Which Laser/Radar detector works?

[kolkim]

Just came along this site: http://jammersstore.com/radar_jammers_laser_jammers.htm

I have a radar detector, doesn't work unless they use the old style of radars, very rare but still works. But I hear most cops use Laser guns now, can anyone fill me in on the differences? on
Radar Detectors
Radar Laser Jammers
Laser Jammers

my radar detector goes off whenever a cop is nearby using the old radars, within a block. Is there a detector that will go off whenever a cop is nearby using the new lasers as well?

[kolkim]

Sorry so I went and read the info on most of the ones.
http://jammersstore.com/p_phantom_c435.htm
This one seems like it's what I want, looks nice, detects lasers, radars, and jams both as well. Just going to ask how far it can detect/jam and if it is cordless. Might be getting this and selling my old one

[zulutango]

You might want to do a search on the topic of Laser jammers...case law in BC for using one...a criminal code conviction for obstructing a Police Officer when you get caught. The Police Laser tells the operator that it is being jammed. I was involved personally in one seizure and conviction. As the Laser gets your speed reading in 1/3 of a second you might consider how you can detect the Laser reading and slow down below the limit in less than 1/3 of a second?

[Strzelec]

I'm not condoning the use of jammers as they are technically illegal, but isn't the "correct" way to use them to have the jammer on, and when the laser is detected, you slow down, and turn the jammer off? That way the delay could possibly be attributed to an equipment malfunction?

[kolkim]

Originally Posted by zulutango

You might want to do a search on the topic of Laser jammers...case law in BC for using one...a criminal code conviction for obstructing a Police Officer when you get caught. The Police Laser tells the operator that it is being jammed. I was involved personally in one seizure and conviction. As the Laser gets your speed reading in 1/3 of a second you might consider how you can detect the Laser reading and slow down below the limit in less than 1/3 of a second?

The main reason I want one is so I know if there is a cop around. I'm not scared of speeding tickets, I don't drive stupid, But I do often get pulled over for stupid things and I just don't like that. Cops don't always shoot their laser at you to get your speed, their cars have lasers or radars on them. I'm sure you know this.

[LenovoTurbo]

Originally Posted by Strzelec

I'm not condoning the use of jammers as they are technically illegal, but isn't the "correct" way to use them to have the jammer on, and when the laser is detected, you slow down, and turn the jammer off? That way the delay could possibly be attributed to an equipment malfunction?

There's almost no delay in reading the speed. Once it's aimed, speed shows. Takes approx 1/3 of a second to read the speed as zulutango said. If your speed doesn't show up quickly, they know it's being jammed.

Originally Posted by kolkim

The main reason I want one is so I know if there is a cop around. I'm not scared of speeding tickets, I don't drive stupid, But I do often get pulled over for stupid things and I just don't like that. Cops don't always shoot their laser at you to get your speed, their cars have lasers or radars on them. I'm sure you know this.

Laser is used to get your speed by pointing it at you. Once the laser is aiming at you, your jammer will beep and jam it, and their gun will say it's being jammed. No time for you to slow down. So they immediately know you are jamming it.

[Shorn]

There is already a thread for this: http://www.revscene.net/forums/laser...ighlight=radar

Search next time, dude.

[zulutango]

What they said.


The main reason I want one is so I know if there is a cop around. I'm not scared of speeding tickets, I don't drive stupid, But I do often get pulled over for stupid things and I just don't like that

No the main reason you want one is to speed and not get caught. If you often get pulled over for stupid things then it seems like a good time to ask yourself why you continue to do stupid things?...orrrr...maybe Insite will build you a "safe speeding site"?

[MindBomber]

No one gets pulled over for "stupid things" they get pulled over for violations or suspected violations of the mva; although your inexperience may lead you to believe obeying stop signs is optional, it is an offense.

If you would prefer not to be pulled over in the future, may I suggest driving like a mature adult and not contrary to the mva?
Posted via RS Mobile

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by zulutango

maybe Insite will build you a "safe speeding site"?

They already have one.

[sho_bc]

And because no one mentioned it yet, we don't have laser "on" (mounted in) the cars. All laser is done by stationary enforcement. All mobile enforcement is done by radar, pacing and/or visual estimation.

[zulutango]

However...Marine Section does have mobile Laser....mounted on Dolphins...on loan from Dr Evil.

[Eff-1]

Originally Posted by zulutango

The Police Laser tells the operator that it is being jammed.

How does that work exactly? Does the laser give the operator a specific error code that points to a jammer?

[LenovoTurbo]

Originally Posted by Eff-1

How does that work exactly? Does the laser give the operator a specific error code that points to a jammer?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think when you point it at a car, the display goes from "-----" to something like "55 km/h" instantly. When it doesn't display the speed, it means it's being jammed.

And they know their laser gun is not malfunctioning because they can just point it at another vehicle near you and it will give a reading, while yours won't.

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by Eff-1

How does that work exactly? Does the laser give the operator a specific error code that points to a jammer?

Trade secret...without being specific, I can tell you though that the operator gets audio and visual feedback that it's being jammed.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Trade secret...without being specific, I can tell you though that the operator gets audio and visual feedback that it's being jammed.

So if I was to be hauled into court for using a jammer, and I challenged the mechanism the laser gun used to detect my jammer and you couldn't disclose it due to it being a trade secret, how would you defend its accuracy?

