As a voter and a Veteran I humbly resubmit the following for consideration:

The difference between 70% and 35% can be viewed below. 

As is clearly visible, 35% tint proves no concern to Law Enforcement as it does not hinder a clear view into the cabin of the vehicle.http://s3-media2.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/ImyjwNEDPs67ldArxQWPWA/o.jpg

(As originally submitted by Chris Spagnole over 3 years ago with a few updates):

Rhode Island has one of the most restrictive automotive tint laws in the country allowing only 70% which is almost clear allowing 70% of light to pass through. In addition, tint tickets from law enforcement if under 70%, require a mandatory court date which requires time out of work to attend.

Ignorance may be no excuse, but many people getting pulled over weren't even aware that they were breaking a law, and are hardly criminals.  In addition, why not allow some tint for automobiles since most trucks/SUVs have factory tint that is well under 70%?

Such a strict law hurts citizens interested in investing in the benefits window film can provide:

-Added crash safety from shattered glass.

-Reduces the sun's glare, helping prevent accidents due to excess glare.

-Blocks 99.9% of UV radiation which is important to prevent melanoma cancer to the skin and the eyes.  

-Keeps vehicles more comfortable by reducing solar heat gain.  

-Adds privacy for drivers, passengers and belongings.  

-Reduces smash and grab theft.  

-Helps protect interior upholstery from fading and leather seats from cracking.

-Eliminates the need for mounted shades, which can become dangerous projectiles in the case of an accident.

-Connecticut Window Tint Laws allow for 35% on the front and rear sides and any percentage on the rear

-Massachusetts Window Tint Laws allow for 35% on the front and rear sides and the rear window

-Recent studies are showing that Side windows do not have factory UV-A protection and because of this drivers are at increased risks of skin cancer. http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/05/12/Study-Your-cars-side-window-may-be-harming-your-skin-eyes/4281463101548/

This law has also been devastating to local shops across the state. Why hurt Rhode Island businesses when customers can just go across the border or to a back alley to get a tint job done? 

All we want is a 35% limit, which is more in line with 46 other states which allow 35% or less! In my opinion 35% is dark enough to allow Rhode Islanders the full benefits of window film, but light enough that our police officers can feel safe.

With Rhode Island being surrounded by states that allow 35% tint, having such a restrictive law creates not only confusion for residents but sets up an unfair and unjust situation where travelers through our state daily are allowed more protections than Rhode Island residents. 

With 35% not affecting Law Enforcements view of the cabin, there is no safety concern, thus one can only surmise that the reason for Rhode Islands excessively restrictive tint laws is for revenue only. 

Please prove me wrong and update Rhode Island's Tint Law to a fair, just and comparable to surrounding states laws. 

If it's acceptable for Connecticut and Massachusetts (as well as many other states) it should be acceptable for Rhode Island.

Again, I urge you to adjust Rhode Islands Tint Laws to 35% light transmission for the protection and comfort of the residents you serve.