Window Tint License Plate IL
You're right: there's a new license plate in Illinois designated with a "WT" at the end, which notes that you're permitted to have tint per a medical condition. (Edit: Mike beat me to it. 
)
In related news, HB3325 passed the house recently, and is currently being considered in the senate. Essentially, if this passes (it's already through the senate transportation committee, and the votes suggest there is zero opposition to this), you can go one of three ways:
)In related news, HB3325 passed the house recently, and is currently being considered in the senate. Essentially, if this passes (it's already through the senate transportation committee, and the votes suggest there is zero opposition to this), you can go one of three ways:
- Same as today: nothing up front, dark as you want in the back
- Up to 50% (+/- 5%) in the front, and up to 30% (+/- 5%) in the back
- Up to 35% all around.
They can't tell by visually inspecting, but I can guarantee you'll see at least a few departments plunking down for hand-held meters; they're not that expensive, and violation revenue will make the purchases worth it (the last time I was pulled over in Joliet, the officer specifically asked if I had front tint, which would have been an easy additional fine if I'd acted like a jackass). The law allows for a +/- 5% variance, but that's as measured by the officer's meter, which means that 5% has to take into account calibration drift by the meter.
I just don't see the point of an extra 5%, but maybe that's just me? 35% seems plenty dark. My personal interest in this is that the previous owner of my car tinted the rear (at what I think is 50%), and I just want to extend it to the front for a more consistent appearance (and for the light reduction; I'm mildly photo-sensitive, but sunglasses fix the problem just as well).
As for the bill itself, it looks like it passed the Senate's transportation committee, but if I'm reading this right it was 6 for, 2 against, 1 abstaining, which makes me wonder who the opposition was. (The first time the Senate transportation committee looked at it, it was 6 for, none opposed or abstaining.) So, out of 11 members, only 6 cared to even show up the first time, and I'd guess the same six approved the new version. Our tax dollars in action: would you get paid if you didn't show up for work? Bleh.
I didn't notice this before, but the amendment was proposed by the Senate's chief sponsor of the bill (Sen. Matt Murphy), so I suppose I shouldn't have been too worried about the content of it.
There's no indication of when it'll end up back on the Senate's schedule yet, but we'll probably know today sometime.
I just don't see the point of an extra 5%, but maybe that's just me? 35% seems plenty dark. My personal interest in this is that the previous owner of my car tinted the rear (at what I think is 50%), and I just want to extend it to the front for a more consistent appearance (and for the light reduction; I'm mildly photo-sensitive, but sunglasses fix the problem just as well).
As for the bill itself, it looks like it passed the Senate's transportation committee, but if I'm reading this right it was 6 for, 2 against, 1 abstaining, which makes me wonder who the opposition was. (The first time the Senate transportation committee looked at it, it was 6 for, none opposed or abstaining.) So, out of 11 members, only 6 cared to even show up the first time, and I'd guess the same six approved the new version. Our tax dollars in action: would you get paid if you didn't show up for work? Bleh.
I didn't notice this before, but the amendment was proposed by the Senate's chief sponsor of the bill (Sen. Matt Murphy), so I suppose I shouldn't have been too worried about the content of it.
There's no indication of when it'll end up back on the Senate's schedule yet, but we'll probably know today sometime.
That, I don't know. There's no reference to an effective date, so I assume this will take effect upon signature by the governor. Maybe someone else here with more exposure to Illinois politics can say?
More curious facts: this was originally introduced by Rep. Tom Cross as a bill to require the "SCHOOL BUS" text on the front and rear of a bus to be in a particular size and position, along with noting the name of the owner, weight of the vehicle and passenger capacity on the side, along with a few other things. It had absolutely nothing to do with tinting.
More curious facts: this was originally introduced by Rep. Tom Cross as a bill to require the "SCHOOL BUS" text on the front and rear of a bus to be in a particular size and position, along with noting the name of the owner, weight of the vehicle and passenger capacity on the side, along with a few other things. It had absolutely nothing to do with tinting.
HB3325 had it's second reading in the Senate yesterday, and the amendment was adopted. The third and final reading should happen today according to the Senate schedule. Assuming nothing strange comes from that, and assuming it passes, I don't know if it has to go back to the House, or if it just goes straight through to the Governor's desk.
Also, to answer the original question about timing: the synopsis of the Senate version makes it clear that this goes into effect immediately after passage.
Here's the current synopsis of the bill:
Also, to answer the original question about timing: the synopsis of the Senate version makes it clear that this goes into effect immediately after passage.
Here's the current synopsis of the bill:
Replaces everything after the enacting clause. Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code to provide that a person may drive a motor vehicle with a nonreflective material tinted film that does not allow less than 50% light transmittance (or less than 35% light transmittance if the windows to the rear of the driver already have certain window treatment applied) upon the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver. Deletes a front windshield exemption for persons afflicted with or suffering from a medical illness, ailment, or disease. Deletes an exemption to certain window obstruction provisions for motor vehicles manufactured prior to January 1, 1982. Provides that is a petty offense for a first offense and a Class C misdemeanor for a second offense for an installer to install window treatment on motor vehicles that do not have specified license plates or stickers. Effective immediately.
Question: My girlfriend just got a ticket for tint (35% front 25% back) a few days ago, would it be possible to fight the ticket after this passes? I know the back is darker than the law requires and it happened before the actual law passed but I'm just wondering if it would be possible.
Assuming her tint level wasn't in violation, it would be worth bringing up if the bill is passed into law prior to her court appearance. A sympathetic judge might be willing to dismiss it (and a sympathetic prosecutor might be willing to drop it ahead of time).
However, I'd be prepared for the possibility of needing to present evidence that you're not in violation of the current law. And she obviously is.
In short: I'd pay the violation and fix the rear tint to be in compliance with the pending law, and hope I didn't get caught again in the interim.
However, I'd be prepared for the possibility of needing to present evidence that you're not in violation of the current law. And she obviously is.
In short: I'd pay the violation and fix the rear tint to be in compliance with the pending law, and hope I didn't get caught again in the interim.
I was planing on getting the tint redone after I got a warning for it a while ago but didn't have the money at the time. Looks like I'll have to go ahead and go through with it. Thanks
This is great news for the state of Illinois even though it is probably the most corrupt and crooked state in the nation. They don't call it Crook County for nothing. **** Mayor Daly and all his ball licking democrat cronies that ride his coat tails. Crook County should be a state of its own. Better yet it should just be banished. Any law that Illinois tries to pass get shot down directly from those crooks.
Ok I'm done now
Ok I'm done now