Also, visual speed estimation has regularly been accepted by the courts to be accurate enough for a conviction, so I don't see how using a jammer prevents you from obtaining enough evidence for a conviction in the first place.

[zulutango]

You are mixing up 2 different things...the accuracy of a Police Laser in displaying target speeds and the reaction of a jammed Laser. They are two different things and you seem to be saying that they are the same thing.

IF this was court the Crown would describe what happened to alert them to a jammer being used.

The "accuracy" of a Laser in recording the speed of a targeted vehicle would be part of the evidence entered. The operator would describe the tests he/she performed before using the unit and then also introduce visual estimation and tracking history to further support the evidence of "accuracy".

As far as your last paragraph goes...you are mixing subjects again. You would not be in traffic court if you were being charged with CC obstruction for using a jammer. The methods used to catch you using it would be part of the Crown's case. The fact they found one in your vehicle would also be used.

[sebberry]

I would be calling into question how the jammer detection mechanism in the laser gun functions. I would want to examine exactly how the laser gun detects jamming and I would want to be able to verify that the system cannot be jammed by a jammer installed on another car.

If the manufacturer of the gun cannot due to trade secrets show me how the detection system functions then I have no way to verify that the gun can only be jammed by a jamming beam emitted from within the laser cone.

And again, since a measurement device isn't even required for a speeding conviction, a jammer is at best an attempt to obstruct. I'm not actually stopping you from obtaining a speed since you can do that without any instruments and still obtain a speeding conviction.

[zulutango]

The owner's manual of the Laser unit in copyright material. Contact the manufacturer if you want to know for free what others have to pay for. Saying that there are other ways to detect speed is like saying that preventing a Cop from running after someone is not obstruction if you allow the Cop to walk after the person. Look at the CC definition of obstruction.

What is the definition of “obstruction”?
The definition of "obstruction" that has generally been applied by the court occurs when a person makes it more difficult for the police to carry out their duties. It is generally not an defence to argue that the police were eventually able to carry out their duties despite the attempt to obstruct them from doing so.
What does the Crown Attorney need to prove to show a person obstructed the police?
The Crown must first prove that there was an obstructing of a police officer. They must also prove that the police officer was acting pursuant to a lawful purpose. Next the Crown must prove that the obstructing affected the officer in the execution of a duty that he was then executing, and lastly they must prove that the person who obstructed the officer did so intentionally.

As a closing thought, the fact that they found jammer in your vehicle would be evidence that the Cops were right and that you had a jammer. I can't imagine what sort of an explanation that you could concoct to convince a Judge that you had a legal reason to have a device in your vehicle that was designed solely to obstruct Police in the execution of their duties. That would be a trial worth spectating.

[sho_bc]

This was posted in the other thread, marketed to be a parking assist with the bonus of jamming lasers as well:
http://www.kmph.ca/products/laser-pr...ad-system.html

[zulutango]

In compiling my Crown council report I would definitely link to the manufacturers/sellers websites and produce all materials that described the units sold and their intended use.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by sebberry

I would be calling into question how the jammer detection mechanism in the laser gun functions. I would want to examine exactly how the laser gun detects jamming and I would want to be able to verify that the system cannot be jammed by a jammer installed on another car.

If the manufacturer of the gun cannot due to trade secrets show me how the detection system functions then I have no way to verify that the gun can only be jammed by a jamming beam emitted from within the laser cone.

And again, since a measurement device isn't even required for a speeding conviction, a jammer is at best an attempt to obstruct. I'm not actually stopping you from obtaining a speed since you can do that without any instruments and still obtain a speeding conviction.

Go away now, little troll... your trolling is weak and transparent.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by zulutango

The owner's manual of the Laser unit in copyright material. Contact the manufacturer if you want to know for free what others have to pay for. Saying that there are other ways to detect speed is like saying that preventing a Cop from running after someone is not obstruction if you allow the Cop to walk after the person. Look at the CC definition of obstruction.

What is the definition of “obstruction”?
The definition of "obstruction" that has generally been applied by the court occurs when a person makes it more difficult for the police to carry out their duties. It is generally not an defence to argue that the police were eventually able to carry out their duties despite the attempt to obstruct them from doing so.
What does the Crown Attorney need to prove to show a person obstructed the police?
The Crown must first prove that there was an obstructing of a police officer. They must also prove that the police officer was acting pursuant to a lawful purpose. Next the Crown must prove that the obstructing affected the officer in the execution of a duty that he was then executing, and lastly they must prove that the person who obstructed the officer did so intentionally.

Has it not been said here by police officers that laser/radar guns are frequently used simply to corroborate the officer's visual estimation and not to take the initial reading?

In that case the police officer has already successfully carried out his duties in obtaining a speed before the obstruction attempt was even made.


And no, I don't have a jammer or even a detector in my car.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Go away now, little troll... your trolling is weak and transparent.

Just a friendly debate, that's all.

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Has it not been said here by police officers that laser/radar guns are frequently used simply to corroborate the officer's visual estimation and not to take the initial reading?

In that case the police officer has already successfully carried out his duties in obtaining a speed before the obstruction attempt was even made.


And no, I don't have a jammer or even a detector in my car.

What is the definition of “obstruction”?
The definition of "obstruction" that has generally been applied by the court occurs when a person makes it more difficult for the police to carry out their duties. It is generally not an defence to argue that the police were eventually able to carry out their duties despite the attempt to obstruct them from doing so.