fdjon

I just got pulled over and ticketed for having "smoked taillights." In my stock 93 FD. Yes, you read that correctly.

Anyone else had this happen? The cop argued with me for a while about "the taillights need to be red and they can't be stock because blah blah blah and I'm going to ticket you anyways so you can contest it on your own."

So now i need to deal with this somehow. Any suggestions?

SayNoToPistons

smoke tailights are illegal in some states. like tinted with window tintor the spray. unless yours is 100% stock. theres nothign you can do.

FDZero

iTrader: (10)

Hmm...interesting. I never been pulled over YET (dammit...just got jinxed..haha) for this but I do know that the completely clear taillight trend a few years back was banned here where I live...there has to be at least 2 distinctive colors, red being one for certain. You should check up on your DMV or hit the latest BB on your citys traffic laws.

...maybe the cop was having a bad day....

antiSUV

iTrader: (10)

You gotta go to court and come out with a stupidly-huge pile of evidence in your favor. Collect every pic of a stock FD you can find and print them out. Buy a pile of dealer brochures off Ebay or someplace. Heck, bring in your own tail light off your own car and show that the plastic is molded with that tint and there are DOT approval numbers molded into the surface.

-James

DragonRx7

Get Mazda to certify that they are indeed in stock form.

RE-Amemiya

Can't say i've every heard of that, but i wouldn't be worried. It's not like you've done something wrong, F that cop.

Do what antiSUV suggested...just show the judge your taillight with the DOT approval.

FDZero

iTrader: (10)

In addition to what I said above...maybe the cop is unaware how the FD taillights are. I mean...look at it (yes, I know our taillights are sexy!)...it's completely black during the day and night....it really only visible when u brake, blinkers, etc. I understand how he thinks they're smoked and thus draws conclusion of it not being legal.

BTW, i think FD tailights are only cars that have completely/almost black taillights during day and night prior to turn on lights, brake, blinker, etc?

FDNewbie

iTrader: (10)

What they said. I've gotten harrassed about it before too. Cops have a hard time believing they're OEM lol.

fdjon

antiSUV (Stupid Useless Vehicle)- that's great- maybe I'll do that AND provide somesort of Mazda certification? ha.

Damn, now I have to take time to do it, etc..

Force13B

iTrader: (19)

There very few cops out there that are car people. I sat on a curb for an hour while a cop called in to check if a rotary engine was street legal, then proceeded to ask me if i had any aftermarket parts

FDNewbie

iTrader: (10)

Oh man...that was a good one. Is a rotary engine legal...

dgeesaman

iTrader: (7)

Download one of the original Mazda brochures. Show that to the court.

David

Force13B

iTrader: (19)

The whole story is way better. I'll give you a quote from it.
cop: "That's the smallest radiator i've ever seen"
me: "That's my intercooler"
I'll leave it at that.

7tcbody

I'm going to kick a ricer in the nads for causing all this shiat and also for devaluing our cars

JD_SMOOTH83

I ve seen a few posts like this recently...its sum BS, I would be very angry for getting ticketed over this...now u have to waste your time in court, our taillights are legal because if you look at the rear bumper you will see two red reflectors w/ the reverse lights......which cali requires

scotty305

iTrader: (2)

All cars that are street legal in the US need to have a red reflector and a clear reverse light visible on the rear; on most cars, this will be built into the main taillight (the part that lights up when you hit the brakes). On our cars, the reflector and the clear reverse lights are down low on the bumper; on a red FD it blends in especially well and you might not even notice it. The cop isn't used to seeing a taillight that doesn't have the red reflector material built into it, you might have to show him the reflector, and point out the little DOT label that's molded in.


Also, I remember seeing Mazda literature that talks about them using tinted taillights, because it makes it easier to see if the driver is braking: the lights are either red or black, as opposed to bright red and dim red.


-s-

BLKTOPTRVL

Hard to believe that any cops in the US would not know that sometimes smoked tails come as OEM.

Even if there aren't a lot of RX-7 FDs on the road, I would think enough cops would have noticed that Firebirds came with them.

adictd2b00st

this story reminds me of a friend who got a ticket for his stock wing on his EVO when they first came out :P "obstruction of view" haha

DCrosby

Anybody heard of Innocent until proven guilty ???
Let the officer "Prove" that those are aftermarket smoked, and have a factory brocure with you, when you go showing the supposed "tint" probhably to be had on E-Bay for $10-$20

FDNewbie

iTrader: (10)

DCrosby, there's a dichotomy between what the law states and what IS. What IS, is that you are by a FAR stretch guilty UNTIL you PROVE your innocence; your word will not stand up to the Officer's, as his is seen as expert testimony, given that he's considered an expert in the field...

~Ramy

Sgtblue

iTrader: (16)

They shouldn't. The ticket is stupid and it gives us all a bad name when they do that crap. He obviously rode the short bus to school...and didn't wear a helmet like he was suppose to.
All of the suggestions are good. But as soon as practical, BEFORE court, just see if you can get a few minutes with the County Attorney/DA or whoever prosecutes traffic. Make your case. Stay calm and as difficult as it may be, don't be critical of the Cop. I wouldn't drag your taillights in with you, but drive the car there and offer to let them look at it. Show them a few pictures of other cars and maybe even a simple letter from a MAZDA tech attesting to the taillights stock condition. Politely let them know your willing to go to trial. Approach it with an attitude of: "I just didn't want to take up your time with the matter" and how your sure the "Officer is just confused" yadda yadda. Chances are, they'll see the light (nice pun huh) and will simply drop it.

BLKTOPTRVL

Good suggestion. But I would hope to see the cop get humbled in front of the judge for wasting everybody's time and the defendant's time and money.

Sgtblue

iTrader: (16)

While that makes a nice mental picture, it's not likely. AFTER he gets it dismissed, he'd could take a shot by going through the Officers food chain.

RotaryEvolution

iTrader: (30)

just take in a picture of the back of the car and point out the reflectors and backups moulded into the lower portion of the bumper as scotty mentioned. if the cop doesn't show then the case will be thrown out, if he does show he will look like a fool for not noticing the markers down low on the bumper.

imo i would love the satisfaction of making him look bad, maybe he will think twice about pulling over someone for something so stupid in the future.

scotty305

iTrader: (2)

www.iluvmyrx7.com used to have a ton of scanned magazine articles and sales brochures, but the site's down. Does anyone have copies of these?

edit: found some good stuff at www.fd3s.net , there are some old magazine articles that make it very clear that the RX-7 came with 'smoked' taillights.


http://www.fd3s.net/magazine_article...article02.html

-s-