but they were close and the judge said she didnt even care if they were oem, they were illegal in her state :lol:

BigAls87Z28

07-20-2010, 12:00 AM

The story was posted on GMI, and it seems that the guy brought in examples of the Pontiac brochure, and the judge said that the OE tails were illegal, reguardless of what he had on his car.

Mike

07-20-2010, 08:17 AM

The story was posted on GMI, and it seems that the guy brought in examples of the Pontiac brochure, and the judge said that the OE tails were illegal, reguardless of what he had on his car.

its not regardless of what he had on the car, the judge wouldnt even know what a g8 is if he didnt go in there fighting his ass off to get his modified light ticket knocked down...

greenformula92

07-20-2010, 08:37 AM

WildBillyT

07-20-2010, 08:46 AM

thats b/s...how can lights approved by DOT be illegal?

They can be illegal because local governments can create their own local laws on top of federal ones.

Ridiculous, yes, in some cases. Such as IF this is true about the taillights, or the "wacky laws" seen here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,473971,00.html

sweetbmxrider

07-20-2010, 10:12 AM

but if you fought it to supreme court, federal law > municipal law

like when feds and dea bust pot smokers in cali :nod:

BigAls87Z28

07-20-2010, 10:56 AM

Federal law always trumps state law, end of story. While his tail lights might or might not be legal, others with stock tail lights could fight this to federal court in which it would be thrown out as soon as they show the DOT badge on the tail lights.

Think of how many cars also have tail lights in similar fasion to the G8? Altima, Prius, Hyrbid Camry, Merc Mountainer, and a host of few other cars.

Mike

07-20-2010, 11:17 AM

no, federal law is the minimum standard that a state can meet, if a state wants to be stricter than the feds, that is accepted practice.

WildBillyT

07-20-2010, 12:22 PM

no, federal law is the minimum standard that a state can meet, if a state wants to be stricter than the feds, that is accepted practice.

Yup. This was my point above- laws on top of federal. The pecking order is

Federal
State
County
Township

etc.

sweetbmxrider

07-20-2010, 01:44 PM

so then why is federal court the highest court of law?

also, how come people with lexus suv's like the rx and crap don't get stopped daily?

http://www.mercedes-lease.com/photos/actual113350/640x480/Lexus-RX-330.jpeg

WildBillyT

07-20-2010, 01:56 PM

so then why is federal court the highest court of law?

What else would there be? "Earth" doesn't have a set of laws, other than gravity and maybe a few others. Federal court is there to protect federal laws.

Again- lower levels of government can have stricter laws on top of federal ones, but they can't be more lenient.

LTb1ow

07-20-2010, 02:11 PM

What else would there be? "Earth" doesn't have a set of laws, other than gravity and maybe a few others. Federal court is there to protect federal laws.

Again- lower levels of government can have stricter laws on top of federal ones, but they can't be more lenient.

What about states that do not test emissions? Isn't that more lenient that the federal clean air act?

WildBillyT

07-20-2010, 03:26 PM

What about states that do not test emissions? Isn't that more lenient that the federal clean air act?

No. That is a technicality. People who live in those states still live in the United States so they are required to abide by federal laws like the clean air act. Which is why removing a cat for anything other than replacement is technically illegal.

States that do not test are not saying it's OK, they are just leaving enforcement up to the feds.

WildBillyT

07-20-2010, 03:34 PM

Well, if you wanna get into this whole state vs feds... why is it that the Federal govt is suing the state of AZ over a more strict approach to a federal law?

Non political of course. :lol:

I do not know enough about the issue to really comment. Gun to my head I'd guess that it violates some sort of federal legislation.

Frosty

07-20-2010, 04:10 PM

No. That is a technicality. People who live in those states still live in the United States so they are required to abide by federal laws like the clean air act. Which is why removing a cat for anything other than replacement is technically illegal.

States that do not test are not saying it's OK, they are just leaving enforcement up to the feds.

Exactly. Removing your catalytic converter is still violates federal law.

LTb1ow

07-20-2010, 04:42 PM

WBT, you are too quick. :lol:

Frosty

07-20-2010, 04:45 PM

WBT, you are too quick. :lol:

That's what she said. ZIIIIIIIIIIIIIING

LTb1ow

07-20-2010, 04:48 PM

http://www.ls1lt1.com/forum/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

ryanfx

07-20-2010, 08:41 PM

Here is his car, per the forums. I don't see why this guy is bitching. What's not to get about why you're being fined?

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/12/2010/07/6a1f814de862a3a8d091f609140adae2/340x.jpg

Tru2Chevy

07-20-2010, 08:53 PM

Ryan, those aren't the tails he had on at the time he was pulled over.

- Justin

sweetbmxrider

07-20-2010, 09:31 PM

:rofl: who the **** cares. if he has tinted tails, he should expect it. if the judge is that dumb, realize we don't have it THAT bad :laugh:

BigAls87Z28

07-20-2010, 10:50 PM

So what you are saying is that a state can override and make something illegal that is made legal by the highest court in the land, correct?
State law can be expanded above, but cannot reverse federal law.
Example would be the weed thing. You cannot override federal law. You can only manipulate it or expand upon it. In the end, there is no maryland law that states that these are illegal, so really this argument is useless. The judge has no grasp on the law, be it state or federal, reguarding tail lights.
If it gets to the federal level, it will be thrown out.

