Radar detectors - are they worth it?

[russell_bynum]

OK, so the lesson is:

 

Poor people are more likely to get off.

Rich people get the ticket because "They can afford it."

 

And if you have a radar detector, you're more likely to get a ticket since the LEO feels they'll be teaching you a lesson.

 

 

Not that I have a problem with officer discretion...It's gotten me off the vast majority of the times that I've been stopped (Despite the fact that I've had a detector every time I've been stopped except for one....which ironically was the one ticket I got.) I believe I usually get off because I'm very polite and I go out of my way to make sure the officer knows that I intend for them to be in full control of the situation.

 

I guess officer's discretion can be a double-edged sword sometimes.

[Lawman]

OK, so the lesson is:

 

Poor people are more likely to get off.

Rich people get the ticket because "They can afford it."

 

 

GUILTY.. Consequences are more severe for poor people and they generally seem more responsive to a warning..

[Husker Red]

OK, so the lesson is:

 

Poor people are more likely to get off.

Rich people get the ticket because "They can afford it."

That seems like a gross oversimplification of his response, focused on what YOU saw as important details. I read it as:

Clean driving record = gets off.

Habitual violator = gets ticket.

[Lawman]

OK, so the lesson is:

 

Poor people are more likely to get off.

Rich people get the ticket because "They can afford it."

That seems like a gross oversimplification of his response, focused on what YOU saw as important details. I read it as:

Clean driving record = gets off.

Habitual violator = gets ticket.

 

Past driving record is one of the 4,789 things I consider.

[Dave McReynolds]

Sounds like total BS to me. Every single person I know is a "habitual speeder". When I drive my truck, I'm ususlly pretty close to the speedlimit and I almost never pass anyone...which tells me that the vast majority of drivers are habitual speeders.

 

It sounds like a "And thought you could outsmart me...I'll show you." routine to me.

 

Even though, as I discussed in my earlier post, I feel offended morally, entrapped maybe, by my two speeding stops on straight, otherwise empty, highways by concealed CHP's, I have no doubt that I was violating the speeding law. I don't know if they would have cited me if I hadn't had a radar detector, but the fact that they might have given me a warning instead plays into my decision not to use one anymore.

 

Frankly, if I were a LEO, I would cite anyone I stopped who was using a radar detector, under the assumption that they intended to speed. I just don't know any other reason you would use one.

 

That said, if they were effective in the conditions I would like to speed, long empty highways where I'm a danger to no one other than myself, I would continue to use one. But since they're not, it would be pretty stupid to carry something that pretty much guarantees you a ticket rather than a warning.

 

As far as habitual speeding is concerned, there are habitual speeders who try to understand the unwritten rules of the road and stay within those guidelines, and then there are habitual speeders who don't.

[russell_bynum]

OK, so the lesson is:

 

Poor people are more likely to get off.

Rich people get the ticket because "They can afford it."

That seems like a gross oversimplification of his response, focused on what YOU saw as important details. I read it as:

Clean driving record = gets off.

Habitual violator = gets ticket.

If the driving record was the only factor, then why mention the fact that the rich guy had a diesel pickup with every bell and whistle, and the other guy had a crappy car that was overheating, a child seat in the back, and he makes a very meager salary?

 

(Besides...he already fessed up. )

[russell_bynum]

But since they're not, it would be pretty stupid to carry something that pretty much guarantees you a ticket rather than a warning.

 

Call me lucky, I guess...The only time in the last 10 years that I've been ticketed was when I didn't have a detector. I don't know if a detector would have helped...it was on a long straight flat section of freeway with VERY light traffic (one car every mile or so), all of it going roughly the same speed as me (~90 in a 70) and the LEO was hiding in the bushes...probably using instant-on.

 

As far as habitual speeding is concerned, there are habitual speeders who try to understand the unwritten rules of the road and stay within those guidelines, and then there are habitual speeders who don't.

