Southern Minn. teen cited for Ron Paul decal

2007 Minnesota Statutes
169.71 WINDSHIELD.

Subdivision 1. Prohibitions "generally"; exceptions. (a) A person shall not drive or operate any motor vehicle with:

(3) any sign, poster, or other nontransparent material upon the front windshield, sidewings, or side or rear windows of the vehicle, other than a certificate or other paper required to be so displayed by law or authorized by the state director of the Division of Emergency Management or the commissioner of public safety.

The argument:
1. Subdivision 1 states this law speaks "generally," meaning the judge has the authority to rule by his [educated] discretion, since the word "exceptions" is allocated to public safety vehicles. Generally speaking, this sticker does not meet the qualifications of being ruled as a misdemeanor under the law, as it is not a "sign" nor a "poster", and is in fact transparent within its borders, and is not nontransparent throughout its entirety, and is designed in a manner consistent with the law as to not obstruct or substantially reduce the driver's clear view through the window.
2. The driver can still see through the window directly and in the rear view mirror.
3. Law enforcement can still see INTO the vehicle through the rear window.

AND

(3) when any side window or rear window is composed of or treated with any material so as to obstruct or substantially reduce the driver's clear view through the window or has a light transmittance of less than 50 percent plus or minus three percent in the visible light range or a luminous reflectance of more than 20 percent plus or minus three percent;

The argument:
1. The window is not covered with any material so as to obstruct or substantially reduce the driver's clear view through the window.
2. The sticker is not a solid object and is designed in such a manner as to be consistent with the law and to permit the clear view through the rear window.
3. The sticker is placed high enough from the lower portion of the rear window as to allow clear view from the driver's perspective in the rear view mirror.
4. The law does not define "substantially," accept in the case of window tint and reflective materials that must meet the requirement of allowing "50 percent plus or minus three percent in the visible light range or a luminous reflectance of more than 20 percent plus or minus three percent." The rear window is not treated with either a window tint that prevents 50 percent of the visible light range into the vehicle, nor is it a reflective material.

Also:
The first ticket can be upheld in court. Any ticket issued after the first, and prior to your court date, can, and should, be dismissed, since you are being charged twice for the same crime. You are innocent until proven guilty.

There are other places to put large Ron Paul signs on your car that do not obstruct your vision in any way, such as I have done with my two very large, very visible signs on the back of my car. Having been a Minnesota resident most of my life, and having been pulled over for lack of good visibility when moving to and from college, I wouldn't suggest that the Minnesota cops are out to get him. Ron Paul did very well in Minnesota. If he really wants to try it again with a Mcromnialabee Clinbama sign, I bet he gets ticketed then, too.

of course we want to make a good name for our beloved Dr. Paul, but anything (including civil disobedience which I think this really is) that draws attention to him is going to help. At least people will maybe check out Dr. Paul and make an INFORMED decision which is not what they were allowed to do before thanks to MSM.

**That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them

...trying to steal from people under the guise of safety. In most states this is perfectly legal and quite common. If you compare the number of accidents in states that don't allow this vs states that do, I bet you see no difference. In fact, I bet statistics would show that pulling someone over on the side of the road to give them a ticket presents a greater traffic risk than this window decal. Then again, I'm sure the officer that pulled him would agree in private.

I will donate money to any legal battle against the state.

$550. is probably alot of money to him, but look at the word he got out--
a true Ron Paul follower-
"but I'm going to go down fighting,"

"The Only President to save my kids future"

"It's very clear in state statute that you cannot have anything that obstructs the driver's vision."

This could be interpreted that a dead bug "obstructs" the view. Not much but a little. Like most laws it is so open to interpretation that it can be used as a tool of abuse by law enforcement.

I don't see that it really obstructs his view from the photo. You can clearly see through it. It will be interesting on how the judge views it.

I wish him good luck. He could fight under UCC. For a claim their must be a damaged party or victim and there clearly is none. But, I doubt the judge will buy it.

I wish him luck..

"2007 Minnesota Statutes
169.70 REAR VIEW MIRROR.
Every motor vehicle which is so constructed, loaded or connected with another vehicle as to obstruct the driver's view to the rear thereof from the driver's position shall be equipped with a mirror so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the highway for a istance of at least 200 feet to the rear of such vehicle."

It might be argued that the sticker creates no greater obstruction than if the car were "loaded" with a TV box in the back seat, in which case this statute appears to allow that if the car has both side mirrors, it is exempt.

-0-

LawfulGov.Org
Your Nexus to the Freedom Movement

Here you go, just throw this at them:
http://groups.google.com/...

**************************************
How to support RP's cause every day:
1. Don't use credit cards
2. Stamp your cash with RP stamp before spending
3. Take cash out of ATM, stamp, put back in bank
4. Explain to teller why you did #3
5. Repeat

Cody need to go find a good probono attorney that will work his case.

Since the cop is always the "Trusted" one in court and what you say against him is never believed, I recommend videotaping the cop every time you get stopped. Since most cell phones take video now, it is easy to do. Make sure you are quick enough to get it turned on and taping before he gets up to your car.
There is nothing better than catching a cop in a lie, and it may make a good YouTube video.

Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You, But What Your Country Is Doing To You.
The Only Thing We Have To Fear, Is Government Itself.

If the car has side mirrors, then that should be all the judge needs to know before he dismisses the tickets. Otherwise... if the logic stands... then maybe people could not rent U-Haul trailers.

If I were Cody, I would go to the court clerk and tell her I would be out of state on the day the ticket says I must appear, and then get this thing rushed in front of a judge. Then when the judge throws the thing out... keep records of the Courts minutes in the car... for the next time "Barny" pulls him over.

It is illegal in my state to put anything on your rear window..A car will not pass state inspection with anything at all on the rear window or windshield

Ever see a semi truck trailer with a rear window, motorhome, box van, etc.

Cop does not know the vehicle code very well. Actually, you only need a drivers side mirror.

you're lucky you got news coverage at least some people will become more aware of the fascist direction this country is moving in.

You've got to see the picture that goes along with this article though for the full story. you can clearly see out! If you're getting tickets for that, every prius owner should get tickets because your visibility is much higher than in a prius. i'd like to see the state statue that they refer to. it should give specifics on how much visibility is required. in most states decals are actually affixed to windows as proof of various inspections and so forth.

i'd really love to hear more about what was said when Hauer "talked himself into a citation every time."

This just dovetails with all the reports I read and hear of the growing contempt and arrogance police increasingly display in the US lately (not to mention the growing militarization of police departments nationwide).

The police recently went on a "bust" here in Anchorage, arresting those most vile and dangerous of society's lowest denizens ---- jaywalkers! And then arrested several more people for "disorderly conduct" and "resisting arrest" when they unbelievably and naturally questioned these acts!

Really, where the hell are we going as a society, and when the hell are we all going to collectively say "Enough!"?

That in the 2000's you be disrpectful to a cop...

GOD FORBID... they take ANYTHING u say or ANYWAY u act...

AS DISRESPECT...

I am a SON of a Cop.. who was called a pigglet for years as a teen and early 20's..

Course back then u could "SAY" FU to a cop and SO WHAT?? that is merely speech..

HOW ABOUT WHEN COPS ACT DISRESPECTFUL TO CITIZENS??

THAT HAPPENS CONSTANTLY ANYMORE.... over this... disrespect for officer tickets... THIS IS BULLSHIT

I drive autos for work that do not have any rear view...This is silly!

What view was obstructed? What was the driver supposed to see but didn't? I would have thought that mirrors would cover this. If a pedestrian had been injured as a result then there's the evidence. "Your view of the pedestrian whilst driving backwards was blocked so the charge stands".

In any case - why not a word like "please remove the decal please because.....xyz.

'I always think of all you canvassors and precinct leaders at the front line.
Good luck out there &Thank you. It's appreciated'.-fip -U.K

He should just paint it on with window paint, that's legal.

he deigned to exercise his right to free speech and *actually* showed disrespect toward the officer, by what? having a different opinion than the officer?

holy crap, off with his head, already!

18 wheeler drivers can drive with a huge box obstructing their rear view, thus the side mirrors. I'd go and call B.S. too

speak back to the enforcement officer of our rulers they represent the ultimate authority and can make law on the spot. They should be obeyed regardless, it is our duty as faithful servants of the government. Obey our rulers. Obedience is happiness. War is Peace.

This is what her car usually looks like.

http://www.flickr.com/pho...

I hope I didn't just jinx her.

Well I see all sorts of these "see thru" decals on cars and trucks advertising businesses and so forth in my state, (I have one on my car) however, Minnesota may have laws against these types of decals. Remember, every state is supposed to be sovereign and have its own laws. In my state, as long as you have these decals in combination with sideview mirrors, they are legal.

My thought on this is if he has sideview mirrors, he can see thru the decals well enough and use his mirrors as well. What would be the difference if he was driving a panel van with NO READ DOOR WINDOWS, just sideview mirrors only? But then again, maybe the MN laws don't allow those types of vehicles.

Of course, he has the right to fight it in court. I wish him luck.

That decal does not obstruct his view any more than those half/full naked women stickers or SKIN stickers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
arrrgggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

I guess my big yard sign in my backwindow is worse than that!

if Cody is bright enough to support Dr. Paul, then he is bright enough to know that his liberty is at risk by doing this. Go Cody! You just bought yourself an article and an example to others that it takes guts to speak out.

Look at the decal...