BurninrubberGT

07-21-2010, 06:53 AM

another example would be the new under 21 law with the stickers, 3 nj towns have abolished the law in their jurisdiction, but it is still active on a state level

WildBillyT

07-21-2010, 08:10 AM

another example would be the new under 21 law with the stickers, 3 nj towns have abolished the law in their jurisdiction, but it is still active on a state level

The best example would be California emissions laws riding on top of federal ones.

BigAls87Z28

07-21-2010, 09:12 AM

You are expanding on the federal emissions laws but they cannot violate the federal ones. I don't understand how counties can abolish a rule set by the state run dmv. They might be protesting it but its still a law.

Mike

07-21-2010, 11:24 AM

yes EXPANDING maryland isnt saying 20 dollar ebay lights ARE legal, it is saying that a light that the dot approved ISNT, they are making the law stricter, ie EXPANDING on it not reversing it

07-21-2010, 11:40 AM

interesting case.

and yes the fully blacked out tails werent on his car when stopped.

What he did to his stock tails was similar to the "whistler" mod for the ls1 camaros... opening up the lights and painting the internal surfaces black.

imo, the judge is just overreacting saying stock g8 gt lights are illegal. thats ridiculous. However, she can easily rule that his light were illegal. The DOT certification are for the stock lights, once he opened them up and changed anything, thats the point where the DOT classification meant nothing anymore. The judge should rule that ANY mods to stock equipment is a violation but to say ALL STOCK G8 GT lights are illegal is beyond me. Once her ruling goes to any higher court, be it country or state, it will get thrown out. simple as that.

NastyEllEssWon

07-21-2010, 02:21 PM

The best example would be California emissions laws riding on top of federal ones.

another example would be the recent recognition of state marijuana laws trumping federal :nod:

WildBillyT

07-21-2010, 03:19 PM

another example would be the recent recognition of state marijuana laws trumping federal :nod:

They aren't. Before I opened my fat mouth I thought of the MJ stuff and a few other examples.

It looks that way but states don't have that power. I think there are some type of details that make it possible, like enforcement varies from state to state (similar to the Texas home protection laws that make it OK to kill a criminal invading your home vs. other states where that is murder). Or like how Oxycodone is a Class II drug (vs THC @ Class I) but it remains legal in certain cases. I'm guessing it's not the drug itself that's illegal, it's the way it is being used or possessed (based on the CSA of 1970). So basically it's not MJ or Oxycodone that's illegal, it's that it's a controlled substance and using it in a fashion other than indicated by the fed gov is illegal. States put their own laws on top of that, and Cali relaxed theirs.

Maybe a lawyer on here can set me straight.

Frosty

07-21-2010, 03:22 PM

I'm not a lawyer but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express :rofl:

Anyway, from what I understand regarding the Cali MJ deal is that the DEA can still come in and raid these places and make arrests. That may have recently changed but a year ago or so the DEA still had authority over ANY state drug law.

NastyEllEssWon

07-21-2010, 08:38 PM

in the last year it was regarded that state mj laws trump federal laws. if you get arrested in texas with a california prescription card you are still protected under the laws with which your prescription provides, given that you are still abiding within the parameters set by california state law, if not then it goes out the window.

it was made so because people from california were traveling with their meds and still getting busted by other states.

Frosty

07-21-2010, 10:26 PM

Nice, yeah I was going off the old laws.

I'm REALLY shocked that state law can/does trump federal drug laws...times are changing eh?

BurninrubberGT

09-29-2010, 01:34 PM

new news

The Maryland judge who threatened to approve tickets for all Pontiac G8 owners over their stock tail lights has backed down, reportedly saying she "misunderstood." Vehicular freedom's having a good week in the Bay State.

To recap: The judge had issued an $85 fine to the owner of a Pontiac G8 GT for illegal tail lights ticketed by police, and ruled even the factory version would be illegal under Maryland law, despite being approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Thing is, Altezza-style tail lamps can be found on dozens of cars, and are a mainstay of the aftermarket. Thanks to a local state's attorney who has similar lamps on a Lexus, not only were the charges dismissed, but the owner of the G8 received an apology from the supervisor of the officer who wrote the ticket.

http://jalopnik.com/5650920/maryland-judge-dismisses-g8-tail-light-charges

qwikz28

09-29-2010, 02:57 PM

apparently it was a good day for motorists in Maryland under the law:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/28/followup-motorcyclist-wins-taping-case-against-maryland-state-p/

Featherburner

09-29-2010, 03:01 PM

What a relief.

09-29-2010, 04:50 PM

at least theres still some common sense going around even if it takes a while...

Frosty

09-29-2010, 06:17 PM

apparently it was a good day for motorists in Maryland under the law:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/28/followup-motorcyclist-wins-taping-case-against-maryland-state-p/

That cop should lose his f'in badge. There was NO reason to pull a gun, especially in civilian clothes. It's jerk-offs like him that give cops a bad rep.

maroman88

09-29-2010, 06:36 PM

That cop should lose his f'in badge. There was NO reason to pull a gun, especially in civilian clothes. It's jerk-offs like him that give cops a bad rep.

esp wen there was a marked unit behind him already anyway

Firebird92

09-29-2010, 11:29 PM

this is why everytime i get pulled over i turn on my droid (cop cam app) because as sad as it is you can never win a hearsay match again the police unless you have alot of $$$ or know somebody

FlyingDutchman

09-30-2010, 04:32 PM

That cop should lose his f'in badge. There was NO reason to pull a gun, especially in civilian clothes. It's jerk-offs like him that give cops a bad rep.

especially since he approached him gun drawn not stating who he was right away. for all the guy on the motor cycle knew, that cop coulda been a deranged man (although id say the cop is outta his mind lol)