Help Setting Up Enforcement on HID Kits

Status
Not open for further replies.

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
Good evening,

I'm new to this forum. Long time lurker first time poster. I'm writing this today for genuine help. I'm going to be working with the Juneau Police Department in setting something up in the way of headlight enforcement. I'm sure as most of you all know Alaskan headlight laws are archaic and totally inadquate. They don't even so much as mention the FMVSS safety standards that have come to define the professional head-lighting industry.

The level of civic disobedience and complacency amongst law enforcement is shocking. The lack of enforcement is scary. I feel kinda worried about my safety. I've seen LED fog lights operated on trucks without their headlights even turned on. I've even seen a city firetruck with blue-rich fogs being operated instead of their head-lighting assembly. I might be off, but the low down bumper mounted lights were very dim and very blue, and I'm genuinely worried about the safety of first responders to accidents. I've also seen city buses with blue-rich assemblies, though I have yet to verify with the organization their complaince with the FMVSS. I've also seen HID kits mixed with halogen assemblies in that one headlight is halogen and the other is a very blue hid. I've seen LED fogs generate horrific glare during overcast daylight hours. One thing that I still need to notice, simply anecdotally, is that those with the illegal HID kits also tend to have very heavy tinted windows making me wonder if they're running totally blind. I've also seen modifications that oddly replace the rear backup light with very bright blue-rich LEDs in the old halogen assembly. Typically these modifiers also at times smoke tail lights out and their headlights out.

To that end I had a word with some of the local LEO's, pretty pleasent people actually, they gave me a number to a Sargeant on Duty to route my information on headlight enforcement to. That's where I'm turning to this forum. You have all taught me so much, but now I am asking for help with helping the local police agency to enforce headlight laws. With that being said, where do start? I have a link to the SEMA page documenting the dangers of HID kits, but they go into mentioning NHTSA. I was wondering would it even be possible to get NHTSA to help provide an official source with backbone to help this agency with its enforcement? I want to just start with a solid basis for enforcement before anything else.
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
It doesn't look like I can send PM's yet with my profile. But it looks like I have the SEMA page that brings foreword NHTSA's information on the non-compliance of HID kits .Would that be enough for a police agency? Would it take NHTSA itself to contact the local PD for more concrete information?

So finding this-49 USC 30122: Prohibits regulated parties to "render inoperative" a mandatory regulated device, system, or design feature; "render inoperative" can mean to remove, disable, damage, destroy, or alter the performance so it is no longer compliant.

That would essentially give the local authorities the ability to pursue illegal usage of these cars equipped with HID kits. Are those two pieces of information adequate enough to enable police agencies to enforce headlight compliance laws?

I was also reading on another thread on a post from Alaric how he recommends an efficient cost effective basis for enforcement. This system of enforcement involves going under the hood of a suspected offender's car and investigating for light system tampering. Is there a way to train an agency to do this? I suspect at least pictures of these systems in cars and possibly a real life example might be of real aid to training.
 

Alaric Darconville

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,377
Location
Stillwater, America
cetary35,

Part of the problem you're facing is that there are no Federal laws preventing the vehicle owner from doing "what they want" to their cars. While certain lighting equipment is illegal per se (for example, those HID kits you mention, which, under Federal law are illegal to manufacture, import, or introduce into interstate commerce), and certain parties are prevented from doing "what you want them to do to your car" (mechanics and car dealerships are regulated parties and cannot render inoperative any piece of motor vehicle safety equipment, and since an HID kit "renders inoperative" the headlamps, the mechanics are prohibited from installing them).

I've even seen a city firetruck with blue-rich fogs being operated instead of their head-lighting assembly.
Fog lamps are not regulated at the Federal level, and since it's a fire truck, it's allowed to have blue lights. Also, State/City-operated emergency vehicles are usually given (perhaps way too much) latitude not only in the equipment they they have, and in their usage; that will be a hard fight.

Obviously, fog lamps being "not headlamps", more enforcement is needed. But the same lax State laws leave a lot of wiggle room for the most part (Oklahoma does say that "fog lamps may not be used in substitution of headlamps", but that varies from state-to-state.

One thing that I still need to notice, simply anecdotally, is that those with the illegal HID kits also tend to have very heavy tinted windows making me wonder if they're running totally blind.
Considering HID kits worsen your ability to see at night, the window tinting, even at legal levels, isn't helping. If they've tinted their *windshield*, too...

