Laser, the cops point of view

[gprsh924]

I wish there were more cops like you.

[Mule]

Wonders never cease. Just as a broken clock is right twice a day, The Brain of Steel is correct about the Geico gun. I saw this long ago in an NMA bulletin. Here's the link.
http://bimmer.roadfly.com/z3/messages/archive/msgsy1999w44/15394.html

[legion]

Originally Posted by Mule

Wonders never cease. Just as a broken clock is right twice a day, The Brain of Steel is correct about the Geico gun. I saw this long ago in an NMA bulletin. Here's the link.
http://bimmer.roadfly.com/z3/messages/archive/msgsy1999w44/15394.html

I'd like to point out that that is one, misguided insurance company, and not "insurance companies" as Soup insinuated.

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Superman

No conspiracy. No theory. Fact is, the development and marketing of these technologies is fully and vigorouly underwritten by insurance companies. They invented and developed laser and radar guns, and marketed and sold them to police departments complete with legal defense services. Another fact here is that public agencies rake in the dough from these citations. All this same stuff is true regarding traffic signal cameras also.

Where is the 'theory' here?

I thought this was common knowledge.

[jkarolyi]

That's why friends don't let friends insure with GEICO. This conspiracy theory is true!!! Dirty, dirty stuff.

For those of you who are for fair speed limits and procedural justice concerning red light and speed cameras, join the NMA (National Motorists Association). They lobby for these things and are quite powerful. If it weren't for them, we'd still have 55 mph speed limits! Check out their site:

http://www.motorists.org/

[Superman]

I rest my case, Chris. Unless you want to tangle with my Chief of Research, Mule.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by MMARSH

Jeff I use laser every day. I write alot of speeding tickets. I don't write chicken**** tickets. I typically don't even start my bike up unless someone is going at least 15 over.

I agree with you about what can happen when the unit is not held steady. It has happened to me. I've never seen a jump of 20 mph, but I have seen it jump 10-15 over. What do I do? I shoot it again. I personally always track the car and get a confirmation on the reading anyway. A properly trained user of the equipment would know that the higher reading was an error, because of the vehicle tracking history and because of the vehicle speed estimation. The difference between you shooting a gun and shooting a laser is that our laser travels at 983,571,056 feet per second and sends hundreds of light pulses a second. At 1500 feet. the spread of the laser is about 21/2 to 3 feet and it never spreads more then five feet even at over 5000 ft. It doesnt need to be held in the exact same place to get an accurate reading. (at distance I go for the entire front of the vehicle)

The courts assume that the people using the equipment are properly trained. I've never lost a case because of my ability or inability to use the equipment.

There are way to many people speeding for me to write someone a ticket who I am not 100% sure was indeed committing the violation.

Hold on. (put on flamesuit) ok. go ahead.

I'm not sure you understand the principles involved, Mike. I probably did a lousy job of explaining it. Here is a link to an article from the BBC that relates to the investigations they have conduscted on laser accuracy. Dr. Michael Clark, who is apparently recognized as one of the world's foremost experts on laser, disputes its accuracy when used for speed enforcement. Maybe this will explain it better.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/southwest/series11/week1_speed_cameras.shtml

If you are actually following the speeding car and verifying its speed by pacing it (I assume that's what you mean by "tracking"), then good for you. That is a level confirmation that, unfortunately, not all police feel obliged to obtain. Like the guys standing on the shoulder just pointing cars over; they are clearly not pacing. They are relying 100% on the laser reading. And the courts could care less. Laser has proven to be too unreliable for that.

I'm not sure where you are going with your "speed of light vs. speed of bullet" comparrison. That's kind of irrelevent. I'm merely using shooting as a comparitive experience that many of us have in an effort to bring to light just how difficult it is to hold steady. And I'm sorry, but you could not be more wrong about the need to be held steady enough to remain on the same reflective plane of the target vehicle. Moving from windshield to front bumper will induce error; enough to place an innocent motorist well above the limit. Read what Dr. Clark has to say about that. Merely aiming at the whole front of the car just doesn't give the accuracy needed.

And yes, I'm sure the courts assume you are properly trained. Traffic courts assume a great deal these days. They have lowered the burden of proof placed upon the State to "preponderance" of evidence, or 51% likely, in traffic court. When it was still "beyond a reasonable doubt" it was well neigh impossible for the State to obtain a conviction. Back then, if an officer showed up in court with a reading from an instrument that could be proven to have given a false reading even once, it would be case closed. Not guilty. Now the state gives itself all the leeway in the world. That you still deploy an instrument that you yourself have admitted can give false readings is evidence of that. Not every officer is as consciencous as you, Mike. Others will nail innocent citizens based on bad laser readings and the courts will accept that. That, my friend, is not how it is supposed to go down here in America.

[Superman]

I hope there isn't an interpersonal train wreck here. Mr. Marsh and Mr. Higgins are two of the very most respected contributors here. And for good reasons.

[skipdup]

Holding a heavy barreled rifle, with expensive optics, with three points of base at 200 yards is extremely difficult for me. Couldn't imagine trying to hold something the size of a side arm steady...

I've started noticing more and more tripods being used by police here in San Antonio. I'd guessed they were lasers...

- Skip

[cstreit]

Originally Posted by legion

You make a lot of accusations there, yet you have nothing to back them up. Sources? Surely you understand the difference between "unfounded accusation" and fact.

There's actually a ton of documented evidence to support this. In fact the original laser guns were termed "Geico Guns" by many state officers (I know a few personally that will back this up) because a "certain" ins. co. supported the development and rollout of these to may state police departments.

http://www.quattro123.com/LTI.htm
http://bimmer.roadfly.com/z3/messages/archive/msgsy1999w44/15394.html
http://tipmra.com/new_tipmra/insurance_scam.htm

If you do a search on Geico and Laser guns you will find a lot. (and plenty of whack jobs as well, but its out there.)

I've been running a Hi-end jammer from overseas for over 8 years because while dopplar radar guns can be beaten with a combination of awareness, a Valentine, and a very quick braking foot, laser detectors only tell you that you're busted.

So I have a Bearcat scanner that signals an alarm when it picks up state patrol repeater (cop to car to repeater station) transmissions, the laser jammer, and a Valentine 1 with remote display. I'll share some stories with you next time I'm down in Bloomington. I've got over $1500 invested in this equipment and it's paid for itself many times over.

[Steve Carlton]

Per radarbusters.com, "Laser Jammers and Radar Jammers are illegal in the states of Nebraska, Minnesota, Utah, California, Oklahoma, Virginia, Colorado, Illinois and Washington DC." That video illustrated one issue with a jammer, that it's suspicious to the cop when he gets no reading when he normally would. Radarbusters.com talks about jammers that generate error codes. I don't know how viable that is. One nice thing about Passports, is they're designed to be integrated with laser "shifters" made by Escort. The alert goes off on the radar detector, you slow down, then shut off the shifter so the cop can get a "good" reading. I've been wanting to do this for a while, but it's not cheap:
http://www.passportsr1.com/

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Per radarbusters.com, "Laser Jammers and Radar Jammers are illegal in the states of Nebraska, Minnesota, Utah, California, Oklahoma, Virginia, Colorado, Illinois and Washington DC." That video illustrated one issue with a jammer, that it's suspicious to the cop when he gets no reading when he normally would. Radarbusters.com talks about jammers that generate error codes. I don't know how viable that is. One nice thing about Passports, is they're designed to be integrated with laser "shifters" made by Escort. The alert goes off on the radar detector, you slow down, then shut off the shifter so the cop can get a "good" reading. I've been wanting to do this for a while, but it's not cheap:
http://www.passportsr1.com/

http://www.blinderxtreme.com/
These have a laser detector and jammer. Same thing, alarm, slow down, turn off jammer.

If the cop knows that he should be getting a good bead on you, but his gun is not playing, then he's going to know that you've got something going on. It's probably best if they don't know or aren't sure and you don't flaunt it too much.

[Joe Bob]

Fuch Geico, the little turd Gecko and the caveman, too.....I'd go without if they were only ones out there insuring....

As to Laser enforcement, I have heard from more than a few officers that 15 over is the minimum where they will get a move on with.....

It's the blatant speed traps that bug me. 65 down to 45 or less with little or no warning. X band "how fast are you going" signs with cops hiding behind them with K or Ka/Laser as back ups....now they are using K and Ka bands on the signage....

[RoninLB]

Originally Posted by cstreit

So I have a Bearcat scanner that signals an alarm .....

my Bearcat scanner alarm is obsolete. Do you know which one isn't?

thx

[911Rob]

I checked out the website and emailed them for ordering info.
I want one!

sent an email to them for pricing and ordering info
informacije@laser-interceptor.com

[Por_sha911]

If I understand what I just saw, then that video is bogus. The Laser needs a reflective surface to get a reading but when it was aimed at a jacket of someone it read 15. Last I checked, wool, cotton, and polyester is not a reflective surface. Wassup with that?

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Por_sha911

If I understand what I just saw, then that video is bogus. The Laser needs a reflective surface to get a reading but when it was aimed at a jacket of someone it read 15. Last I checked, wool, cotton, and polyester is not a reflective surface. Wassup with that?

Uh, if you can see it with the eye, then it's a reflective surface. The only thing that's NOT a reflective surface is a black hole.

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by masraum

Uh, if you can see it with the eye, then it's a reflective surface. The only thing that's NOT a reflective surface is a black hole.

In the literal physics sense that is true but, everyone makes a big deal over the fact that Laser has to be aimed at a flat reflective surface like the front bumper or a tag to get a reading. If something with as little light reflection as a dark cloth jacket can do the job then Laser can work on any part of the car. Hence, either the above understanding is false or the vid is bogus.

[Steve Carlton]

I think the laser got a reading on the bike because of its proximity.

[911Rob]

no reply to my email today?