Larry, in California the law exists only to serve as a revenue generator. That is why they allow you to 'buy' your way out of it as oppose to making it right. It is also why motorcycles are not required to have a front plate. A few years back there was a petition online but many didn't know it existed. I have had no front plate on all my cars now for over 20 years and in that time I've been ticketed three times. Each time I fix it for the day, pay the $10 and move on. I'm happy and the State got their tax. No harm in that.

 

i dont run front plate on sports cars not only because it is unsightly but also because I dont want to drill holes into my bumper

Here is someone else's Gallardo with front plates - ouch!

 

+1

I don't get the big deal either...is the front plate *that* ugly? Authorities need to ID the car and sometimes from the front.

As for tints, I hate the idea of getting a bad job and worrying about bubbles. Also, at night, if you over-tint, it could pose as a viewing impairment.

Since I'm at it, I don't like oversized rims either. I prefer diameters that improve performance rather than for show.

 

That's some poor drilling...shouldn't it be lower w/i that concave part?

 

If one drives with no tag and the laws are relaxed he's still bound to get pulled over sooner or later . The exposure alone of having every camera in your city photograph 100 percent of the time the absent tag could actually generate a pile of revenue . (sidenote . Florida does have red light cameras, open toll roads , and high tech surveilance which also generates revenue AND can add moving violation points -every state has rules --not just California).

He still has to drive with a level of stress and discomfort --or getting pulled over at an inconvenient time , or pressing the cop for his time . The cop might even agree with you but may still write the ticket because that's his job.

I did a google search to see if there is a petition and found this http://www.petitiononline.com/caplate/petition.html
It showed on other car forums too.

You had posted a tow hook mount . it doesn't disfigure the bumper , may comply with rules .. sounds like a compromise ? No?

 

It's acceptable to ignore an improper law that has essentially no validity that is also universally ignored by LE. What about motorcycles? Plenty of laws broken on motorcycles and by motorcyclists too. Would you put one on your bike to be safe?

And all that "work" to reform a front plate law is usually a waste of time. In two major metropolitan areas, LE also basically ignores the ridiculous law.

2) Speeding is an excellent example. Do you speed? Do you know if the speed limit surveys are current where you speed? Should the 55 zone be 65 and everyone does 70mph? Have you peititioned, written and campaigned?

No. Approximately 300,000 miles, and being pulled over, it's never mentioned or simply confirmed it's in my possession.


Incorrect. It's not even in the back of my mind just like most without a front plate. The key word is "may" write a ticket. Or he may not waste his time.

Straw argument?

 

Ran my S4 without a front plate for 2.5 years in Iowa. Got pulled over for it and no other reason. The stop made me late for an appointment and the fix and sign off took an hour or so. Don't need that type of hassle. Kept the front plate on and the 09C4S has a front plate.

 

You raise a good point about the cameras as they are becoming more and more prevalent and I certainly would change my behavior if I was getting tickets in the mail every month for it. So far I have only seen setups that capture your rear plate.

Cops have a surprising amount of discretion as to whether or not to ticket you. I pass 4-5 cops a day on my commute. I have never been specifically pulled over for no front plate, it has always been under special circumstances. Perhaps with the desperation for revenue this is changing and that may change my behavior as well if it becomes more common.

Yup, that is the one I signed many years ago. Unfortunately, most cars are utilitarian to their owners and they don't care about such things as us enthusiasts. So the petition will ultimately die off.

Yes, it's a good compromise but still unsightly. I purchased the one I posted and highly recommend it. However, I admit I purchased it solely for the day that *if* I get a fix it ticket I'll have a quick solution for the day

 

Has anyone tried this:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...lby-gt500.html

 

That's a good idea, but it's as if you guys are being compelled to hang the visual equivalent of a baboon's butt on the front of your car, gonna out of your way to find ways around the law and inconveniencing yourselves...is the front plate *that* hideous?

 

Ah, a topic near and dear to my heart. As someone who has been driving in CA with no front plate and (CA) illegally tinted windows, I have to give my experiences. I’ve been pulled over 4 times in 7 years. Fix it tickets depend on who pulled you over, city or state, either $10 or $25 per violation. I really like my window tint (car appearance and functionality in bright sunlight)and look w/o the front plate and the fix its have not dissuaded me from keeping my setup. The truth is cops don’t even know why they are ticketing you for it. I’m always amicable with the officers whenever I catch the blues, and usually are sincere and talk for a bit. I’ve heard that tinted windows are a hazard for any officer that might be trying to identify what a driver is up to, and also it makes it harder for rescue crews to break into the window during an accident scenario. I might possibly buy the identification spiel, but in reality they are applying regulation for taxation. Front plates? How often will front plates be beneficial for officers watching traffic. It’s only for red light cameras-again, revenue generation. I have ways to get these fix it tickets cleared easier than paying to get a front plate mounting bracket, so I keep the car the way I like it, and deal with the possibilities of getting pulled over. The cost benefit for me is worth it.

 

1) Window tint -

If that window tint does not comply with the law the least of your problems are with a fix it ticket -which is bad enough.
I just finished reading a personal injury attorney website which specalizes in window tint cases used in accident injury law suits.

If you are upset over a few dollars of excess revenue all it would take is an accident to clean house . Even your insurance might not back you unless you inform them and then they would deny the policy (if the tint was illegal) .

All this over dark glass ? Which happens to cut visibility ? And isn't legal in your region ? Which is deemed illegal because of accidents ? Sheesh .

You would not have any legal defence. You are driving a Porsche . if this was a discussion with a thug he probably wouldn't care .. but unlike a thug .. a guy who can afford a car like this and who knowingly sets himself uip for problems (in my opinion) makes it even more ridiculous.

Add to this .. that even if you don't have an accident .. all those fix it tickets are recorded and in the event that you ever face any legal issue and they check every public record .. you think these tickets can help you win positive sentiment from a judge?

For what ? To feel cool ? Now i REALLY don't get it.


2) The tag --
All the arguments .. point to (paraphrasing) "a silly revenue generating law"

Of course that's opinion but the FACT is that the law exists and you can (and have gotten) get a ticket.

Having one tag instead of two cuts the probablilties in half of a visual ID of the car. You can fictitiously claim that it doesn't but there is ONE more tag if the car has two.

So if a thug uses stolen tags -- now with this two tag law they'd have to steal two tags instead of one (making their job harder) -- adding protection to the honest people and the cops.

It's really not that hard to follow this simple law .
It's not even mandatory to live in California . This is where you chose to live . Every place has their rules .

 

How do you spell paranoia.

Lighten up.

 

Legally, i have no issues with most of your arguement, you're right. Speaking in terms of common sense, these rules bogus, hence most other states do not find them illegal.

They are an excuse for an officer to pull you over, and i bet most of their expired license our DUI arrests stemmed from finding a minor violation such as tinted windows or a busted tail light. I keep my license current, and take cabs when i might be drinking.

Your tag examples are great examples of someone inventing and advancing their negative argument. You really want to go with the "front plates keep the bad guys away" arguement? That's just 7th inning because it's a stretch.

 

In many states, a Rx for medical necessity may allow an owner to use darker tint.

ICD9 379.24 Vitreous opacities would be a reasonable exclusion diagnosis.