j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
Florida law quoted:
(3) The windshield on every motor vehicle shall be equipped with a device for cleaning rain, snow, or other moisture from the windshield, which device shall be constructed as to be controlled or operated by the driver of the vehicle.
The law also requires that headlights be on when wipers are in use or during "rain, fog, or smoke" .I have heard officials use the term "inclement weather" on videos during traffic stops that legally require wiper use, but I cannot find that description/term anywhere used in the statues. That is a whole other discussion as in Florida it can often be raining on one side of the highway and not the other.
I have used RainX for decades and find it far superior in most of my driving situations, the exceptions being fine mist and/or very low driving speeds/stationary. Using the wipers any amount degrades the effectiveness of the applied Rainx.
My question here is, if I remove and discard my wiper system, apply Rainx, easily proven BTW during a rainy traffic stop, can I make the case and support it that an auxiliary properly aimed external electrical air blower used as/when needed, meets the legal requirements for a "device" for the known rare exceptions I note above? It actually might be more effective as it could reach areas wipers miss, if aimed optimally.
If I rode a motorcycle, I have no idea what pickle I would be in.
BTW, I'm looking for two things here, car guys real world thinking on the matter, and what would be your unbiased verdict if you sat on a jury and heard this above framed question? There is no wrong answer. The last is a way I often look at contentious questions, as they usually have the final say, not the experts, judges, lawyers, LEO, etc. who all often have their own agenda.
(3) The windshield on every motor vehicle shall be equipped with a device for cleaning rain, snow, or other moisture from the windshield, which device shall be constructed as to be controlled or operated by the driver of the vehicle.
The law also requires that headlights be on when wipers are in use or during "rain, fog, or smoke" .I have heard officials use the term "inclement weather" on videos during traffic stops that legally require wiper use, but I cannot find that description/term anywhere used in the statues. That is a whole other discussion as in Florida it can often be raining on one side of the highway and not the other.
I have used RainX for decades and find it far superior in most of my driving situations, the exceptions being fine mist and/or very low driving speeds/stationary. Using the wipers any amount degrades the effectiveness of the applied Rainx.
My question here is, if I remove and discard my wiper system, apply Rainx, easily proven BTW during a rainy traffic stop, can I make the case and support it that an auxiliary properly aimed external electrical air blower used as/when needed, meets the legal requirements for a "device" for the known rare exceptions I note above? It actually might be more effective as it could reach areas wipers miss, if aimed optimally.
If I rode a motorcycle, I have no idea what pickle I would be in.
BTW, I'm looking for two things here, car guys real world thinking on the matter, and what would be your unbiased verdict if you sat on a jury and heard this above framed question? There is no wrong answer. The last is a way I often look at contentious questions, as they usually have the final say, not the experts, judges, lawyers, LEO, etc. who all often have their own agenda.
Last edited:
