HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nobled@rebecca.its.rpi.edu (David Noble)
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:24:43 GMT

wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:
>I have heard this explanation as well.  I can't figure out how something 
>can be legal coming out of a factory, and be illegal when you apply it to
>your own car.

The explanation I've heard is that factory jobs use windows with tinted
glass, while third party jobs just coat the windows with a film or sheet
of plastic or something. The concern with third party tinting is that
apparently the coated glass is more dangerous when it breaks. Just what
I've been told, anyways.

I'd also like to know how to untint the windows, since I'll be moving to
California soon. My car had tinted windows back & front when I bought it,
but it was a third party job. Of course, I'm more worried about the
emissions than the windows...

-- 
Dave                         <dnoble@rdrc.rpi.edu>
            Computer & Systems Engineering, class of '92 and a half
 Visual Technologies Program, Rensselaer Design Research Center, RPI, Troy NY
///// "Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked." \\\\\
Xref: sparky ca.driving:2591 rec.autos.driving:7246 rec.autos:29977
From: sharen@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Sharen A. Rund)
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:45:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co.

In article <1992Dec14.142124.4907@julian.uwo.ca> wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:
>In article <1ghsufINNniq@agate.berkeley.edu> shyguy@ocf.berkeley.edu (David S. Shy) writes:
>>>Is there somekinda law in CA that prohibits tinting the front two windows 
>>>of a car ? I was given a ticket this morning for having tinted front two 
>>
>>one cannot tint the front two windows of a car.  however, this only
>>applies to third party jobs (i.e., your local garage or done by yourself.)
>>if the car was tinted coming out of the factory, it is perfectly
>>fine and legal.  
>
>I have heard this explanation as well.  I can't figure out how something 
>can be legal coming out of a factory, and be illegal when you apply it to
>your own car.  I've always wondered how limousines that are custom built
>get around such a law...

the limo driver's windows aren't tinted....B-)
-- 
________________       __        ________________   "They that can give up
\_________      \     /_ \      /      _________/  essential liberty to 
 \_________      \_____/  \____/      _________/  obtain temporary safety
  \___________________      __________________/  deserve neither liberty 
                     /______\                   nor safety."  
ALL disclaimers apply ....                           --Benjamin Franklin
	  
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: john@rachel.storcon.com (John Hunley)
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:31:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Storage Concepts, Inc.

In article <1992Dec13.211005.15008@netcom.com>, suleman@netcom.com (Dani Suleman) writes:
|> Is there somekinda law in CA that prohibits tinting the front two windows 
|> of a car ? I was given a ticket this morning for having tinted front two 
|> windows. I have no idea that it's illegal here since I just came from
|> Texas. In Texas, the front two windows can be tinted provided that the
|> tint is within some limit (there is a limit on how dark the front two
|> windows can get). Any advice on this matter is appreciated !

The applicable paragraph in the CVC is 26708.  It's too long to quote here
in full, but basically what it says (disclaimer: this is my own personal
interpretation, I'm not a lawyer, don't come running to me if you get nailed)
is that you may not operate with "any object or material placed, displayed,
installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows."
Side windows to the rear of the driver are exempted (26708b4), as is the rear
window IF you have mirrors on both left- and right-hand sides (26708b8).
Tinted safety glass is permitted by 26708.5b.  Therefore, the basic distinction
is whether you have tinted glass or tinting that is stuck onto the glass.
There's no mention of "factory" vs. "third party."  A third-party tint job
would be legal if it was done by replacing the windshield and front windows
with tinted safety glass, rather than by sticking or painting something onto
the existing glass.

An interesting side note is that 26708a3 specifically includes snow and ice
as an obstruction covered under 26708.  So you can get a ticket for 26708 for
having snow or ice on your windshield or front windows, as well as stick-on
tinting.  Same violation.

BTW, 12505c requires anyone moving ("establishing residency") to California to
obtain a California Driver's License within 10 days of establishing
residency here.  Most people aren't aware of this until it's well past, but
since it sounds like you've recently moved here, you might want to get that
taken care of.  I would also recommend buying a copy of the CVC ($3 at any
DMV office, pick one up when you apply for your license), it's a great value
and indispensable (IMHO) if you want to drive intelligently (which a lot of
California drivers don't seem to care about). 
--
                            John Hunley
   Sr. Software Engineer                  Email:  john@storcon.com
   Storage Concepts, Inc.                  UUCP:  uunet!storcon!john
   1622 Deere Ave.                        Voice:  (714) 852-8511
   Irvine, CA  92714                        FAX:  (714) 557-5064
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: john@rachel.storcon.com (John Hunley)
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:45:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Storage Concepts, Inc.

In article <1992Dec14.225910.2323@julian.uwo.ca>, wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:

|> So what's the deal with these pull-down blinds that are attached via 
|> suction cups?  Heck, the above law could even nail you for having parking
|> stickers on your windshield.

The pull-down blinds are permitted ONLY if the driver or front passenger has
a signed document from a physician or optometrist (CVC 26708b10) stating that
they are required due to a medical or visual condition.  CVC 26708b3 allows
"signs, stickers, or other materials which are displayed in a 7-inch square in
the lower corner of the windshield ... [or] ... rear window farthest removed
from the driver, or ... in a 5-inch square in the lower corner of the
windshield nearest the driver."

Also exempted are such things as rearview mirrors, rear window wiper
hardware, rear trunk lid handles and hinges, destination signs on busses,
magnifying or wide-angle lenses on the passenger side window of a truck, and
of course the standard equipment sun visors.

See why I said the whole paragraph 26708 is too long to quote in full?  ;-) 
--
                            John Hunley
   Sr. Software Engineer                  Email:  john@storcon.com
   Storage Concepts, Inc.                  UUCP:  uunet!storcon!john
   1622 Deere Ave.                        Voice:  (714) 852-8511
   Irvine, CA  92714                        FAX:  (714) 557-5064
From: ez008208@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Julian Burger)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Auto Talk and Way To Go
Date: 13 Dec 92 19:23:30 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

I'm not positive this is the appropriate newsgroup, so excuse me if it isn't.

Has anybody in the Bay Area purchased an Auto Talk device or a Way To Go
device?  They provide traffic information "customized for you". 

Auto Talk is sort of like a TV audio program receiver that you install in
your car.  You can receive regular TV audio and they also have two special
channel for traffic info (and weather too).

Way To Go is a hand-held device that only reports on traffic conditions.

I haven't purchased either of the two.  Has anybody out there been
considering a purchase, or gone through with one?

JB @ UCD
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: kevinb@oblivion.csd.sgi.com (Kevin Brokaw)
Subject: Transferring a vehicle to CA from NY
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:34:28 GMT

I've just recently moved out here from "upstate" NY, where emissions
testing is unheard of, and have found my vehicle (an 86 Ford Aerostar
w/4 cyl and 5-speed) was not available in CA for that model year due to
emissions problems. So far, I've heard estimates of from 300 to nearly a 
grand just for the "pleasure" of putting CA plates on this thing. I still 
maintain a residence in NY, so I have been able to keep my non-CA-resident
status up to now, but I will soon become "permanent", and I'd like to 
solicit some advice on just what to expect (advice, that is, from someone
that DOESN'T expect to dip into my wallet). I'm willing to accept the 
fact that my insurance will probably triple (I pay less that 400 dollars
a year for good coverage in NY), but I don't want to be suckered, and between
all the DMV fees and smog/repair charges I've had thrown at me, I'm starting
to feel like a dartboard. Can anyone break things down a bit?
Thanks in advance, 
Kevin 


-- 
Kevin Brokaw        ( kevinb@sgi.com )   | 
Product support engineer                 | Sorry.. this closet is for anxieties.
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems        | Pipe dreams are under the bed. 
(Forgive them,they know not what I post) | 




-- 
Kevin Brokaw        ( kevinb@sgi.com )   | 
Product support engineer                 | Sorry.. this closet is for anxieties.
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems        | Pipe dreams are under the bed. 
(Forgive them,they know not what I post) | 
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Subject: Stealth paint for Laser speed check?
Reply-To: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 15 Dec 92 18:42:11 GMT

In article <53410026@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> chuang@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Chi Huang) writes:
>Do anyone know if any place in CA is using the LIDAR now? LIDAR is the 
>device uses Laser to detect your car speed.

Surely this one is easy to defeat. Isn't anyone offering flat black paint yet? 

--
George F. McQuary 
"He is mad, bad and dangerous to know." -Lady Caroline Lamb
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: byafuso@athena.qualcomm.com (Byron Yafuso)
Subject: I didn't receive a registration renewal notice
Summary: Anyone else not receive registration renewal notices this year?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:44:34 GMT

I was getting new tires for my car the other day, and my buddy noticed 
that my registration was expired.  I'm pretty sure I never got a renewal
notice.

So, I called the DMV and was informed that, because I was late, I would
have to pay a late fee.  I was also informed that the late fee had been
recently increased to %40 from %20 of the renewal rate.

Hmmm?  I wonder if this is incentive for the state to "forget" to mail
renewal notices to people.

I might have confused the computer program last year when I went ahead
and got my car smog-checked out of turn (I thought I had to do it
every year).  But, then again, maybe not.

Did anyone else not get a registration renewal notice in the mail?



byafuso@qualcomm.com

Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: grant@clarinet.com (Grant Robinson)
Subject: Re: Do I need Chains?
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Distribution: ca
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:03:22 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.224222.6534@prpa.philips.com> ross@prpa.philips.com (Ross Morley) writes:

>I would be rather annoyed to find that CalTrans now makes even 4wd
>vehicles with M+S tires drive 30 miles at 30mph with chains on hard
>pavement...  especially after getting 4wd mainly to avoid the horrible
>wear on my car and chains this causes.

We were on I80 while chain restrictions were on all the way from just past
Applegate to Tahoe City, and you can rest assured, no one drove at
30 mph.  We had chains, and limited our speed to 30 - 35 mph, and were
passed on everything on the road that was operational.   Some of the 4WD's
were pushing 65, based on educated guessing.  Average speeds were probably
in the neighbourhood of 45 - 50 mph.  No hard pavement in sight anywhere.
-- 
Grant Robinson -- ClariNet Communications Corp, Sunnyvale, CA (408)-296-0366
From: keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Insurance impossible for out-of-state vehicle purchase?
Date: 11 Dec 92 21:28:47 GMT
Organization: California-Nevada Methodist Homes

In article <1992Dec10.220348.23499@netcom.com> dman@netcom.com (Dallman Ross) writes:
>accident in CA -- we're talking claims of $50,000 or more -- the
>insurance company is going to start investigating what the hell you're
>doing in California, you'd better believe it.  When they amass witnesses
>Second, I'm not sure what will happen to the validity of your CA
>Please tell me more about the exact requirements for bringing a
>non-CA-smog-conforming vehicle into CA.  Just what does happen these
>days?
>

First of all Dallman, I don't have two drivers licenses.  I only
have one.  That is for the state I have my car registered in, and 
the state that is my legal residence in.  If I was to have an
accident in CA, I'd say what anybody else would say, I was on
vacation.  People are allowed to drive their cars out of the 
states they are registered in.  
As to your questions about bringing non-CA smog vehicles into
the state, well, this question has been asked recently, and al
I know is what I have read about on the net, and from second-hand
information from CA DMV.  Basically, if one is to register a vehicle
from out of state in CA, they will ask you some questions.  I understand
that it is supposedly prohibitive in order to prevent people from driving
to Nevada and Oregon and purchasing vehicles, and then driving them
back into CA.  So one has to have purchased the vehicle and kept it
a while before attempting to bring it into the state.  Anyway, upon
trying to register it, one has to pay a one time environmental-impact
fee of approx $300, as a "fine" for not having a CA-emission equipped
vehicle.  Then, one has to have the car inspected in order to make 
sure that it *does* pass the federal standards.  Then, one has to 
buy the CA license plate which is priced to vary according to the
value of your vehicle.  I was told by CA DMV, that the cost to register
my 1990 VW Fox in CA would run somewhere between $1000-1500.  Then
I would have the "privelege" of paying exorbitantly high CA insurance
rates, paying through the nose for a CA plate every year, and waiting
the approximately six weeks that I've been told that it takes for
one to get a CA drivers license.  I hope this has enlightened you.
--Keith
From: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: East Bay Traffic School recommendations?
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:17:31 GMT
Reply-To: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Distribution: ba
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501

