PA & Doorless = $141.50 fine

Looking at this a bit closer, notice point (a) referring to the inspection procedure:

IMG_6958.JPG

Within the inspection procedure 175.80, a vehicle is failed if when doors are not present if originally fitted by the manufacturer per (i):

IMG_6957.JPG

This means that as long as there are provisions for doors, they must remain. Structural roof/no roof is irrelevant. It’s my understanding that an officer can inspect / re-inspect a vehicle as part of a traffic stop and subsequently cite for violations. Bummer!
 
sipafz said:
Looking at this a bit closer, notice point (a) referring to the inspection procedure:

View attachment 300820

Within the inspection procedure 175.80, a vehicle is failed if when doors are not present if originally fitted by the manufacturer per (i):

View attachment 300824

This means that as long as there are provisions for doors, they must remain. Structural roof/no roof is irrelevant. It’s my understanding that an officer can inspect / re-inspect a vehicle as part of a traffic stop and subsequently cite for violations. Bummer!
Click to expand...

I, unfortunately, agree with you. I guess it’s time to figure out how to advance PA HB976.

IMG_8048.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
CCTX50 said:
Just an officer doing his job.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using WAYALIFE mobile app
Click to expand...

Protecting and Serving? I’d say the public is probably better protected if he would’ve pulled over someone engaging in activities that endanger other motorists. Possibly the motorist I witnessed texting while the officer was following me. Then again, I guess I had a better vantage point being doorless.

As I mentioned, having drove a doorless Wrangler without issue the past 18 years; and having not incurred a traffic violation in the past 15, I’d like to think “doing his job” might include utilizing professional discretion to issue a warning.


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
Saharaunlmtd said:
Protecting and Serving?
Click to expand...

Yes.
Before you ask ‘how is that protecting and serving’ by stopping you for (fill in the blank). Just brush up on Whren vs the United States. Regardless how you feel of ‘how he should have’ handled it. Im guessing it truly is a guy just doing his job. Again see above and hopefully the light bulb moment comes on and be thankful you have a proactive cop in your neck of the woods. Maybe the guy was told to work that stretch of road because of too many traffic complaints or crashes. He’s appeasing the community by his presence and making stops. Or maybe he is just a crazy mother effer going rogue writing chicken shit day in day out and is that one guy everyone hates to work with.
Look. I get it. The officer may be in the wrong in this case. I have no effing clue what your laws are. And I hate sounding like I’m defending him. I’m just saying to look at the big picture. Difficult I know because it’s you that got spanked with a bogus ticket. lol
 
Sharkey said:
I'd challenge it just to make the officer look like an ass for writing down the incorrect code when he is a code instructor.
Click to expand...

Thread is closed with this comment, his profession is knowing the code, second you state he doesn’t actually know his code should be enough.

Wait this dude is an attorney isn’t he?


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
PA & Doorless = $141.50 fine

HighwayTrout said:
Yes.
Before you ask ‘how is that protecting and serving’ by stopping you for (fill in the blank). Just brush up on Whren vs the United States. Regardless how you feel of ‘how he should have’ handled it. Im guessing it truly is a guy just doing his job. Again see above and hopefully the light bulb moment comes on and be thankful you have a proactive cop in your neck of the woods. Maybe the guy was told to work that stretch of road because of too many traffic complaints or crashes. He’s appeasing the community by his presence and making stops. Or maybe he is just a crazy mother effer going rogue writing chicken shit day in day out and is that one guy everyone hates to work with.
Look. I get it. The officer may be in the wrong in this case. I have no effing clue what your laws are. And I hate sounding like I’m defending him. I’m just saying to look at the big picture. Difficult I know because it’s you that got spanked with a bogus ticket. lol
Click to expand...

You wouldn’t be saying that if he was white.


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
I know I’m late to the party but in PA there is a gray area for the door issue. In the state inspection code it states that all original equipment must be present and in working order at the time of inspection. So doors, top, etc.

Now I’m the vehicle code there is no area in which it says that the doors need to be on.

Being that I am a PA state inspector and I have family in the police sector I know the vehicle codes. PA state police is required to take the same vehicle inspection test as I take. Within the last few years tho more local police are going and taking the inspection class as well.
 
sipafz said:
Looking at this a bit closer, notice point (a) referring to the inspection procedure:

View attachment 300820

Within the inspection procedure 175.80, a vehicle is failed if when doors are not present if originally fitted by the manufacturer per (i):

View attachment 300824

This means that as long as there are provisions for doors, they must remain. Structural roof/no roof is irrelevant. It’s my understanding that an officer can inspect / re-inspect a vehicle as part of a traffic stop and subsequently cite for violations. Bummer!
Click to expand...

This is correct. An officer is the one who also enforced the inspection procedure. They are the ones that make sure that inspectors like myself and doing their job.

Take a vehicle crash for instance. The state police officer is able to do an inspection of the vehicle on the spot. If they find for instance that the brake pads had no material and they can clearly see they were metal to metal then they are able to come after me for inspecting it (2/32 or less is failure on tires and brake pads). On the inspection stickers there is a date as to when the vehicle was inspected. If they crash two days after I inspect it they are able to see the station number who inspected it and my signature is on it as well. They are able to come and look at the number I wrote down to compare.
 
