OhOneSnake said:
Because when you have safety equipment on your vehicle and are using that equipment it must be in working order!
Pulled over for burn out fog lamp?
- Thread starter WashburnGT
- Start date
Because when you have safety equipment on your vehicle and are using that equipment it must be in working order!
So if I decide to add a foglight to a vehicle I own, I must add two so its semetrical?
Further, if I add two foglights, am I required by law to have them on the same switch so that they are both lit at the same time?
Sorry, but this sounds more like a bored cop picking on a sporty car owner to me than a stop he felt needed to be made.
On another note, wouldn't the thread starter been within his rights to tell the officer no when it came to opening the hood, or does that only apply to the trunk and non-visible interior of the car?
Further, if I add two foglights, am I required by law to have them on the same switch so that they are both lit at the same time?
Sorry, but this sounds more like a bored cop picking on a sporty car owner to me than a stop he felt needed to be made.
On another note, wouldn't the thread starter been within his rights to tell the officer no when it came to opening the hood, or does that only apply to the trunk and non-visible interior of the car?
Last edited:
Ohoesnake,
Let me ask you a few questions
1. who in their right mind installs one fog lamp
2. what do you not understand about FACTORY equiped SAFETY item MUST be functional
3. did the cop possibly pop his hood to ensure that there were no NO2 hook up due to the fact his exhaust was loud (probably not under the legal decible limit) 1 ticketable offense right there. So next he looks for a more serious offense using the probable cause just gained! To ensure that NO2 was not on the vehicle(because it is also illegal)
4. Why must you argue that the police officer was in the wrong to begin with he is in a position where he decides what is right or wrong AT THAT TIME not after the fact. You are probably the same person who argue why american soldiers are in Iraq and Afghanistan, The same person who blamed the police for the beating of Rodney King, The same person who on september 11 2001 jumped on the patriotic bandwagon.
Why I ask because you are not mature enough nor man enough to do what you want to do, you just do as everyone else does. America feels soldiers should not be fight so you do to, some liberal **** thinks that the police were to blame for rodney king so you do to last but not least it is thought to be cool to bag on some of the few people that keep justice in the country(cops) so you do to.
Bottom line read the facts and understand why things happen and then comment on them
Let me ask you a few questions
1. who in their right mind installs one fog lamp
2. what do you not understand about FACTORY equiped SAFETY item MUST be functional
3. did the cop possibly pop his hood to ensure that there were no NO2 hook up due to the fact his exhaust was loud (probably not under the legal decible limit) 1 ticketable offense right there. So next he looks for a more serious offense using the probable cause just gained! To ensure that NO2 was not on the vehicle(because it is also illegal)
4. Why must you argue that the police officer was in the wrong to begin with he is in a position where he decides what is right or wrong AT THAT TIME not after the fact. You are probably the same person who argue why american soldiers are in Iraq and Afghanistan, The same person who blamed the police for the beating of Rodney King, The same person who on september 11 2001 jumped on the patriotic bandwagon.
Why I ask because you are not mature enough nor man enough to do what you want to do, you just do as everyone else does. America feels soldiers should not be fight so you do to, some liberal **** thinks that the police were to blame for rodney king so you do to last but not least it is thought to be cool to bag on some of the few people that keep justice in the country(cops) so you do to.
Bottom line read the facts and understand why things happen and then comment on them
LOL...he must have been pretty bored to pull you over for that....but still the law is the law...even if its a stupid one
Lightning28307: I think you need to take your own advise when it comes to commenting before you know whats going on.
How in the world you managed to bring Iraq into the conversation is beyond me, but to straighten you out, I served as an infantry Marine, so anti-military I am not. As for bagging on cops for what they do, I am one, so you should check yourself on those comments as well.
As for my satirical comments about foglights: I think any state/county law that says your foglights must be working is ludicrous, because they are optional equipment. Take a sense of humor pill and reread.
Since when does loud exhaust dictate that the car must have N2O (the correct abreviation for Nitrous Oxide, not NO2 as you stated)?
Additionally, having an N2O setup under the hood isn't the illegal part, its having the bottle hooked up for use thats normally the illegal part.
How in the world you managed to bring Iraq into the conversation is beyond me, but to straighten you out, I served as an infantry Marine, so anti-military I am not. As for bagging on cops for what they do, I am one, so you should check yourself on those comments as well.
As for my satirical comments about foglights: I think any state/county law that says your foglights must be working is ludicrous, because they are optional equipment. Take a sense of humor pill and reread.
Since when does loud exhaust dictate that the car must have N2O (the correct abreviation for Nitrous Oxide, not NO2 as you stated)?
Additionally, having an N2O setup under the hood isn't the illegal part, its having the bottle hooked up for use thats normally the illegal part.
Last edited:
OhOneSnake said:
You cannot refuse to open your hood. The officer has the legal right to inspect the mechanical components of your vehicle. The trunk is a different story, it is used for the storage of personal property and and as such requires a different level of authority.
Thanks for the clarification.
Users who are viewing this thread
