Fiasco

Read this today in FSB document.

"The use of devices to detect police speed enforcement equipment will be prohibited by two draft Statutory Instuments published for consultation with the DETR. The use of such detection devices was considered to be illegal untill Jan. 1998, when a judgement by the High Court found that the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1949 did not specifically preclude it.
The Road Vehicles (construction and Use) (Amendment) Regulations would be made under the Road Traffic act 1988 and would creat an offence of useing detection devices in a motor vehicle,"

There is a lot more about probable fines and endorsements, but this is the gist of the thing and all that I have time to type at present. However, there is a site to view at,

robman

If the government is serious about reducing deaths on the road by reducing speed (as opposed to coining it in from inadvertant speeding in poorly marked areas) then they should spray gatsos bright green and put an effing great big speed limit sign on the back of them. I'm happy to obey the speed limits but it does help to have bloody signs instead of stealth gatsos given the ridiculously ambiguous speed limits in this country. The highway code is practically useless in most circumstances and you *need* a sign to tell you what the limit is, not some "supercop" (no offence to our sensible law enforcing members) out to make a name for himself in the tabloids.

grr

R

steve McCulloch

Like people are really gonna take note and get rid of their radar detectors (and jammers!) - I think not

Some will get rid - and some........... will risk it

kryten

There are a few important points to note:

Its a consultation SO GIVE THEM YOUR OPINION! Send in your views, to the consultation address AND YOUR MP.

They are not proposing new legislation, just amending current statutes which are:

'Using detection devices in a motor vehicle' - the important word here is USING as they have to prove you were using it: now if you turn it off before they can see it - no proof!

'an offence to install or use these devices without a licence' - based on the wireless telegraphy act. Again proof of 'installation' is needed so if its just sat on teh passenger seat with no power, its not installed - plus this statute, while carrying a potentially larger fine has no potential for driving licence endorsments or disqualification.

Its very vague about the 'devices' themselves eg would using a GPS based device be the same as a radar detector and if so, would your mate sending you an SMS telling you there was a speed trap down the road also count?!

How many people were prosecuted under the old laws - can't think of any cases myself.

The only time it would become a real problem was if simple 'possestion' of devices was restricted - but for this they would have to be very specific and possibly pay compensation to those already owning one.

boomer

See also

Fiasco

Boomer

I had'nt realised there was another post on this subject. I have read through the e-mails already sent and they all make some relavant and extremely powerful arguments against this legislation. I would like to add my voice to those that have gone before.

What is the e-mail address of Mr. Edwards? I can't find it anywhere.

Fiasco.

salsa-king

ok
is my Bell Sti Vetor radar detector now illegal?
or can i still use it, but turn the lights off to DIM so no-one behind (ie, police) can see that it is turned on???

they hav to prove i was using it???
is that there word against yours? again!


Phil

Dave P

I guess you just have a switch to switch it off before they come up to your window.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Unless they have devices to detect that your devices are detecting the devices that they were using to detect your speed.

Dave

CharlesW

Isn't a Radar Detector just a detector? As far as I know it does not transmit anything. So I don't see how the police could detect that you were using a detector.

Perhaps someone out there knows better. Is it possible for the police to remotely detect the use of a Radar Detector?

MorayMackenzie

Charles,

I understand TV detector vans can detect TV tuning equipment in operation...

Moray

PS: Some of the american radar detectors claim to detect radar detector detection equipment and warn the driver before shutting down automatically... ho hum.

boomer

Fiasco,

sorry, been away for a couple of days...

Ian Edwards can be e-mailed at Ian_Edwards@detr.gsi.gov.uk - which appears on

Geoff P

There is kit out there that detects detectors, the military have been usying it for at least 10 years ( in areas of terrorist threat, excellent bomb detonators you know!)

ChrisB

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>The first SI, The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use)(Amendment) Regulations, would be made under section 41(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. This would create an offence of using detection devices in a motor vehicle. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So if I see a speed camera and slow down, I can get done as I've been using the Mark I eyeball as a detection device.



Seriously though, what's going to be the situation with GPS based devices such as the Geodesy?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>(a) any device or apparatus designed, adapted or intended to be used for the
detection of the presence of a camera or any other apparatus designed or
adapted for the detection or measurement of speed of any motor vehicle; or <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>(b) any device or apparatus designed, adapted or intended to be used in order to
avoid the detection by or to frustrate the operation of a camera or any other
apparatus designed or adapted for the detection or measurement of speed of
any motor vehicle.”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a only a mere peon of the state, I would say no. As they are pointing out accident black-spots, which may or may not have a camera I would hope they are not outlawed. I suppose you could program a few a locations which don't have cameras to back this up.

Chris.

boomer

ChrisB,

YES, the Geodesy will be deemed illegal, and theoreticaly so will your eyes (according to the letter of the proposed StatDoc)!!!

Farsical YES, but due to become law UNLESS you object!!!!

mb

andym172

If anybody has sent a letter to their local MP concerning this issue, could you please send a copy to my e-mail address (andym172@hotmail.com) please?!!

I am going to be sending a letter to highlight my displeasure and want to word it as strongly as possible whilst, of course, being as polite as possible!...*******s!

Andy.

mutant_matt

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by andym172:
<B>If anybody has sent a letter to their local MP concerning this issue, could you please send a copy to my e-mail address (andym172@hotmail.com) please?!![/quote]

Andy,

Go to this thread where this was previously disscussed as there are a few letters you can "borrow" from there....

Fiasco

Hi Boomer

Many thanks for your recent reply to my post. It would seem that I have re-opened a can of worms here.
JUST TO REITERATE YOUR MESSAGE.

- DON'T COMPLAIN TO THIS BOARD ABOUT YOUR LOSS OF RIGHTS - WRITE TO THOSE WHO JUST MIGHT BE IN A POSSITION TO STOP THIS LUNACY.

Fiasco.

Nimbus

Just a thought, but could the detection of speed cameras, and your slowing down to avoid getting 'snapped' be seen as a good thing?

Assuming that the cameras are put in a place where they are needed (accident black spot, busy junction) and you are barreling along at an inappropriate speed. You detector tells you there is a camera ahead, you slow down thus avoiding an accident.

Just a thought....

<B>N</B><I>i</I><B>m</B><I>B</I><B>u<I>S</B></I>