Hit them with pass practice.... the original jeep aka the Willis came from factory with out any of that and are still driven till this day without door and so on...I live in Orange County upstate NY and as long as the vehicle has mirrors and the driver has on his seatbelt it all okay..I’ve even seen Cherokees with out doors [emoji1360]


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
cozdude said:
This is correct. An officer is the one who also enforced the inspection procedure. They are the ones that make sure that inspectors like myself and doing their job.

Take a vehicle crash for instance. The state police officer is able to do an inspection of the vehicle on the spot. If they find for instance that the brake pads had no material and they can clearly see they were metal to metal then they are able to come after me for inspecting it (2/32 or less is failure on tires and brake pads). On the inspection stickers there is a date as to when the vehicle was inspected. If they crash two days after I inspect it they are able to see the station number who inspected it and my signature is on it as well. They are able to come and look at the number I wrote down to compare.
Click to expand...

Ironically, when I had this crash a couple years ago in Gruff/ Smittybilt V1 4 years ago when a youngster pulled in front of me from a side street. I was running doorless. Not one word was mentioned by any of the 4 or 5 officers that responded from two different municipalities. The problem is that this is arbitrary and evidently applied as an officer sees fit. My nephew is an officer and I've talked to him several times regarding several areas my Jeep does not comply (tires past fenders/doors off/exhaust exits mid vehicle instead of past rear bumper, etc) and his reply is that I've got bigger shit to deal with. Now if he pulls someone over and they're a dickhead, things are looked for if you know what I mean.

Gruff crash.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ddays said:
Ironically, when I had this crash a couple years ago in Gruff/ Smittybilt V1 4 years ago when a youngster pulled in front of me from a side street. I was running doorless. Not one word was mentioned by any of the 4 or 5 officers that responded from two different municipalities. The problem is that this is arbitrary and evidently applied as an officer sees fit. My nephew is an officer and I've talked to him several times regarding several areas my Jeep does not comply (tires past fenders/doors off/exhaust exits mid vehicle instead of past rear bumper, etc) and his reply is that I've got bigger shit to deal with. Now if he pulls someone over and they're a dickhead, things are looked for if you know what I mean.

View attachment 300899
Click to expand...

True, most officers tho don’t take the inspection class. Idk if your nephew has taken it or not or if he is state or local, I just know that the states police around me all take it.

Like you said tho it is at the officers digression if they want to call you out on it or not. Most of the time you really need to be doing something for them to stop you tho like speeding and then get you for not being “legal” per inspection.
 
Ddays said:
The problem is that this is arbitrary and evidently applied as an officer sees fit. My nephew is an officer and I've talked to him several times regarding several areas my Jeep does not comply (tires past fenders/doors off/exhaust exits mid vehicle instead of past rear bumper, etc) and his reply is that I've got bigger shit to deal with. Now if he pulls someone over and they're a dickhead, things are looked for if you know what I mean.
Click to expand...

^^^ This.

So much bad advice in this thread. To the OP, I would pay the fine as you were in violation. I know it’s a bitter pill to swallow, but consider this: I’m guessing that this officer works in your community or one near by (meaning that you’re going to cross paths again). You decide to go to court to make your point (piss in his Cheerios) and either he is there or word gets back to him. Now he spots you again, compliant or not he will probably look for a reason to pull you over, again. I wouldn’t want to deal with that. Your time and efforts would be better spent trying to change the specification as you posted before.
 
PA & Doorless = $141.50 fine

sipafz said:
^^^ This.

So much bad advice in this thread. To the OP, I would pay the fine as you were in violation. I know it’s a bitter pill to swallow, but consider this: I’m guessing that this officer works in your community or one near by (meaning that you’re going to cross paths again). You decide to go to court to make your point (piss in his Cheerios) and either he is there or word gets back to him. Now he spots you again, compliant or not he will probably look for a reason to pull you over, again. I wouldn’t want to deal with that. Your time and efforts would be better spent trying to change the specification as you posted before.
Click to expand...

This is exactly where my head is at. Though I would’ve rather walked away with a warning, he did not scrutinize my Jeep any more. Though I only run 4.75 BS, my tires technically stick out more than allowed, my bumper mounted lightbar is not covered, and my EVO quarter pounder does not suffice in the bumper coverage category.

As I work in his jurisdiction, and my house is only 1 mile outside of his jurisdiction, I don’t want to put a target on my Jeep.


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
cozdude said:
True, most officers tho don’t take the inspection class. Idk if your nephew has taken it or not or if he is state or local, I just know that the states police around me all take it.

Like you said tho it is at the officers digression if they want to call you out on it or not. Most of the time you really need to be doing something for them to stop you tho like speeding and then get you for not being “legal” per inspection.
Click to expand...

I definitely wasn’t speeding, tailgating, failing to signal, texting, or looking suspicious (38 year old clean cut male in business casual attire) but maybe he wasn’t a fan of the Volbeat I had playing....

Coz, the cheapest route I can think of to enjoy my Jeep to its fullest while trying to comply with 175.77(F) would be soft half doors but even then, they can argue they’re not equivalent to original equipment [emoji848] [emoji848] [emoji848]

It’s just a disheartening situation.


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom