According to this week's Autocar, Radar Detectors are to be banned again?

If caught using one, a fine and points on licence.

D'oh!

 

Is this an attempt to make them illegal to use or to own? If to own then I will be looking for the money I spent on mine back from the government (some hope of that happenning).

 

Robertio, I was thinking of a valentine 1 @ £500, they are not cheap and do they really work??
Can you shed any light?

cheers

Nick

 

Interesting topic, does anyone own one, what is it, how much and is it really any good?

Thanks

Trev

 

Have a look at this, yes he is my brother and he has had one for about 18 months.

 

Can't believe they are going to ban the ownership of Radar detectors (use is already illegal). Let alone giving out points. With the amount of radar devices that give out false readings to these detectors, you'd be lucky to ever break the speed limit.

Once again, the easy fix cr@p about speed kills. Speed is only bad when inappropriate. Bad driving is always bad. But no, don't try and improve driving standards, lets just fill the coffers with fines for speeding, using radar detectors etc. Not to mention the extra cut (17.5%) the govt get from increased insurance premiums for those with points.

Round 'em up, put 'em in a field, and bomb the b*****ds.

Jerome.

 

At the moment, radar detectors are not illegal to use as they only detect the presence of a signal and do not attempt to decode it (they used to be until challenged on this point of law a couple of years ago). The jammers are illegal though.

Not having Autocar to hand, for what reason are they being made illegal?

 

Do a search on this forum using "Radar" as a keyword. You'll get lots of opinions.

I undertsood that nowadays it's all done by laser and by the time you detect the thing it's too late anyhow.

 

Does this mean i have now got to fork out more money, for a Radar Detector Detector ?

Paul

 

Coppers doing speed checks use laser.

But what's the situation with cameras now? Has something overturned this business about not having to give your details?

 

Based onthe review in Evo I bought a Beltronics 990. Works well out on the open road, but should be switched off in town as it picks up every set of automatic doors. (Also applies to petrol stations close to dual carriageways, etc).
Gatsos behind signs give about 150 yards warning, laser comes down to the officer operating.
I had one close one where the police car was on top of a fly over (1am on a Sunday night) and set the detector off as I passed out the other side, because it was dark and he assumed I could not see him, his aim followed where the car would have been. Thanks to the detector I slowed rapidly and was doing marginally over 70 when he adjusted his aim onto the car.
For this reason alone I regard it as £350 well spent.
Can not comment on other makes and models though a this is the only 1 I have owned.

 

I may be wrong butI thought that the original reason for banning detectors was caused by the Military.
Radar detectors made excellent bomb detonators now there is not a " threat" per say they are now legal. After all they are purely passive.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>From the DETR:
<B> This view is supported by the police. Indeed, the number of speed limit offences dealt with by police action increased by 17% in 1997 (the latest figures available) to 891,000. If you feel that your local police force is not devoting sufficient resources for road traffic law, you may wish to contact them directly to discuss this issue.

Safety (speed and red light) enforcement cameras are proving to be an effective way to reduce traffic speeds in certain circumstances. They do not have an extended or "zonal" effect which one of the reasons we advise they are only placed at sites with a history of speed related accidents. A Home Office commissioned cost benefit analysis of enforcement cameras showed an average 4 mph speed reductions and a 28% accident reduction at speed camera sites.

On 1 April a new funding mechanism for speed and red light enforcement cameras was introduced. This new system allows the police, local authorities and courts to use some of the revenue from fixed penalty speeding fines to be used to fund new camera operation. This new activity might be additional cameras, placing film in cameras where there was previously none, or lowering the speed thresholds at which point the cameras operate. However, this is only a pilot project designed to prove that the mechanism can be made to work.

The pilots are operating in 8 police force areas and involve partnerships of the local police force, local authorities and magistrates' courts. They will run initially for two years and, if successful, will be made generally available in England, Scotland and Wales.

As I have already explained, safety cameras are most effective at accident blackspots. However, many drivers, when faced with a safety camera will slow down, only to speed up again once past. his is clearly unacceptable. The Department would much rather drivers reduce their speeds voluntarily and consistently whilst on our roads.

In addition, many drivers buy detectors purely to frustrate the safety camera and avoid detection when speeding. There are clear road safety issues here which need to be addressed. This is why we are looking at current legislation to see how we can prohibit the use of camera detectors. However, before we can introduce legislation, we are required to consult organisations which may have an interest in this issue.[/quote]

Further details at

 

I bought mine due to all these bloody cameras about, and it works a treat (Bel 970 VLR).

Highly recommend one!

David.

 

You may have seen this before.

As an alternative to radar/laser guns

 

I have had two now for over 4 years. The first was a Uniden and was not bad.

However, I now have a Bel VLR liek David and it is the mutts naccers. Superb at detecting Gatsos over 300 meters away!

Hard wired into the igniton, it was and still is £300 very well spent indeed.

Detectors are currently legal - originak=lly illegal as thought to contravene the 1953 (?) Wireless and Telemetry Act which stated that you would be in trouble for decoding / interpreting data. A judge through this out of court as a Radar Detector is merely detecting the PRESENCE of data and not decoding it.

(I think! )

Cheers,

Jon.

 

Similar to gpstrapalert thing is the offering here:

 

I read in a car magazine recently that a company has started to produce a Laserjammer that stops the officer using the device from getting a reading from your car.
The way in which it jams the lasergun is as soon as it detects a laser it returns a much stronger beam of light than the detector can cope with and so makes it impossible for the officer to get a reading, As there is no law regarding light it is totally legal to own and use.

I will have a look and see if I can find the magazine which had the article in it.

 

I suspect they are looking at banning them as use of them could be construed as attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Laser Jammers would certainly fall into the above catagory. Radar detectors could do as they are device that effectively prevents you from getting caught when you are commiting an offense.

 

Here we go again.

What annoys me is that if this government (or any other for that matter) was really interested in cutting the number of road deaths (in particular, child accidents (I think we've got one of the worst death rates in Europe)), then they would move all the speed cameras from their current positions and place then outside every school / park in the country - ie areas you are most likely to find kids. But they won't do this as they won't make money out them.

I think the government would be quite justified in banning radar detectors if this happened. This just strikes me as another way to increase earnings from cameras.

This topic really does wind me up

Chris

 

Chris L - good point which I agree with.
Although I do drive fast sometimes (safely though), in open areas where you would not expect to find anyone, I ALLWAYS drive slowly when around built-up areas, schools etc. At the end of the day it is up to the individual driver to determine how fast they drive in relation to which road/circumstances they are in.
This obviously is then determined by how good a driver we all think we are, (my wife tells me I'm the best btw, at driving that is!!)LOL
Anyway, I still can't make my mind up as too which one to buy!!

Nick

 

Nick

See your point. Most people do slow down in these kinds of areas - but not all. I go past a school on my way to work which is on a 40 limit road. I always slow down to well below that because I know that there are going to be loads of kids around - but you should see the looks of people behind who are suddenly up your exhaust pipe 'cause I've slowed down. Its about appropriate speed for the conditions and the time of day.

This morning I heard the Denise Van Outen got done for doing 73 in 40 zone. Now I know that she was not in a built up area etc, but she 'got away' with £500 fine and 5 or 6 points on her licence. I wonder what the chances of you or I keeping our licence if we were caught doing 103 on a motorway? Not good I think. Those in power don't seem to be getting the balance right. There are things they could do without banning radar detecors but most of them involve spending monay and I guess its just not seen as a priority issue - which is a little disturbing.

Chris

 

Hi Guys

I think the laser jammer story was in Revs or Max Power (can’t remember which) the gist of the story was that they had tested it and it worked!

I guess it’s time to buy one before the Kremlin (sorry – the wonderful people who look after us all) ban these too.

The sat-nav system that tells you were the fixed sites are sounds like a damm good idea too, I don’t see how they could successfully legislate against that either.

Cheers

Simon

BTW – NON of the above has anything to do with were I work

 

Found these sites with info on laser jammers:

 

WHat then is the implication for the morpheous GPS speed camera locator which has been developed in association with the police force and is a unit which is updated daily via telephone link to provide accruate details of every live camera?

Sunil

 

to support Chris Leppards statement, certainly around Croydon speed cameras are mostly no where near accident blackspots, they are just situated where maximum revenue will be generated for the goverment etc.

Sunil

 

Hi All!

I may be completely missing the point here, but w.r.t. Gatsos, you don't need a detector because you cannot be "done" from as Gatso. It takes a picture from the back of the car, so it's impossible to tell who was driving. Go to Crown Court (speeding is a criminal offence) and they have to prove that you were driving. Until now they could do that by coericing a confession out of you (Section 172, Road Traffic Act). But of course that is a direct violation of your Human Rights (as outlined under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights).

Section 172 "bit the dust" in Scotland in February this year. England will follow next month (although I believe that there has already been a precedent anyway). So Gatsos are having a really bad time at the mo...

I have heard rumours about action being taken to outlaw forward facing cameras, since apparently they are an infringement of civil liberties or something like that.

Looks like Plod will have to give up on cameras, get more officers and get out on the roads again and actually catch offenders while they're, errr, offending. As a side-effect of having more patrol cars driving round, crime will fall and general road safety will improve. But since this is all far too sensible (and will cost money instead of making it) this bunch of clowns who have the audacity of calling themselves a Government will just seek to infringe more rights, and those decisions will get overturned and so it will go on, costing the taxpayer even more money but with no tangible benefit as a result. Some things never change :-(

Cheers,

Pat.

 

Tell you what Pat - go and blast past your local Gatso and try out the theory - let us know when it gets to court

If it works - well you're a braver man than me.

Chris

 

Pat - I see your point but as another example:
I had just slowed down from 130+ on the A66 last year, to around 70 mph to pull off on my slip road (late at night, nothing on the roads...)apart from 2 cars that had pulled over to let me pass...when I noticed a traffic car (saab), behind them. I instantly slowed too approx 29mph off the slip road(LOL) when plod and his mate pulls me. Remember the 1/3 mile thingy where they have to trail you for this distance (directly behind you) either with 2 in the car or 1 & a camera.....well they did me for 104mph in a 70 limit & 70 in a 50 limit (the A66 goes from 70 - 50 mph a one point), no camera, just plod & his mate who lied in court & stated that they followed directly behind me for some distance.
The 2 cars behind me were in the way & their is no way I missed a traffic car @ 10pm on a quiet road.
The copper told me that I passed him so fast that it took him 2 miles to catch up with me.....so your statement about the gatso's was interesting...BUT...I agree with Chris (again), you try it mate because in reality it's a different ball game.

Nick