This article on DanielSternLighting.com may make it easier to explain why HID kits have been illegalized. They ruin the performance of every headlamp they are installed in, worsening performance for the driver and increasing glare for others.
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
Alaric,
So then can the local PD can at least go around to the dealerships and mechanics and ensure that they are not installing these kits? So would the next step then be following up with local lawmakers and seeing about getting something passed? I'll look in further to headlight laws for the state. I can see it being so simple something as to the effect," All vehicular lighting systems that operate on public roads shall conform to the applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards as outlined in the FMVSS 108."
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
I've reached out to the city about the high CCT lighting I saw on some of their buses. The conversion on the older buses is in fact compliant with the FMVSS. They came straight from the manufacturer of the buses. Their new buses also have LED headlights. I also discussed potential issues regarding aiming of the assemblies, and they confirmed that before each winter they go in and ensure the lights have propper aim.

I'm also following up with the city clerk's office, city manager's office, and police cheif regarding this. I'm going to see if the city can enact a law with the wording in my previous comment. It's so straight forward. I believe drmalenko as well shared some information of how he deals with enforcement of HID kits in the field, and it looks not too cost intensive to have at least a handful of officers trained in the spotting of headlight tampering under the hood.

On a side note, that Daniel stern page has some really great info. I went over it once before, but now reading into greater detail is giving me a greater appreciation and better understanding of the design non-compliance that these HID/LED kits have.
 
Last edited:

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
You might go the next step and send an email to Daniel Stern; he probably has some ideas and resources for what you're hoping to accomplish.
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
I contacted Mr. Stern. Quite professional, but we would have to hire him for the legislation we would want. But to that end, he felt that simply following the FMVSS would not, in itself, alone be adequate. Just following this legislation would otherwise prohibit effective solutions while allowing inconspicuous bad lighting to get away unscathed. How? He did say though that tackling illegal HID/LED conversions would be easy, but that enforcement has to be thoughtfully provided for, which I can see the importance of. For the most part my goal really is just to get those with the illegal kits off the road, so then it may be a matter of how do police enforce this?
 
Last edited:

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
Well, yeah, that stands to reason; I figured you already had an expert signed on and just wanted some additional guidance...if you were to bring it to me and say "Please help" I'd have the same reaction: "Here's my rate card and consulting contract".

It's deceptively complicated, difficult, and un-intuitive to write an effective law/regulation. If you try to go the "Well, let's just write it according to common sense" route, you are just about guaranteed to get it wrong and wind up creating at least as much of a problem as you were trying to solve in the first place.
FMVSS 108 is silent on fog lamps, auxiliary high beam/driving lamps, auxiliary low beam/passing lamps, and a variety of other lamps, so putting a law that says "no driving on public roads with lights that don't meet FMVSS 108" means you effectively ban all auxiliary lamps. That gets drivers pissed off (and they'll revolt about it, probably by putting more/worse illegal lighting on than they would have before) and it REALLY gets the aftermarket industry and their lobbyists pissed off (and they'll swoop in and grind your law into the dirt)...and then either you wind up with a completely useless, toothless "industry wrote this" law basically enabling them to sell/drivers to use whatever they want, or you're otherwise out of luck, because the legislature isn't going to want to try again.

(Oh, and if you try to "patch" your proposed law by saying "OK, it has to be FMVSS 108 and auxiliary lights have to be SAE-approved!", you solve one problem and create two new ones. This is just an example; if we were to sit at a table and go back and forth with you saying "OK, how about this, then? Does that fix it?", just about every time the answer would be "Well, it fixes that, but now you've broken this".

When you wade into the regulatory/legislative side of automotive lighting, you're in a very deep pool. You really cannot wing it; this kind of thing is why experts exist (and are needed, and are worth while).

By the way, another tip: do not rely on SEMA's "information" on this subject. They're the aftermarket industry lobbyist I mentioned, and despite their hand-to-god claims, their motive is not safety.
 
Last edited:

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
So I have to hire someone to fix obsolete laws? Unfortunately I don't think that the city would brunt the cost. I could imagine people switching installing more of the so called auxillary driving lamps after they figured they couldn't install their favorite illegal toy. I will be moving not too long from now, so guess I shouldn't worry about it then.

But are there any existing state vehicle lighting laws that are good?
 
Last edited:

Keitho

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
781
Location
CO, USA
Really? You are surprised that a single, non-lawyer, non-LEO citizen with a brochure and a desire to change government policy and enforcement across multiple overlapping agencies might face a challenge? And you are moving soon, so you want the change to happen after what, a couple of phone calls, before the moving van shows up? With respect for your good intentions, you are in over your head, by a lot.
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
No, I'm just surprised that I would have to pay to fix laws that really should've been properly provisioned for in the first place. I don't believe that it should be the individual that should carry the costs of hiring professionals to fix government. I was simply looking for the input of the local LEO's or other members regarding laws and practices that are already in place that do work. I wasn't thinking that it would be necessary to start from complete scratch and construct a vehicle lighting set of laws unlike any other.
 
Last edited:

Alaric Darconville

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,377
Location
Stillwater, America
No, I'm just surprised that I would have to pay to fix laws that really should've been properly provisioned for in the first place.
But you can't "fix" them the way you're going about it, especially if you're just going after the city fixing their own laws, because that just complicates enforcement. City laws about vehicle equipment should mirror their respective state's laws.

There are a lot of laws that "should've been properly provisioned for in the first place" and the task of fixing them should go to the State legislators, not the mayor or the chief of police of Anytown, USA.

I don't believe that it should be the individual that should carry the costs of hiring professionals to fix government. I was simply looking for the input of the local LEO's or other members regarding laws and practices that are already in place that do work. I wasn't thinking that it would be necessary to start from complete scratch and construct a vehicle lighting set of laws unlike any other.
Every state has good and bad vehicle lighting laws. Oklahoma has a real mess of statutes. 'Most everywhere, they cover the USE of the lighting (particularly when it comes to auxiliary lamps not regulated by FMVSS 108) and when they describe required equipment they use vague descriptions like:
47 OK Stat § 47-12-204 (2014) said:
A. Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer and pole trailer, and any vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a combination of vehicles, shall be equipped with at least two taillamps mounted on the rear, on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable which, when lighted, shall emit a red light visible from a distance of one thousand (1,000) feet to the rear; provided that, in the case of a combination of vehicles, only the taillamp on the rearmost vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified.
In the right conditions, a lit cigarette can be visible from well over a thousand feet away, but I wouldn't depend on it to help prevent a vehicle collision on the highway.

It's one thing to try to get the police in your city to enforce existing State law, and to be aware of HID kits and CHMSL 'pulsers' and all that lot-- but you're going to have a tougher time actually getting new law made to replace the existing mess. Not without a J.D. or becoming the chair of the Senate Transportation Committee in the Alaska Legislature or both. It would also be wise to have a real understanding of the physics of vehicle lighting, and the workings of the human optical system. Again, all this takes real, proven expertise on a variety of subjects.
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
For the most part, I just want the local police to be aware of HID kits and some of the bizarre lighting conversions and see something in the way of enforcement, though the last part might be a bonus. I'm not going after getting full legislation passed if it can be helped otherwise.

I also understand that lighting systems that have been tampered with may lead to the driver of the modified car being at fault in accident, and at times may even lead to the insurance company to throwing the modifier "under the bus" in a collision that involved the compromised system. That might, in itself, be something else I share with the local police cheif. It might also be something I share with the local insurance companies...Why should others have to pay for people that deliberately bring their lighting systems out of compliance endangering the lives of themselves and all those around them and then go to others for money when their illegal toys don't work the way the had planned.

I just thought of something else, the window tint. Maybe I should share that with them to, as beyond legal levels, window tint can easily inhibit effective night vision and is, in certain applications, illegal under state law...
 
Last edited:

Alaric Darconville

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,377
Location
Stillwater, America
For the most part, I just want the local police to be aware of HID kits and some of the bizarre lighting conversions and see something in the way of enforcement
The information on DanielSternLighting.com would be useful-- just be sure to cite the pages.

Key to this is making them understand that it's not only a public safety issue, but that it's *easy to enforce*. No Chief or Captain is going to want to spend a lot of time training everyone. The Sergeants don't want a whole lot of responsibility thrust upon them. For ease of enforcement, it must be cut-and-dried and very simple and not require special equipment. One thing that would have been easier to get enforcement on is those pulsing/throbbing/strobbing CHMSLs. Because the Alaska Admin Code does not explicitly state that stop lamps must be "steady burning", rather "the lights must be illuminated by application of the service or foot brake", it's hard for the State to prove the law was violated. Window tint enforcement requires special equipment.
Training the traffic officers to recognize HID kits might be the easiest, but still requires time and effort-- especially when there can be so many "false positives" (that is, someone is stopped because an HID kit or LED drop-in is suspected, but it's actually car factory equipped with HIDs or LEDs). Imagine the backlash when people complain they're just going about their business when Officer Hardcase stops them because he thinks their 100% legal, completely-unmodified, factory equipment is illegal.

In short: It's just not that easy.

I also understand that lighting systems that have been tampered with may lead to the driver of the modified car being at fault in accident, and at times may even lead to the insurance company to throwing the modifier "under the bus" in a collision that involved the compromised system. That might, in itself, be something else I share with the local police cheif. It might also be something I share with the local insurance companies...Why should others have to pay for people that deliberately bring their lighting systems out of compliance endangering the lives of themselves and all those around them and then go to others for money when their illegal toys don't work the way the had planned.
Insurance companies are probably pretty good at that in some cases. They're probably more likely to check when the Honda Civic in question is lowered and the driver is 18-22 years old, but they'll probably home in on the suspension itself as contributing to the accident (adversely affecting the handling/braking, etc).

I just thought of something else, the window tint. Maybe I should share that with them to, as beyond legal levels, window tint can easily inhibit effective night vision and is, in certain applications, illegal under state law...
Well, yes. If it's "beyond legal levels" that would mean it's illegal under the law that described the legal levels. In the State of Alaska, the applicable Admin Code is 13 AAC 04.223.
 
Last edited:

Keitho

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
781
Location
CO, USA
Instead of going into the office of a public servant, and telling them how to do their job better, please consider:
- getting elected;
- getting a job as a public servant; and/or,
- getting a law degree.

Short of that: vote, pay your taxes, and bring homemade cookies to your local police station, while limiting your input to "thank you for your service."
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
I donno, Keitho. That's a little on the hard-nosed side. There's room for official and unofficial public input at every level of government. Whether it's town hall meetings, public comment periods on proposed laws, special hearings, or just plain old letters, emails, faxes, and phone calls to elected officials, it's definitely kosher for regular everyday people to give feedback and suggestions to public servants. But in a case like this, where the law as it stands is not getting the job done, there are pretty much two valid paths:

1. A subject matter expert takes initiative to contact the police and/or legislature in their area and say "Hey, here are the specific problems I notice with these particular lighting laws. I'd like to offer my services to help get them fixed, and here are my qualifications".

2. A non-expert contacts the legislature, probably through their elected official, to say "Hey, there's a problem with these laws; please engage an expert to fix them right", perhaps after contacting police to see if they're interested enough to lend their voice/support.

What's objectionable isn't the idea that a member of the general public who sees a problem would try to get laws changed, what's objectionable is that a non-expert would move from safe ground (seeing a problem, wanting to fix it) to inappropriate territory (deciding they know how to fix it even though they don't know enough to know what's wrong with their idea of how to fix it).
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
So I have to hire someone to fix obsolete laws? Unfortunately I don't think that the city would brunt the cost

No, of course they wouldn't. The laws you have in mind are not city laws or bylaws, they're state statutes. It's the state legislature's job to change them as, when, and if needed.

But are there any existing state vehicle lighting laws that are good?

I can't think of any I would call "good" (defined as keeping bad lights off the road, allowing good lights, and adequately requiring that lights be installed, maintained, and operated correctly). Some states' vehicle codes on lighting are less of a mess than others. It's not something we care much about on the continent of North America. :-(
 

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
Well that kinda sucks. I know that when it comes to bicycle lighting the same vague general laws dominate the state..." front light must be white and visible from 300ft." No mention of optical control, aiming, ANSI white chromacity range, or even things like strobing, which is a design element no longer necessary or appropriate for this generation of LED bike lights. Btw, I run a low kelvin rated 3050k XM-L2.. I read some of your previous postings Virgil and found them fascinating.

But I think the silver lining to this is that the people that do these sort of mods to their cars are and not telling the company of what they're doing are gambling with their insurance policy. It's almost like they're running around with no coverage. I can only imagine an accident where someone like that is held liable for damages to the other party. Oh wait..

https://www.lelandwest.com/reporting-vehicle-modifications-to-car-insurance-company.cfm
 
Last edited:

cetary35

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
56
Take a look at what I found on the hidplanet forums!

"I was chatting with my insurance agent...He was was saying that their claim adjusters started asking about "aftermarket" or "illegal" lighting during the claim process...
Let's say you got hit by their customer, they will try to determine if your illegal lighting impaired their client's vision just before the crash. Apparently, in at least 5 U.S. states, having illegal HID lighting will result your claim against their client to be denied. (EVEN IF IT DOES NOT DIRECTLY CONTRIBUTE TO THE CRASH) He explained the concept of contributory negligence... if you're even 1% at fault, by having the illegal HID lighting, they are not legally bound (sic) to pay your claim..."

https://www.hidplanet.com/forums/fo...-hid-lights-when-their-customers-are-at-fault

I know that hid planet is generally acknowledged to be a webpage of less then reputable intentions, but finding this out could be good news. Can anyone chime in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top