Okay, I've received my first ticket and the judge was kind enough to allow me
to go to traffic school and keep it off my record. From the California DMV's
listing of Traffic Violator Schools the following schools caught my eye.
Can anyone recommend one of them? 

A Nice Traffic School for You
Free Pizza School --Good Food
A Laff'N Learn Comedy Traffic School
Lettuce Amuse you
Cheap School
Sooo Cheap School of Traffic Safety
Comedy-Magic Traffic School
Pizza School --Low on Dough
U Turn to Us for Quality Education
Free Chinese Food --Our Price is Rice
Laughs Galore --U Won't Snore
Lunch N Learn at Fine Reastaurants
Pizza for You --Comedians 2
Comedy for Less -No Work, No Test!
Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha! School
Humor's My Name, Traffic's My Game
Humor Class --Laugh at Our Prices
Comedians Plus --Learn from Us

--
George F. McQuary 
"He is mad, bad and dangerous to know." -Lady Caroline Lamb
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith)
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Organization: The John P. Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 22:59:10 GMT

In article <Bz9Kx7.EFy@storcon.uucp> john@rachel.storcon.com (John Hunley) writes:
>The applicable paragraph in the CVC is 26708.  It's too long to quote here

>is that you may not operate with "any object or material placed, displayed,
>installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows."
>Side windows to the rear of the driver are exempted (26708b4), as is the rear
>window IF you have mirrors on both left- and right-hand sides (26708b8).
>Tinted safety glass is permitted by 26708.5b.  Therefore, the basic distinction
>is whether you have tinted glass or tinting that is stuck onto the glass.
>There's no mention of "factory" vs. "third party."  A third-party tint job
>would be legal if it was done by replacing the windshield and front windows
>with tinted safety glass, rather than by sticking or painting something onto
>the existing glass.

I have heard about some experimental windshields that have a coating of
protective plastic that prevents injury (cuts, etc) in the event of impact.
I guess the above "law" flies in the face of this protective glass.

So what's the deal with these pull-down blinds that are attached via 
suction cups?  Heck, the above law could even nail you for having parking
stickers on your windshield.
From: levine@dinsdale.ics.uci.edu (David Levine)
Subject: Re: Do I need Chains?
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Date: 18 Dec 92 22:58:30 GMT
Distribution: ca

Richard Ottolini writes:

>Do all four tures have to be chained or just the drive tires?

"at least two drive wheels [sic: tires]"  [CVC 27459]
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Subject: Re: Do I need Chains?
Organization: Unocal Corporation
Distribution: ca
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:31:40 GMT

Do all four tures have to be chained or just the drive tires?
Xref: sparky ca.driving:2562 rec.autos.driving:7181 rec.autos:29668
From: suleman@netcom.com (Dani Suleman)
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
Subject: Tinted windows law ??
Date: 13 Dec 92 21:10:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Hi, 
Is there somekinda law in CA that prohibits tinting the front two windows 
of a car ? I was given a ticket this morning for having tinted front two 
windows. I have no idea that it's illegal here since I just came from
Texas. In Texas, the front two windows can be tinted provided that the
tint is within some limit (there is a limit on how dark the front two
windows can get). Any advice on this matter is appreciated !

--dani
suleman@netcom.com
From: sherw@ocf.berkeley.edu (Gregory Sherwin)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Carjacking:  Old News to me, but I live in So. LA
Date: 16 Dec 1992 00:31:47 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: lightning.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Dec3.211514.8784@unocal.com> stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:
>Yes but there can be media-induced feedback that increases the amount.
>Two years ago the number of carjackings greatly increased for a while
>in Detroit because partly the media was talking about it all the time
>and prepetrators learned how easy it was to do.

And although it is truly the best thing to do, I wonder what the potential
car jackers must think when they see these stories in the media and 
everyone repeats "if you are being car jacked - do not resist and hand them
the keys".  What could be simpler?

greg
From: ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: I didn't receive a registration renewal notice
Date: 18 Dec 92 19:01:02 GMT
Organization: UC Davis Dept of Applied Science at LLNL

In article <byafuso.724617874@athena> byafuso@athena.qualcomm.com (Byron Yafuso) writes:
>I was getting new tires for my car the other day, and my buddy noticed 
>that my registration was expired.  I'm pretty sure I never got a renewal
>notice.
>
>So, I called the DMV and was informed that, because I was late, I would
>have to pay a late fee.  I was also informed that the late fee had been
>recently increased to %40 from %20 of the renewal rate.
>
>Did anyone else not get a registration renewal notice in the mail?

I've heard that this has happened to many hundreds of people, if not
thousands, over the last half-year.  I've heard complaints about this
from all kinds of sources, from this newsgroup to radio consumer advocate
talk shows.  Here's the situation:

The DMV has claimed that they don't need to send a renewal notice.  You're
supposed to know when your renewal is due, and pay it by then or pay late
fees.  This year the DMV decided to get tough about this policy.  I think
(and this part I'm not certain about) that the DMV decided to deliberately
not send out renewal notices (what they call "courtesy notices") to some
people, so that the word would get around eventually that it's the driver's
responsibility.

The magazine I just got from AAA indicates that there is a new law that
will go into affect on January 1, 1993, which compels the DMV to send
out renewal notices.  Apparently the legislature got deluged with
complaints.

Ed
ed@wente.llnl.gov


Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: grant@clarinet.com (Grant Robinson)
Subject: Re: Do I need Chains?
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Distribution: ca
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:06:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.234120.20755@prpa.philips.com> ross@prpa.philips.com (Ross Morley) writes:
>grant@clarinet.com (Grant Robinson) writes:
>
>>We were on I80 while chain restrictions were on all the way from just past
>>Applegate to Tahoe City, and you can rest assured, no one drove at
>>30 mph.  
>
>Even the ones with chains on? 

Yes, even the ones with chains on.

> The chain manufacturers say not to exceed 30mph because it wears the 
> chains out too quickly (and I suppose there is a danger of them flying 
> off if you rotate the wheels too fast).

For the number of times most people use chains, I doubt wear is a concern.
People who drive regularly in those kind of conditions probably have M/S
tires and 4WD.  As for them breaking, I imagine it's a liability type thing,
ie. they rate them much lower than what they're capable of, knowing full
well people will exceed it.  If they were rated for 60, and someone broke
them at 75, a jury might think that they were only exceeding the specs by a
modest amount, and the product was faulty.  However, if they're rated for
30 and someone breaks them at 75....

I could be completely wrong about this, but I saw many people travelling
50mph+ with chains, only breakage I saw was some guy whose cables had come
loose.

>Now I would have been one of those 4WDs pushing 65 if I felt
>sufficiently in control :-). 

I drove a 4WD truck in Canada for the last 4 years, and the important
thing to remember is that although they get better traction, they don't
stop any better.  In fact with many 4WD's once you lose traction, they're
one of the worst places to be, because of the extra weight and poor
emergency handling.  I realize your remark was made at least partially in
jest, but you never know if some newbie 4WD owner might read this and
give pause.

I'm not sure 65mph is out of line on the straights, provided you double or
triple your space cushion.  As for corners, my advice would be that it's a
lot easier not to start sliding (ie go slow enough) than to stop sliding,
once started. :)
-- 
Grant Robinson -- ClariNet Communications Corp, Sunnyvale, CA (408)-296-0366
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos