Tint ticket from City of Calgary parking authority

[Khyron]

At any rate, you can't confirm the tint film without opening the door or lowering the window (vs pure tinted glass). So I'm really interested exactly what act the ticket specifies is violated.

[msixty]

That's horeshlt, what about snow covered windows?

[Maxt]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
Yes, I think that's it. Makes sense, if you need to smash your window out in an emergency the tint would hold it together and cause issues or delay.

Would it be any different from factory side windows that are laminate instead of tempered ?
The side glass on my 2006 dodge crew cab is laminated, it took a baseball sized rock a month or so ago off the mirror. I don't think even tempered with tint would be as tough as this stuff to break.

[cancer man]

The only people that should be allowed are Albinos.They need tint to prevent skin blisters.
Everybody else pay the fines.This is Canada and you have to pay for your freedom.
That is all folks.

I forgot Lupus as well.

[Benny]

Originally posted by btimbit


Something to do with the way it'd hold the glass when it shatters I think

I had a peace officer tell me that the reason you can't have tint is because if you get in a crash your window glass will be held together and could cut you up pretty good, as opposed to shattering and then apparently causing less injury. She then made me peel my tint off and went back to her car and wrote up a tint ticket.

I'm paraphrasing slightly, but I basically told her: "Look lady, I've been in EMS for a long time now and I've seen a lot of car crashes. The glass doesn't break any differently whether it has tint or not, and there's no difference in injury to the occupants. And furthermore, how are you giving me a tint ticket when the car clearly doesn't have any tint anymore??!"

Of course she had no answer and wouldn't budge on the ticket. I'm fairly confident that the only reason tinted windows are illegal at all is because then the police can't see into your car, which doesn't bother me any, and it's easy revenue. I can't speak to the legality of parking officers giving out tint tickets, but I'd be some pissed if I got one.

As an aside, I also once got 4 separate tint tickets from some dink sheriff out by Canmore who gave me a ticket for each window, and then one for each taillight that I had tinted. I don't really give a crap about $57 tint tickets. They're an accepted inevitability of driving a car with tinted windows. But when I'm handed a stack of tickets totaling $228, that's a bit heavy handed.

[AE92_TreunoSC]

Cant see drivers face, dangerous for officers to approach as well. Bad for pedestrians.

When I was younger I always had tint and never got a ticket on top of the speeding tickets I received.

I will join CPA if I can go around ticketing HID's in reflectors. I'll jump out in traffic if need be.

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by Benny
I had a peace officer tell me that the reason you can't have tint is because if you get in a crash your window glass will be held together and could cut you up pretty good, as opposed to shattering and then apparently causing less injury. She then made me peel my tint off and went back to her car and wrote up a tint ticket.

That's some epic level stupid there... Tempered glass is what prevents you from getting cut up not anything else. The tint will just hold the cubes of tempered glass together but it's not like it's somehow going to have sharp edges.

End of the day tint tickets are just BS for the cops to hand out because they don't like not being able to see into your car. Lots of states in the US allow tint all around. Frankly it makes no sense to go after tint while lifted trucks with non functional bumpers who will pancake cars are given a free pass. I know which one I am far more worried about...

[Benny]

Originally posted by AE92_TreunoSC
dangerous for officers to approach as well.

That's the one argument that I can understand. In any instances I've been pulled over, I always roll the windows down completely as soon as I see the lights so the officer has a clear view of the inside. I have this misguided hope that sometimes I can get both windows down before the officer sees the tint, but it hasn't helped yet. I don't want to make an officer's job more stressful than I can be. I just like the way my car looks with tint and like being able to pick my nose in traffic I suppose.

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


That's some epic level stupid there... Tempered glass is what prevents you from getting cut up not anything else. The tint will just hold the cubes of tempered glass together but it's not like it's somehow going to have sharp edges.

I've seen smashed in windows with tint and without at accident scenes. Laminated and tempered glass. The great majority of tempered windows that I've seen in higher velocity crashes tend to spray that shit all over the car, and have cut up some patients. It's not like a tinted tempered glass window will become Odd Job's fucking hat and start slicing heads off in a crash though. She seemed damn certain, so I was a short discussion.

[16hypen3sp]

http://forums.beyond.ca/st2/why-is-w...68#post4286268

[FraserB]

If "officer safety" was a valid reason, then no tint would be allowed at all on any window. Unless the province is under the impression that a criminal with a gun is only going to sit in the front seat of a car.

[wildrice]

Here is a sample of the ticket in question.

[Tik-Tok]

Well, tint isn't a bylaw, so there you go.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by wildrice
Here is a sample of the ticket in question.

If this is what the OP got, then the ticket is 100% valid. It's not a tint ticket, it's a ticket for parking a vehicle not in accordance with the Act on the street.

The CPA guy simply noted which part of the Act was violated to sustain the 14(2)(a) breach.

[speedog]

Well news to me - seeing as I've never received a parking ticket I would've been unaware that their tickets could also be used for traffic violations. Interesting.

[Khyron]

Yah so that's a vague BS one:

14(2)(a) Vehicle not equipped as required with TSA $40.00

Window glazing
70(1) A person shall not install, replace or cover the window
glazing in a windshield or in a left or right side window of a motor
vehicle that is beside or forward of the driver with a transparent,
translucent or opaque material.

As I mentioned before, without opening the window a bit you have no way of knowing if the window has glazing/film or the glass is actually tinted by the manufacturer. At least that's the way the CPS and RCMP play the game.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by FraserB


If this is what the OP got, then the ticket is 100% valid. It's not a tint ticket, it's a ticket for parking a vehicle not in accordance with the Act on the street.

The CPA guy simply noted which part of the Act was violated to sustain the 14(2)(a) breach.

Granted now that I've read it, however

14.
(2) No owner or operator of any self-propelled type of vehicle which:
(a) is not equipped in accordance with the Act;

shall cause or permit such vehicle to be parked or left on any street.

(ap) “street” means any public thoroughfare for movement of vehicles and pedestrians and where the context so requires includes the whole of the place between the boundaries of the street as recorded in the Land Titles Office and includes an alley, but does not include a parking lot or parkade;

[speedog]

From the TSA act...

1(1)(p) “highway” means any thoroughfare, street, road, trail,
avenue, parkway, driveway, viaduct, lane, alley, square,
bridge, causeway, trestleway [B]or other place or any part of
any of them, whether publicly or privately owned, that the
public is ordinarily entitled or permitted to use for the
passage or parking of vehicles{/b} and includes
(i) a sidewalk, including a boulevard adjacent to the
sidewalk,
(ii) if a ditch lies adjacent to and parallel with the
roadway, the ditch, and
(iii) if a highway right of way is contained between
fences or between a fence and one side of the
roadway, all the land between the fences, or all the
land between the fence and the edge of the roadway,
as the case may be,
but does not include a place declared by regulation not to
be a highway;

I would interpret the above as a parking lot (private or public) being fair game.

Of note, "street' is not specifically defined in the TSA but falls under highway (see above).

[Tik-Tok]

But the ticket is for a bylaw infraction, which specifically defines parking lot as not part of the "street".

A police officer can write one for someone parked in a lot, but not parking authority.

[speedog]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
But the ticket is for a bylaw infraction, which specifically defines parking lot as not part of the "street".

A police officer can write one for someone parked in a lot, but not parking authority.

Problem is that it appears that the TSA was referenced - guess the OP will have to challenge this to discover what is really going on.

[Traffic_Cop]

Hmmmm....strange. Learn something new everyday. Im as confused as you guys.