want a radar detector but live in VA?

[sathiele]

If you want a radar detector but live in VA, maybe you should consider writing your representatives.

 

I just crafted up this piece that I sent to 40 representatives across VA, including Kaine.

 

Delegate Joe T. May (R-Leesburg) recently proposed repealing the ban (HB 1120), and something is proposed just about every year. It was tabled, 11-4. So I wrote those 15 people, and the others on the committee who were not present to vote. I also wrote all of the state senators on the transportation committee. And then my local representatives. Unfortunately I'm a little late 'cause I sent it out last night and I think their session in Richmond ends by tomorrow. But still, it will get them thinking.

 

See http://www.stoptheban.org/ for some news and that kind of thing.

 

March 09, 2006

 

The Honorable David J. Toscano

P.O. Box 406

General Assembly Building

Richmond, Va. 23218

 

 

Dear Delegate Toscano,

 

I write to you today because I am concerned about Virginia Code section 46.2-1079. It prohibits the use of radar detectors in Virginia. I question both the intention behind this law and its effectiveness. Virginia and Washington, D.C. are the only places in the US with this prohibition and while that by itself is no reason to repeal this law, there is much basis behind their use being legal in all other states.

 

“If government seeks to use clandestine and furtive methods to monitor citizen actions, it can ill afford to complain should the citizen insist on a method to effect his right to know he is under such surveillance.”

- Judge Joseph Ryan, Superior Court, District of Columbia

 

I hope that you will work to repeal this section of the Code of Virginia for the following reasons:

 

1. Safety or Revenue?

I will be the first to agree that people driving dangerously should be punished. However, too often radar detection sites are established where there is no safety problem, but a great opportunity for revenue for local governments.

 

“One town in West Virginia with a population of only 3,200 issued more than 18,000 tickets in a single year, booking almost $4,000,000 in revenue.” (Escort)

 

These tickets are costly to the motorist. A fine in the low $100s can easily lead to thousands of dollars to insurance companies through increased premiums – many people pay simply out of convenience, while their insurance companies see this as an admission of guilt. Insurance companies are the ones defending the ban, so what is this really about? Not safety, because then they would have had to ignore the statistics (some of which are below). This is all too often about revenue for localities and insurance companies instead of safety.

 

2. Faulty Police Techniques and Equipment.

Both radar and laser speed-measuring devices are still in use in Virginia.

Radar – The radar beam spreads to great width very quickly causing little accuracy. On a busy highway, the officer could be getting a reading from a truck half a mile down the road instead of the driver whose speed he thinks he is calculating (think of the unmanned trailers that are used to display a vehicle’s speed for the driver’s knowledge). Avoiding this is why I, personally, would like to have a radar detector.

Laser – In ideal conditions, lasers are the more accurate of the two methods. Police wait for traffic, aim the laser at a car, and clock its speed. Since its beam is much narrower, laser can be considered more accurate. However, conditions are not always ideal, and laser is particularly vulnerable to the environment. Since water reflects light, the presence of water in the form of rain, snow, fog etc. can reflect laser light to and from a variety of objects (including other cars). If the optical site is not aligned properly, the operator can aim at one vehicle and clock another. Because of these inaccuracies and others, some jurisdictions have “refused to give laser judicial notice” (Escort).

 

3. Use of radar causes alertness.

A break in routine is often useful to prevent one from settling into lazy, dangerous habits. Radar detectors are that break. Just as a manual transmission requires that a driver be more alert to his surroundings and perform better, so does the presence of a radar detector. The Yankelovich Clancy Shulman study in 1987 found that accident rates for detector users were 23% lower than other motorists. Other data suggest that detector users experience an average of five more years between accidents than those without.

 

4. Speeders Will Speed

So just let them? No. But to ban detectors’ use because of them for those who are not driving dangerously is unfortunate. Some people, like myself, only want a detector to minimize incidents listed above, such as false readings. Police presence is more likely to produce safer driving. Radar detectors highlight and point out this presence.

Further, in an NHTSA study of speed-related fatalities as a percentage of overall fatalities (Analysis of Speeding-Related Fatal Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes), Virginia was ranked ahead of 12 states and DC, who also bans radar detectors, ranked sixth (keep in mind, this means the state ranked first has the most speed-related fatalities as a percentage of total fatalities).

 

5. The Most Dangerous Drivers Get Away

Outlawing radar detectors has led to a practice which actually allows those who are most likely to speed excessively become more able. Because Virginia police do not anticipate radar detectors, they are much more likely to leave their radar on. The people who love to speed at incredibly dangerous speeds are easily able to get their hands on radar detectors, and trust me, they do. They pick up on the radar and are not caught. In other states, because many have radar detectors, the police resort to the “instant on” radar technique where they keep their radar off until they have the car in range. Then the radar is turned on and a reading is produced before the reckless driver is able to slow down.

 

6. Virginia Tourism

As delegate Joe T. May (R-Leesburg) mentioned in his recent efforts (HB 1120), the ban provides a rude welcome to the visitors from the other 49 states who are obviously the most cited individuals. I have personally observed this negative view many times.

 

7. Police Utilize Radar Detectors

In some states, police have begun to utilize radar detectors for everyone’s good. In northern Kentucky, unmanned radar units were used to lower speeds on dangerous I-75.

 

“The speeds of vehicles with radar detectors decreased significantly as a result of unmanned radar, whereas the speeds of vehicles without detectors were not affected … When comparing accident data 3 years before and 1 year … unmanned radar installations, there was a reduction in … speed-related accidents” (Evaluation of Unmanned Radar Installations).

 

Eric Scram, spokesperson for www.stoptheban.org, created by the National Motorists Association, says “There is no research that suggests that by [banning detectors], Virginia has improved its highway safety. On the contrary, Virginia's ban prohibits innovative safety programs that use radar pulses to warn motorists with detectors about road hazards. Several states are utilizing this technology to save lives and prevent accidents.” For example, police could place drone radar units in construction zones to remind drivers to watch their speed.

 

I am sending a similar letter to many delegates and senators throughout the Commonwealth. It is my hope that we can work together to repeal this costly and ineffective ban.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

........

 

 

Escort. “The Truth About Speed Enforcement.”

<http://www.escortradar.com/radar_report.pdf>

 

National Academy of Science: Transportation Research Board. “Evaluation of Unmanned Radar Installations.” 1989. <http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=309056>

 

United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “Analysis of Speeding-Related Fatal Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes.” August 2005.

<http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2005/809_839/pages/figure25.html>

[highlander]

Just a quick side note from someone who also wrote his representatives.

 

Radar detector use is illegal in Virginia in Privately owned motor vehicles in use on the road.

 

This allows for their legal use off-road (who cares), and (more importantly) they are legal for use in government owned vehicles. Carry this to extremis, and your local government official can use a radar detector in a 'publicly' owned vehicle while the persons that payed for it cannot use one in their own vehicle.

 

How's that for irony?

[Mitch]

well written. Good job. I see it hasn't had much influence...yet.

 

I just might have to borrow your text.

[TSiWRX]

I'm not going to get into the legal side of this. I'm just going to report on the technical side:

 

If you want something, "now."

 

The Bel STi-Driver is completely undetectable via any current Radar-Detector-Detector (RDD) technology, including Spectre.

 

This is even at "point blank" range.

 

You'll still need to consider proper mounting of the detector (i.e. viewable outside vehicle?) and also your detector usage tactics (i.e. responses to your detector going off).

 

All other detectors claiming full RDD immunity are outright lies. Yes, even the V1 and 9500i are not immune to Spectre.

 

---

 

The upcoming Escort 9500ci, set for a late first-quarter, early second-quarter release, is a complete remote-mount/install detector (and LIDAR jammer), which is claimed by Escort to offer the same amount of RDD cloaking as the Bel STi-R/STi-Driver (Bel and Escort are essentially the same company). This has yet to be proven via independent tesing, however, as there are no production models on-market.

[sathiele]

I'm not going to get into the legal side of this. I'm just going to report on the technical side:

 

If you want something, "now."

 

The Bel STi-Driver is completely undetectable via any current Radar-Detector-Detector (RDD) technology, including Spectre.

 

This is even at "point blank" range.

 

You'll still need to consider proper mounting of the detector (i.e. viewable outside vehicle?) and also your detector usage tactics (i.e. responses to your detector going off).

 

All other detectors claiming full RDD immunity are outright lies. Yes, even the V1 and 9500i are not immune to Spectre.

 

---

 

The upcoming Escort 9500ci, set for a late first-quarter, early second-quarter release, is a complete remote-mount/install detector (and LIDAR jammer), which is claimed by Escort to offer the same amount of RDD cloaking as the Bel STi-R/STi-Driver (Bel and Escort are essentially the same company). This has yet to be proven via independent tesing, however, as there are no production models on-market.

 

 

yeah the sti is a great unit, but its price just went up to $499....which might be worth it if it didn't have the terrible two-tone audio ramp-up that it has. beltronics claimed they had a fix for it, but actually just made it worse - not what i would expect from a $500 detector. the escort 9500ci will be too expensive (for me) as all remote-mounted units are.

 

i think i'll just wait until i move out of VA.

 

i certainly recognize that there are plenty of easy arguments in support of the ban. i don't agree with everything i wrote, or at least i would take a different approach in future efforts. i simply think that the key is that this is a passive device.