It is capable of carrying 2 roses.

I'm taxing that fool, mafia style!

 

oh no you din't!

don't get all mad because i can drive my modified car with tinted windows in cali without it needing to be a rust bucket pre '75 retiree. i wave to wacky as soon as i pass the border.

 

Jealousy is an ugly thang...

you're just mad coz the only way to go for an old school is to upgrade and not downgrade, thanks to these junk RX-7s for keeping my RX-3s alive. lol.

you're just mad coz us pinoys dont need window tint...we dont burn, we just get golden brown LMAO

 

i'm not mad, my old '74 REPU almost burned to the ground after the new owner added a cigarette lighter! lol

so if you want to add anything new to your old school, rethink the possible side effects.

 

You lied...you fucked up, lets blame the prior owner.
You lied...booked for 8+ weeks then but you have time to postwhore



The side effect of owning an old school is that whenever I spot a RX-7, I think of usable parts from it.

 

some ghey lovers quarrel going on here.

 

wacky you mad because i can drive my FD all day with its ponies and not be worried ........LMAO

looks like both ways i am win win.

Oh and I got a real job its called "dope dealing" want some....puntanginamoo lol

 

vete a la mierda cabron lol

 

To me, we, the American public, should not have to prove anything. It should be up to the officer to prove the tail lights are tinted. Not just his/her opinion which is obviously wrong.


"Innocent until proven guilty"

 

good one wacky lol

 

I agree but you know that's just a catch phrase to make us feel better

 

you and your ghey lover lol

 

The OEM manual describes the tail lights as tinted (stock)... I would describe the tail lights as tinted... When the officer describes them as tinted do not argue the fact... They are tinted, OEM and DOT certified... They are also LEGAL... They illuminate as red and there are red reflectors below... What more would the DMV and Court want??? Nothing... Zoom... Zoom...

 

I feel your pain, I was pulled over last week for the same reason...I could tell they singled me out because my car is red and loud. They said it was because my tail lights were tinted (they're not, they're from a '99 but still OEM). When I explained that to the cop he said, "Well, we're going to get you for something."

They gave me a ticket for not having a front-license plate (I bought the car a month ago, I have no bracket to mount it). I would fight the ticket but the court is an hour and a half away, screw that I'll pay the stupid fine.

I wish cops would focus on preventing and responding to real crimes rather than trying to meet quotas and generate revenue. It's unfair to target someone because of their age and the car they drive.

 

I agree with the post above yours. Get the ticket, have it dismissed rather than getting a legitimate ticket and having no chance of getting it dismissed.

 

well then that must you

 

Holy crap where has this thread gone since i last checked lol. Thanks DINO

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I still haven't settled this B.S. been out of town, etc....

 

Got my ticket today, the officer chp Hayward totals ignored the fact that I had my car manual with me. When I asked to show him picture and proof he just ignores me and doesn't even bother answering me. Writes his ticket for light and no front plate.

This is with me being very respectful asking his permission before I get my Insurance and license everything, but he was rude a d ignored everything I said.

 

Ego tripping as always man. Cops.

 

thanks to this thread and occassional rolling smog machine off glendale blvd in echo park, i want to buy more smog exempt old school lol