Link: http://bit.ly/bnTvtd

This is a prime example of the failure of our court system.

I hope she does not find out the Fiero came with a tinted neutral lens and had the reflectors in the bumper. She would declair it unfit as will as some Trans Ams too.

I asked my attorney wife. Federal law trumps state law, appeal using the Supremacy Clause, maybe even Commerce clause. There is no excuse for the judge to do this.

The owner of the G8 modified the lights. The OEM lights are fine. Around here, though, cops probably wouldn't have noticed or been bothered to care.

What a retarded state Maryland is, or at least the legal state system anyway.

The owner of the G8 modified the lights. The OEM lights are fine. Around here, though, cops probably wouldn't have noticed or been bothered to care.

The article quite clearly stated they were factory-spec.

The article quite clearly stated they were factory-spec.

Apparently, there are photos of his car sporting dark tinted taillights. He swapped them out a few weeks before he got the ticket. The tail lights he has he modified slightly, as well... he opened the unit and blacked out the chrome ring and then painted the top of the lens (the part that wraps over the top). I would like these modifications myself... I don't care for the plastic top on most lenses...

Some would say they are still modified... but the taillight lens itself was not. In fact, when asked, the heavy lens tint would not have been an issue, as the taillights are still red, provided enough light makes it though the tint... in general, visibility from 50 feet.

I think this is pretty ridiculous. He has modified the trim near the lights. Whats next? You can't put a sticker near your taillights? I guess painting your car or putting a bumper sticker on your car (assuming either does not cover your lights) is illegal, as well.

So many car on the road with worn tires and bad brakes and they worry about this?

I remember years ago getting into a old GP and there was a hole in the floor from the seat to the brake pedals. I put my feet on the ground like Fred Flintstone and yelled at my buddy to look. There are way too many of these kinds of cars to worry about legal tail lights.

Apparently, there are photos of his car sporting dark tinted taillights. He swapped them out a few weeks before he got the ticket. The tail lights he has he modified slightly, as well... he opened the unit and blacked out the chrome ring and then painted the top of the lens (the part that wraps over the top). I would like these modifications myself... I don't care for the plastic top on most lenses...

Some would say they are still modified... but the taillight lens itself was not. In fact, when asked, the heavy lens tint would not have been an issue, as the taillights are still red, provided enough light makes it though the tint... in general, visibility from 50 feet.

I think this is pretty ridiculous. He has modified the trim near the lights. Whats next? You can't put a sticker near your taillights? I guess painting your car or putting a bumper sticker on your car (assuming either does not cover your lights) is illegal, as well.

Where are you getting your information? I didn't see it in the linked article.

Where are you getting your information? I didn't see it in the linked article.

Scroll down to the Jalopnik comments. The defendant posted pics of his tails.

either way, the judge is a jackwagon!!!!

Where are you getting your information? I didn't see it in the linked article.

There was some info in the comments... also, there was considerable info in the G8board threads... but a lot of that disappeared in the following hours, "for fear of police retaliation". The guy is a regular poster on G8Boards and there was considerable threads with his modding adventures.

Sad, but kinda funny too...