G8 GT Tails illegal in MD? - Page 2 - NJFBOA - Home of New Jersey's Camaros and Firebirds

Frosty · 07-20-2010, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTs1ow

WBT, you are too quick.

That's what she said. ZIIIIIIIIIIIIIING

LTb1ow · 07-20-2010, 04:48 PM

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?

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

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

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by BurninrubberGT

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

V · 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildBillyT

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

WildBillyT · 07-21-2010, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NastyEllEssWon

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

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

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

Quote:

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...-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/f...yland-state-p/

Featherburner · 09-29-2010, 03:01 PM

What a relief.

V · 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwikz28

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

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/28/f...yland-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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty

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)