 

Yep, I agree. I'd venture a guess that those who don't follow those guidelines are probably not going to be helped that much by a detector anyway.

[BigArn]

Note to self, remove SIG ARMS bumper sticker off of truck bumper. Just can't be to carefull.

[bakerzdosen]

For the record, I actually enjoy the technical aspects of patrolling LEO's. There are times that I'm not speeding at all and have my V1 going just to see how local law enforcement handles their radar/lidar. There are very few places that are truly creative with their "speed traps" but they are out there. (I know "speed traps" aren't legal everywhere - CA comes to mind.) I've been impressed a few times both by how intelligently thought out a LEO's setup is, and at times, equally impressed that a certain setup would actually catch anyone. (I saw a bad example in Southern Utah last summer: A highway patrolman had his car behind a tree in the median on I-15. However, the glare from his windshield was almost blindingly strong from a LONG way away. No need for a radar detector there...) And who hasn't been entertained by the "dummy" LEO outside of Torrey?

 

However, this is not to say that I haven't seen speeds north of the limit a time or two...

 

The only time I've been pulled over (and ticketed) in the past 15 years, I haven't had my V1 on or with me.

[Fugu]

If a detector virtually guarantees tickets, I must be one charming SOB.

 

[E30TECH]

I have decided to pull the trigger on the V1 and remote audio module.

 

Before I do that, I wanted to see if anyone knows of interference with the GXM30 and the V1. I recall reading it here, but couldn't locate it in the archives.

[russell_bynum]

I have decided to pull the trigger on the V1 and remote audio module.

 

Before I do that, I wanted to see if anyone knows of interference with the GXM30 and the V1. I recall reading it here, but couldn't locate it in the archives.

 

I don't know what a GXM30 is (the muffler bracket for a '79 Pinto?), but you will not be dissapointed with your V1.

 

Congrats!

[bakerzdosen]

I don't know what a GXM30 is

It's the XM radio antenna for a Garmin (think Zumo 550 for example) GPS.

 

Luddite.

[russell_bynum]

I don't know what a GXM30 is

It's the XM radio antenna for a Garmin (think Zumo 550 for example) GPS.

 

Luddite.

 

Hey....what do I know....my bike doesn't even have servo brakes.

[KDeline]

[i appreciate having the discretion to write some and let some go..The alternative would be to write every violator for every violation observed and I don't think that is a good idea.

 

 

 

Proof again the law is not the same for everybody. The kid was speeding and the SUV driver was speeding. To the letter of the law they should have both gotten awards. In this way the system is not fair. If you are in a bad mood, I will bet your discretion is much diffrent, again not fair. But lifes not fair is it?

[Matts_12GS]

[i appreciate having the discretion to write some and let some go..The alternative would be to write every violator for every violation observed and I don't think that is a good idea.

 

 

 

Proof again the law is not the same for everybody. The kid was speeding and the SUV driver was speeding. To the letter of the law they should have both gotten awards. In this way the system is not fair. If you are in a bad mood, I will bet your discretion is much diffrent, again not fair. But lifes not fair is it?

is it really news that life isn't fair?

[E30TECH]

Ordered the V1 and remote module today. I even ordered one for a friend

[russell_bynum]

Ordered the V1 and remote module today. I even ordered one for a friend

 

 

Can I be your friend? That's a pretty generous present.

 

[E30TECH]

Ordered the V1 and remote module today. I even ordered one for a friend

 

 

Can I be your friend? That's a pretty generous present.

 

 

I only said I ordered it for him He'll be paying for our shipping as a gift to me (so I shipped it 2nd day). He has never ordered over the internet and is worried about fraud.

 

But you can be my friend anyway

[onmyrt]

To tell you the truth, I've never quite understood why Radar detectors are even legal.

To me, the use of a device that's only purpose is to undermind the law, is in itself 'obstruction of justice'.

