Text 15657, 213 rader
Skriven 2005-11-09 13:31:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 15618 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
Ärende: looters in NO
=====================
 MvdV>>>> There is indeed no arguing with these robot cops that we have
 MvdV>>>> here. Actually, most of the time you never see them. You won't
 MvdV>>>> know you speeded until you find the ticket in the mail.

 >>> If it's means of detecting your speed is radar or laser, I'll
 >>> know they're there.

 MvdV>> How?

 > Radar/laser detector.

Laser is only used for the manned speed traops. The laser isn't switched on
until the cop sees that you are in range. Nothing to detect until it is too
late. with a bit of luck you may spot the cop though.

 > (I wouldn't care if it was illegal)

You would if you got caught with one here.

 MvdV>> They use rader for the robot speed traps and they are
 MvdV>> facing in the same direction as the traffic moves. A
 MvdV>> radar detector (illegal here) won't see them until you
 MvdV>> get past them and hit the forward facing beam.

 > Wrong. Radar dectectors will sense a signal even from the side.

From *your* side if you go through *their* beam.

 > I used to have one that would detect the radar for automatic door
 > openers at the supermarket while driving by.

Right. When the beam from the thing is in your direction. Now try to detect
that radar door opener from the back of the building! Cause that would be more
comparable to the situation with the Dutch unmanned radar speed traps.

Here you see a picture of one of those speed traps.

http://flits.bnet.be/questDetails.jsp?id=18

The left one is empty, the right one is loaded. You can see the camera lens on
the top. Click on the image to enlarge.

The "square thing" below the camera lens is the flaslight. The radar antenna is
not visible, but you can bet it has a pretty good front to back ratio. ;-)

Note the brand name on the bottom: "Gatso". "Gatso" is the company from Maus
Gatsonides, a famous Dutch ralley driver. No, not speed ralleys, economy
ralleys where the obect is not to get to the finish as fast as you can, but to
get there with the least amonut of fuel. When he stopped rallying, he went into
bussines and his first speed trap was the "Gatsometer" with two air tubes laid
across the road.

Here is a picture of the speed trap in sito:


http://users.telenet.be/pzloon/pzloon/img/flitspaal002%20groot.jpg


This picture was taken in Belgium, but they are used in the same way in The
Netherlands. Note that it is facing in the direction of movement. I this case
the driver of the Mercedes could easily spot the thing and slow down, but ever
so often they are placed behind an obstruction of some kind and you don't see
them until it is too late. As the radar beam is facing forward a rader detector
would have to relay on backscatter. On e does not eneter the prime beam until
it is too late.

 > Laser detectors won't.

 MvdV>> And then it is too late. it measures the speed while
 MvdV>> you are moving away from it and photographs you from behind.

 > That's where that device I mentioned later comes in handy.

Hmmm....

 >>> And of course, the red-light cameras are easily
 >>> defeated with a polarized plate cover.

 MvdV>> Illegal here.

 > Here too, yet they're still sold and used. Just like 11mtr
 > (CB) linear amplifiers, they're also sold and used here.

I have never seen them here. My guess is that here ius no percentage in it as
the chance of being caught is too big.

 >>> Shades of Big Brother.

 MvdV>> I don't see it that way. The camara only gets activated when one is
 MvdV>> speeding. How is that worse than a human cop standing on the side
 MvdV>> of the road watching traffic?

 > See US Constitution, Amendment 4.

That means nothing to me.

 MvdV>> Not here. I have never seen movable plates or even heard of them.

 MvdV>> The point is that over here nearly all these tricks to evade speed
 MvdV>> traps carry a much higher penalty than just the speeding. Speeding
 MvdV>> is mere violation of the traffic laws. You pay the fine and that's
 MvdV>> it.

 > Not really. You admit guilt on any of those charges and you're
 > license is in jeopardy for a loss of points.

We don't have a point system. Yet...

 > Not to mention, that when you get a moving violation, your
 > insurance premiums are subject to an increase.

How would they know? Big Brother telling them?

 MvdV>> But deliberately manipulating plates to avoid detection
 MvdV>> is forgery. And forgery is a crime. That means that when
 MvdV>> convicted you are marked for life.

 > Mounting them on a hinge isn't changing the plates...

But using the hinge to turn the plate out of view is manipulation to avoid
detection. I do not know if that legally qualifies as forgery. I do know that
I'd rather pay the fine for speeding than be caught in an attempt to avoid
detection with a thing like that.

 >>> Radar is easily defeated with a radar jammer. It detects the
 >>> radar signal and adds some white noise to the reflected signal,
 >>> confusing the radar gun. And, unlike radar jammers on the market,
 >>> it's quite legal to use.

 MvdV>> Over here it would not be legal. If only because using such a thing
 MvdV>> without a license is a violation of the radio regulations.

 > You don't need a license to use a passive device.

Explain to me how one can add white noise to the reflected signal with a 100%
passive device.

Mind you, rectifying the signal and using it's power to feed an oscillator is
not a 100% passive device...

 > It'd be no different than mounting a reflector around your
 > license plate frame.

I am not sure if that is legal here. If its color is anything but red, it sure
is. Even then, I suspect it could be construed as obstruction of justice...

 MvdV>> And then there is always "obstructing a police officer
 MvdV>> carrying out his duty"...

 > He wouldn't know, as the device is passive and only adds white
 > noise to a reflected radar signal.

He would notice that his speed trap is not working as expected. That would make
him suspicious and take a closer look. Over here cops are not stupid. He might
spot it.

 > It draws no current, nor is it electrified until
 > it sees that radar signal.

Aha, sso when in operation it *does* draw current.

 > Of course, you can buy one that's not passive,
 > but those are illegal here too.

If that "passive" device of yours is what I suspect it is, I am pretty sure it
is illegal here.

 MvdV>> Not here I think. But then there is the catch all of
 MvdV>> "reckless driving"....

 > Which is what the write you for if you exceed 100mph.

Ah, but here "reckless driving" is not limited to excessive speed. Perhaps
comparing it to that "failure to see safe way" that was mentioned here before.

 MvdV>> Over here cops never patrol alone. So they have each other as
 MvdV>> witness...

 > Here there's a team, which is commanded by a field sargent. He
 > has his own vehicle and is capable of traveling to any trouble
 > spot because he doesn't have a regular patrol area. And like I
 > said before, a judge is going to believe an officer of the
 > court before he'll believe a citizen.

In principle that is the same here, but if it is two citizens against one cop,
it is different. Plus that technical evidence can override the testimony of
either one.

 > In that case, a jury trial is your best bet, if you're right.

No such thig here. No jury.

 MvdV>> They are stricter here. The robot speeds traps are set to trigger
 MvdV>> at plus 3kph at speeds below 100 kph and at plus 3% for speeds
 MvdV>> above that.

 > I think there's a big difference between your country and the
 > wide open spaces of West Texas. Or any of the roads between
 > cities in the western US. Long stretches of nothing but mountains,
 > cactus and coyotes for scenary.

Yes, there indeed is big diffenerce. Here it is rare if there is no other car
in sight. Having no other car in sight for longer than five minutes is *very*
rare.

In South Africa I have driven in places where one could drive for an hour
without seeing another car...


Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.nodelist.org (2:280/5555)