Radars detectors legal?

[Pixie]

I would like to see the analysis that justifies banning radar detectors. Is there any evidence that users of the detector have any more accidents?

Who mentioned safety and accidents?
Radar detector use constitutes tax avoidance

[Pixie]

Really? What's your source?

Traffic Radar Handbook by Donald S Sawicki

[Ixion]

Actually, I suspect that you have hit the nail on the head.

Consider. Radar detectors are most useful for avoiding the low end speeding tickets, the 20 or 30 over sort. They are much less useful if you are knocking 300kph.

Now, the gubbermint (ie the cops) have agreed to reduce the fines for speeding. But, there is no way on earth they (gubbermint or cops) are going to be willing to actually forgo any revenue.

So, if the tax on each speeding offence is less, the only way that the revenue can be kept up, is to issue more tickets. More tickets, at a lower tariff each still comes to the same dollars.

So the police are going to be dishing out a LOT more tickets for 111kph . Or 101kph. But doing so would prompt more people to buy radar detectors.

And emphasis on ticketing minor breaches would mean that detectors became more useful, and instant on much less effective, Because, it is a lot harder for a cop to tell if a vehicle is doing 109kph or 111kph, than to tell the difference between 109 and 139. The only way to check is to ping the vehicle . So they'll be using instant on to ping a lot of vehicles that turn out to be doing only 109kph. And all those wasted pings would get picked up by the radar detectors.

Want a prediction ? Bet anyone a choccy fish that once detectors are banned the 10kph tolerance disappears overnight. 101kph, ticket.

And the cops will continue to bleat that the public don't support them anymore. Wonder why?

[cold comfort]

I bet RD users get more speeding tickets then the general population too.

Not so- my wife now has one as all her transgressions are caused by inattention (running 4 businesses and "multi-tasking"). She states the squawks on start-up and the occ flase response to other RD has made her more mindful of her speed.
I never use one in town as i am more aware and tend not to speed anyway.

[denill]

Actually, I suspect that you have hit the nail on the head.

Consider. Radar detectors are most useful for avoiding the low end speeding tickets, the 20 or 30 over sort. They are much less useful if you are knocking 300kph.

Now, the gubbermint (ie the cops) have agreed to reduce the fines for speeding. But, there is no way on earth they (gubbermint or cops) are going to be willing to actually forgo any revenue.

So, if the tax on each speeding offence is less, the only way that the revenue can be kept up, is to issue more tickets. More tickets, at a lower tariff each still comes to the same dollars.

So the police are going to be dishing out a LOT more tickets for 111kph . Or 101kph. But doing so would prompt more people to buy radar detectors.

And emphasis on ticketing minor breaches would mean that detectors became more useful, and instant on much less effective, Because, it is a lot harder for a cop to tell if a vehicle is doing 109kph or 111kph, than to tell the difference between 109 and 139. The only way to check is to ping the vehicle . So they'll be using instant on to ping a lot of vehicles that turn out to be doing only 109kph. And all those wasted pings would get picked up by the radar detectors.

Want a prediction ? Bet anyone a choccy fish that once detectors are banned the 10kph tolerance disappears overnight. 101kph, ticket.

And the cops will continue to bleat that the public don't support them anymore. Wonder why?

I really think you've summed it up nicely. Took the words outa my mouth - only better.

[denill]

I never use one in town as i am more aware and tend not to speed anyway.

Up till just a few monthe ago I NEVER used it around town. Do now, as 'they' are now more pedantic.

[cold comfort]

Actually, I suspect that you have hit the nail on the head.

Consider. Radar detectors are most useful for avoiding the low end speeding tickets, the 20 or 30 over sort. They are much less useful if you are knocking 300kph.

Now, the gubbermint (ie the cops) have agreed to reduce the fines for speeding. But, there is no way on earth they (gubbermint or cops) are going to be willing to actually forgo any revenue.

So, if the tax on each speeding offence is less, the only way that the revenue can be kept up, is to issue more tickets. More tickets, at a lower tariff each still comes to the same dollars.

So the police are going to be dishing out a LOT more tickets for 111kph . Or 101kph. But doing so would prompt more people to buy radar detectors.

And emphasis on ticketing minor breaches would mean that detectors became more useful, and instant on much less effective, Because, it is a lot harder for a cop to tell if a vehicle is doing 109kph or 111kph, than to tell the difference between 109 and 139. The only way to check is to ping the vehicle . So they'll be using instant on to ping a lot of vehicles that turn out to be doing only 109kph. And all those wasted pings would get picked up by the radar detectors.

Want a prediction ? Bet anyone a choccy fish that once detectors are banned the 10kph tolerance disappears overnight. 101kph, ticket.

And the cops will continue to bleat that the public don't support them anymore. Wonder why?

As always, a thoughtful and insightful comment. I wouldn't even risk a chocc fish on that one. The more draconian the rulings and the more they are perceived as unreasonable by the public the less support the cops will receive. They just don't get it!

[madandy]

One problem with a reduction of the % over thing:
http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/...rcement-guide/

Check the paragraph about speedometer accuracy.
also note the bit about 250m of the end of a passing lane...

I do feel for many Cops who are simply expected to enforce laws created by suits in parliament. Sure, some blindly carry out their jobs with little regard for discretion but there are others, Scumdog perhaps, who are realistic about their priorities and exactly what acts, upon our highways & byways constitute true ofences and issue penalties accordingly.

[sinned]

As always, a thoughtful and insightful comment. I wouldn't even risk a chocc fish on that one. The more draconian the rulings and the more they are perceived as unreasonable by the public the less support the cops will receive. They just don't get it!

"They" are the analysts and bureaucrats that reside in govt departments. Ministers and MPs follow the advice they are given unless they think, the voters won't like this, pressure groups are making a noise, or it is contrary to the principles their party is based on or the party's objectives. The public is well prepared for draconian rulings by the careful preparation of PR spin - prepared by the department and signed off by a minister.

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Want a prediction ? Bet anyone a choccy fish that once detectors are banned the 10kph tolerance disappears overnight. 101kph, ticket.

Problem there is it is virually impossible to keep a vehicle at a constant speed within 1kph even a computer controled Cruise Control would be able to especially on rolling hills... it will hunt within 4 or 5kph either side as you go over the hills, even the humps in the road can have an effect etc... and all it would take is a cop pinging you as come over a peak of hill.

Heck I have go over a bump in the road which twisted my wrist a bit and before I knew it I was do 65 in a 50 zone... and said shit bugger and all as I was buttoning off... if there was a cop I am sure I would have been ticketed...

Also Dopler shift is not that accurate either (Yes laser is) and is realistically on only accurrate to about 4kph (number sounds familar its the tolarance around schools) heck it was orginally designed to hunt submarines hat are only doing 4 knots

Anologue speedos are also not that accurate, tho most read slower, I have seen a few that read faster by 4 or 5 kph mix that in with the inaccuracy of dopler... there is way to many varants

[Ixion]

"Well, Sir, my radar shows you don't 101kph. So that's 25 demerits. If you have concerns about your speedo being accurate enough what i suggest you do is to keep the speed down to 90kph. That will give you a safety buffer. Thank you for your contribution to the national revenue"

[Mr Merde]

One problem with a reduction of the % over thing:
http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/...rcement-guide/

Check the paragraph about speedometer accuracy.
also note the bit about 250m of the end of a passing lane...

I do feel for many Cops who are simply expected to enforce laws created by suits in parliament. Sure, some blindly carry out their jobs with little regard for discretion but there are others, Scumdog perhaps, who are realistic about their priorities and exactly what acts, upon our highways & byways constitute true ofences and issue penalties accordingly.

After reading the above mentioned guide I find the following excerpt raising a few questions in my mind

"sAll speed measuring devices are to be operated in an overt manner. Hidden or camouflaged deployment is not to be used unless there is a specific operation targeting offending consisting..."

Now in relation to the Auckland motorway, which I commute everyday, I continually see a couple of white vans parked on the shoulder. They have their windows blocked by mirror glass and quite often are in places where you only get to see them once you are within apprximately 50 or so metres. I have been told that these are mobile speed camera vehicles, but there are no visible markings or wornings on them.

Surely they break the above quoted guidelines. Also as I have noticed them in these spots for a number of hours and again according to the guide quoted

"Only members of NZ Police are permitted to operate speed-measuring devices for speed enforcement purposes"

thye must surely have a police officer sitting in them operating the speed measuring device.

If they do not have a police officer in them then how can they legally gather evidence of a speeding occurance?

Sorry to muddy the waters but this is of interest to me.

[denill]

"Well, Sir, my radar shows you don't 101kph. So that's 25 demerits. If you have concerns about your speedo being accurate enough what i suggest you do is to keep the speed down to 90kph. That will give you a safety buffer. Thank you for your contribution to the national revenue"

Again, most perceptive.

BTW, do you by any chance issue the edicts of conduct to be carried out by HP?

[rwh]

After reading the above mentioned guide I find the following excerpt raising a few questions in my mind

"sAll speed measuring devices are to be operated in an overt manner. Hidden or camouflaged deployment is not to be used unless there is a specific operation targeting offending consisting..."

Now in relation to the Auckland motorway, which I commute everyday, I continually see a couple of white vans parked on the shoulder. They have their windows blocked by mirror glass and quite often are in places where you only get to see them once you are within apprximately 50 or so metres. I have been told that these are mobile speed camera vehicles, but there are no visible markings or wornings on them.

Surely they break the above quoted guidelines. Also as I have noticed them in these spots for a number of hours and again according to the guide quoted

"Only members of NZ Police are permitted to operate speed-measuring devices for speed enforcement purposes"

thye must surely have a police officer sitting in them operating the speed measuring device.

If they do not have a police officer in them then how can they legally gather evidence of a speeding occurance?

Sorry to muddy the waters but this is of interest to me.

Yes, it's a pretty bad document. Check this one out:

Speed measuring devices (including, but not limited to, speedometers, laser and radar devices) are, if operated in or from a vehicle, only to be operated from vehicles owned or operated by NZ Police.

So while I'm required to have an accurate speedometer, I'm not allowed to operate it.

Richard

[Ixion]

Yes, it's a pretty bad document. Check this one out:



So while I'm required to have an accurate speedometer, I'm not allowed to operate it.

Richard

no, these are policy instructions to the cops, not the public. Bear in mind that they are policy, not law. The police can (and do) ignore them if they wish.