I've heard that flashing your headlights at oncoming traffic to warn others of an LEO presence is a violation of the law, go figure.

[russell_bynum]

To tell you the truth, I've never quite understood why Radar detectors are even legal.

To me, the use of a device that's only purpose is to undermind the law, is in itself 'obstruction of justice'.

I've heard that flashing your headlights at oncoming traffic to warn others of an LEO presence is a violation of the law, go figure.

 

As long as my government is willing to use sneaky electronic surveillance devices against me, I will use whatever electronic countermeasures I can. FWIW, If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

[RBertalotto]

To tell you the truth, I've never quite understood why Radar detectors are even legal.

To me, the use of a device that's only purpose is to undermind the law, is in itself 'obstruction of justice'.

I've heard that flashing your headlights at oncoming traffic to warn others of an LEO presence is a violation of the law, go figure.

 

Oh come on! We all know that radar detectors are simply safety devices. They give us warnings of construction and traffic delays.......The speed trap detection is simply an annoyance that we all have to put up with.......

[Lawman]

If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

 

Russell,

To say I'm baffled would be an understatement..I feel I've been ostracized after trying to articulate a reasonable position in support of mandatory helmet laws and then you say this and it goes by without so much as even a mention..The people love you...You should be in politics....

[Whip]

If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

 

Russell,

To say I'm baffled would be an understatement..I feel I've been ostracized after trying to articulate a reasonable position in support of mandatory helmet laws and then you say this and it goes by without so much as even a mention..The people love you...You should be in politics....

 

 

I don't know what your talking about....

[russell_bynum]

Russell,

To say I'm baffled would be an understatement..I feel I've been ostracized after trying to articulate a reasonable position in support of mandatory helmet laws and then you say this and it goes by without so much as even a mention..

 

Hey...my goal is to minimize my chance of getting tickets. If a jammer would help with that and it was legal, I'd do it. If a cloaking device was legal (and existed) I'd do that.

 

 

The people love you...You should be in politics....

 

Only the people who don't know me love me. Once they learn the truth...

 

 

It isn't personal, btw. You guys are just doing your job, and it's a nasty job that I wouldn't want. I have nothing but the highest respect for LEO's.

 

But you gotta do what you gotta do and I gotta do what I gotta do.

[Lawman]

But you gotta do what you gotta do and I gotta do what I gotta do.

 

I can appreciate that....That's why we call it an "adversarial criminal justice system" and I think it works quite well most of the time....

[Firefight911]

But you gotta do what you gotta do and I gotta do what I gotta do.

 

Hmmm, why do I have this vision in my head?????

 

[bakerzdosen]

Hmmm, why do I have this vision in my head?????

 

You have weird visions.

 

I personally envision something more like this:

 

 

[velomoto]

... again not fair. But lifes not fair is it?

Ummm, no it isn't. But did anyone ever tell you it would be???

[velomoto]

FWIW, If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

I don't understand why this is an issue for you???

[Lawman]

FWIW, If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

I don't understand why this is an issue for you???

 

Because it's wrong....There's reasons some things are illegal..The principal has to do with protecting the innocent..I'd have a problem with it for the same reason I'd object to someone raping you even if it was legal....

[Dave McReynolds]

I don't really believe you think rape and speeding are morally equivalent.

 

There's a distinction between a radar jammer and a radar detector: one interferes with the operation of a law enforcement device, while the other just receives signals, enough of a distinction to make one generally illegal and the other generally legal. However, in this context, both would be used for the same purpose: avoiding speeding tickets.

 

So why are either one of them legal?

 

I think radar detectors are legal because everyone, and this includes legislators, and probably includes you, knows that some people are stopped for speeding violations for public safety reasons, while other people are stopped for "other" reasons. "Other" reasons include speed traps set up to raise revenue (you may never have done this, but you can't deny it has been done), ticket quotas, and just the pure LEO mindset that if you see a violation, you do something about it, whether it really makes any difference to anyone or not. Which is fine; I do the same thing preparing tax returns every day. I don't have to agree with a tax law to make sure that it is correctly applied if I'm going to sign my name to the tax return.

 

But that does make it different from rape, and even different from fining a restaurant for having a dirty kitchen, both of which are public safety problems, and neither of which have the "other" components I mention.

 

I think legislators realize that these "other" components to speeding violations exist, and that it would be difficult to write the laws in such a way to exclude them. So in most states, they are reluctant to outlaw radar detectors, as an effort to maintain some balance.

[Lawman]

I agree with everything you said including that I do not believe rape and speeding are morally equivalent..The point is the "principal" for my objection is the same. I object to both because they are both wrong and they are both wrong because to allow either hinders protection of the innocent..

[Fugu]

So speed traps and radar enforcement are there to make people slow down...

 

Yet it's illegal to signal oncoming motorists to slow down because there's a speed trap or a cop radaring.

 

They both slow down traffic, so why's one illegal and deemed "interference"?

 

 

 

I warn other people and will continue to do so. If pulled over for it, I'll simply explain that I saw a patrol car on the side of the road and thought there might be a hazard other drivers needed to be alerted to and was doing my part to make the roads safer. I'm just trying to help.

[Jerry Johnston]

So speed traps and radar enforcement are there to make people slow down...

 

Yet it's illegal to signal oncoming motorists to slow down because there's a speed trap or a cop radaring.

 

They both slow down traffic, so why's one illegal and deemed "interference"?

 

 

 

I warn other people and will continue to do so. If pulled over for it, I'll simply explain that I saw a patrol car on the side of the road and thought there might be a hazard other drivers needed to be alerted to and was doing my part to make the roads safer. I'm just trying to help.

 

Damn good point!

[Jerry Johnston]

Don't know about "protecting the innocent" but I feel if it's illegal it's because a law was passed (normally)by the majority not to be interpreted by each individual differently.

[russell_bynum]

Yet it's illegal to signal oncoming motorists to slow down because there's a speed trap or a cop radaring.

 

What??

[Fugu]

What??

 

Uh oh. Have I fallen for internet wisdom?

 

I thought there was something earlier in this thread to that effect (see page 7, bottom), and was under the impression that you'd be ticketed for obstructing or some such where no law specifically against it existed. I take it from your comment I'm incorrect.

 

There is a verified case in the UK of a guy ticketed for putting up a sign ahead of a photo radar rig. The ticket was upheld. He was apparently warned, then refused to take the sign down, and then cited.

 

There is a verified case of a guy in the US being given a $10 ticket for flashing his headlights in warning to others, but that was thrown out, the judge citing the 1st amendment (presumably the state constitution 1st).

 

76-8-306. Obstruction of justice in criminal investigations or proceedings -- Elements -- Penalties -- Exceptions.

 

(1) An actor commits obstruction of justice if the actor, with intent to hinder, delay, or prevent the investigation, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of any person regarding conduct that constitutes a criminal offense:

(a) provides any person with a weapon;

(b) prevents by force, intimidation, or deception, any person from performing any act that might aid in the discovery, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of any person;

© alters, destroys, conceals, or removes any item or other thing;

(d) makes, presents, or uses any item or thing known by the actor to be false;

(e) harbors or conceals a person;

(f) provides a person with transportation, disguise, or other means of avoiding discovery or apprehension;

(g) warns any person of impending discovery or apprehension;

(h) conceals information that is not privileged and that concerns the offense, after a judge or magistrate has ordered the actor to provide the information; or

 

Probably a great big stretch but who knows.

 

There's a ton of anecdotes out there about people being pulled over for flashing their lights being cited for improperly flashing their headlamps and things like that but I can't verify them.

 

 

 

 

[russell_bynum]

What??

 

Uh oh. Have I fallen for internet wisdom?

 

I thought there was something earlier in this thread to that effect (see page 7, bottom), and was under the impression that you'd be ticketed for obstructing or some such where no law specifically against it existed. I take it from your comment I'm incorrect.

 

Beats me. Somehow I missed that (even though I replied to that post.

 

That's the biggest bunch of crap I've heard in a long time....which doesn't mean it isn't true, of course.

 

I flash my lights to warn people all the time. Not just for speed traps (honestly, I don't come across those very often), but to warn about accidents, crap in the road, or whatever.

 

I'd like to see chapter and verse of the law that makes that illegal.

[David]

What??

 

Uh oh. Have I fallen for internet wisdom?

 

I thought there was something earlier in this thread to that effect (see page 7, bottom), and was under the impression that you'd be ticketed for obstructing or some such where no law specifically against it existed. I take it from your comment I'm incorrect.

 

It is illegal in TN to warn oncoming motorists, but this was (gloriously) overturned recently.

[Fugu]

Beats me. Somehow I missed that (even though I replied to that post.

 

I was editing while you were typing- posted the UT law on obstruction. I don't have the legal chops to say if it could apply.

[Lawman]

I believe that law has been repealed in most if not all states..Here's what I would tell you...If you flash your lights to warn oncoming traffic of radar and you get stopped and asked by an officer if you flashed your lights at oncoming traffic you should not lie..If you say "no" don't be surprised if he writes you a ticket for operating a motor vehicle with defective headlights..

[russell_bynum]

I believe that law has been repealed in most if not all states..Here's what I would tell you...If you flash your lights to warn oncoming traffic of radar and you get stopped and asked by an officer if you flashed your lights at oncoming traffic you should not lie..If you say "no" don't be surprised if he writes you a ticket for operating a motor vehicle with defective headlights..

 

Well yeah...lie to an officer and you'll get nailed. I'm cool with that. That's how it should be.

 

But it boggles the mind that we would actually have a law that prohibits flashing lights to warn other motorists.

[velomoto]

FWIW, If a radar jammer was legal, I'd have one.

I don't understand why this is an issue for you???

 

Because it's wrong....There's reasons some things are illegal..The principal has to do with protecting the innocent..I'd have a problem with it for the same reason I'd object to someone raping you even if it was legal....

Lawman - that was exactly my point. If one is inclined to ignore (break?) one law, then why not another, and another, and... It's that slippery slope thing.

 

As for people flashing headlights, I thot that went out with the 70's! I can't recall the last time I had someone flash their lights to warn others of a speed trap up the road. Hmmm, time for another survey.

[Fugu]

If one is inclined to ignore (break?) one law, then why not another, and another, and... It's that slippery slope thing.

 

This argument only holds water if you think all laws are equally important.

[russell_bynum]

If one is inclined to ignore (break?) one law, then why not another, and another, and... It's that slippery slope thing.

 

This argument only holds water if you think all laws are equally important.

 

Exactly.

 

Well, I'm already going 70mph in a 55mph zone on this long, straight, flat road with 10 miles visibility in all directions and no traffic, so I might as well sell copies of our Nuclear Missile launch codes to the highest bidder, murder a bunch of school kids, and rob a bank while I'm at it.

 

[bakerzdosen]

Well, I'm already going 70mph in a 55mph zone on this long, straight, flat road with 10 miles visibility in all directions and no traffic, so I might as well sell copies of our Nuclear Missile launch codes to the highest bidder, murder a bunch of school kids, and rob a bank while I'm at it.

 

No wonder you got your nickname... That's a lotta stuff to be doing while riding a bike - even on a flat straight highway.

[russell_bynum]

[Paul Mihalka]

It is obvious that there are different levels of breaking a law. That's why the fines increase with increasing speeds above the limit.

[russell_bynum]

It is obvious that there are different levels of breaking a law. That's why the fines increase with increasing speeds above the limit.

 

Yep. And murder has an entirely different level of punishment than letting your parking meter run out.