Radar detectors- legal?
Discussion
I have one for you; is the use of a radar detector legal in the UK? And what about their sale? I know everywhere sells them and lots of people use them, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can!
The reason I mention it is because I have recently been having this debate with friends and there seems to be conflicting arguments.
Thanks - Bono
The reason I mention it is because I have recently been having this debate with friends and there seems to be conflicting arguments.
Thanks - Bono
quote:
Mel, do you have anything to base your comment on?
There are stated cases covering the interception of communications, and your right, it doesn't fall into that, but how about 'peverting the course of justice'?
Bono
Perverting the Course of Justice, Contrary to Common Law
1. This is arrestable offence and attracts life imprisonment and or fine
2. It requires positive acts by the defendant, not merely standing by and allowing an injustice to take place.
3. The offence will include cases where evidence is deliberately destroyed, falsified or concealed as well as intimidation of witnesses or jurors.
4. Admitting to a crime to enable the true offender to avoid prosecution, making a false allegation of an offence, giving another persons details when reported/charged with an offence
It is important that the requisite intention is proved in every case as that intention cannot be implied, even from admitted facts.
Point 3 above covers the destroying or falsification of evidence. This may be the case with a radar jammer as you are actively sending out a signal to conceal or disrupt the evidence from the evidential device.
However merely having a device which receives a signal and warns you about the location of a radar trap is not and cannot be considered under this offence as you are not destroying, concealing, or falsifying anything.
Therefore you can have a radar detector without fear of prosecution from this offence. (Which would be a bit of a sledge hammer/nut type of scenario).
>> Edited by madcop on Saturday 7th September 13:27
>> Edited by madcop on Saturday 7th September 14:56
>> Edited by madcop on Saturday 7th September 14:58
quote:
Perverting the Course of Justice, Contrary to Common Law
1. This is arrestable offence and attracts life imprisonment and or fine
No it carries a penalty of 1 year in prison re indexing the library, followed by 3 years working in a theatre doing community service and weekends at home for a shag. The fine must be paid, but even if you have shit loads of money the 50k p.a. cost of keeping you in prison is paid by the car driver, oops sorry tax payer. It seems odd that we move more towards the third world system where the wife gets a stiffer penalty than her criminal husband.
Bono,
See yesterdays (8-11-02) Sunday Times Driving supplement, an article about an ex-plod who now works for a Radar Detector retail outlet.
It explains the case in brief detail on how the case for detectors was made and is now implemented.
Makes for an interesting article, however considering he is ex traffic, some of his comment were a little surprising.
Simon
See yesterdays (8-11-02) Sunday Times Driving supplement, an article about an ex-plod who now works for a Radar Detector retail outlet.
It explains the case in brief detail on how the case for detectors was made and is now implemented.
Makes for an interesting article, however considering he is ex traffic, some of his comment were a little surprising.
Simon
quote:
3. The offence will include cases where evidence is deliberately destroyed, falsified or concealed as well as intimidation of witnesses or jurors.
...
Point 3 above covers the destroying or falsification of evidence. This may be the case with a radar jammer as you are actively sending out a signal to conceal or disrupt the evidence from the evidential device.
But surely in the case of a jammer, the evidence has never existed? The radar is trying to acquire evidence, and is disrupted in this activity, so the evidence has never been captured by the device, and hence has never been destroyed, falsified or concealed. Of course, this might be classified under 'interfering with the police in the course of their duties', but that's another story.
The change in legality was brought about when a rather clever person thought up that under the wireless and telegraphy act the "receiver" had to be allowing the person listening to decode / receive a signal(message) that was not intended for him. A signal must have some sort of meaning, the signal from a radar / laser gun is infact a carrier that contains no information (message) thus you cant be prosecuted with receiving a signal / message that is not intended for you.
To add it’s defiantly an offence to listen to police radio transmissions, unless you are a police officer. (or any other transmission thats not intended for you)
To add it’s defiantly an offence to listen to police radio transmissions, unless you are a police officer. (or any other transmission thats not intended for you)
Wireless telegraphy act. How does this cover visible light? if I design a headlight bulb to put out a touch of laser frequency.. I am not interpreting data, just swamping it. Why is there all this technology to catch motorists when there is hardly any technology used to catch real criminals?
quote:
Visable light? I dont understand your point? Are you trying to say that you could spoof a laser gun with a headlight bulb and be within the law?
The laser guns just use light in a different part of the EM Spectrum to visible light - you could (relatively) easily make a lightbulb that would emit light in the laser/radar region of the EM spectrum as well as visible light...
AFAIK there is no legislation covering light emissions.
However, I can imagine a case where a laser jammer is construed as interfering with a police officer in the course of his duties (or whatever it is!). This would be because the jammer is reacting to the laser speed gun. However, if you were to have a permanent light emission "cloak" around your car I'm not sure the same could be said.
How much do you want for those headlights!?!?
Cheers
Chris
However, I can imagine a case where a laser jammer is construed as interfering with a police officer in the course of his duties (or whatever it is!). This would be because the jammer is reacting to the laser speed gun. However, if you were to have a permanent light emission "cloak" around your car I'm not sure the same could be said.
How much do you want for those headlights!?!?
Cheers
Chris
Its quite hard to jam/spoof laser, its taken some 5 years to get to an affordable device (300 quid) that will effectivly jam/spoff the unit, however it would not take much for the manufactures of the guns to get round it. And they will.
At the moment there is no law regarding the jammers, however if you were caught using one you would very likley find yourself in court for obstuction etc.
At the moment there is no law regarding the jammers, however if you were caught using one you would very likley find yourself in court for obstuction etc.
Apologies for sounding like a stuck gramaphone record to those who have read my previous posts on laser jammers. Once again here is some definitive info on both the legality and the detection of usage which I posted a couple of months ago:
At the moment my money would go on the SLD920. Not only has it proven jamming capabilities (www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/snooper920.htm) but it also has the added bonus of effectively neutralising the jammer detection functionality that is engineered into some laser guns. A while ago on the Yahoo UK Traffic forum a member reported on a test he and his friend carried out on a cop's Riegl laser gun. Riegl are precision made laser devices manufactured in Austria (I believe) so attention to detail is second to none. Our heros had between them an LE850 and an SLD 920. Both systems jammed the Riegl but the LE850 triggered a jammer warning whereas the SLD 920 just caused the Riegl to malfunction. The SLD920 result is confirmed at the above link.
I'm sure Steve Warren will evaluate the LE850's successor and hopefully this next generation piece of kit will render jammer detection systems useless. And it will remotely open garage doors as efficiently as ever!
As for the the legality of laser jammers, once again here is what the Speedtrap Bible have to say on the matter. From www.speed-trap.co.uk/FAQ/FAQ.htm
"There have been no reported cases on the use of laser jammers and there is no law outlawing them or their use. The only reference to an action brought by the police against a driver using a jamming device (although not a laser jamming device) was brought in 1999 under s5 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1947. This case established that provided radio/microwave emissions did not attempt to transmit to a receiver whether specific or otherwise no offence had been committed. Therefore simply surrounding an object (e.g. a car) with transmitted radio/microwaves is not an illegal act notwithstanding the fact that the effect would be to disrupt the lawful use of another transmitting device (e.g. a radar gun). It seems to me that the same principle should apply to lasers but as far as I can tell this has never been tested in court."
At the moment my money would go on the SLD920. Not only has it proven jamming capabilities (www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/snooper920.htm) but it also has the added bonus of effectively neutralising the jammer detection functionality that is engineered into some laser guns. A while ago on the Yahoo UK Traffic forum a member reported on a test he and his friend carried out on a cop's Riegl laser gun. Riegl are precision made laser devices manufactured in Austria (I believe) so attention to detail is second to none. Our heros had between them an LE850 and an SLD 920. Both systems jammed the Riegl but the LE850 triggered a jammer warning whereas the SLD 920 just caused the Riegl to malfunction. The SLD920 result is confirmed at the above link.
I'm sure Steve Warren will evaluate the LE850's successor and hopefully this next generation piece of kit will render jammer detection systems useless. And it will remotely open garage doors as efficiently as ever!
As for the the legality of laser jammers, once again here is what the Speedtrap Bible have to say on the matter. From www.speed-trap.co.uk/FAQ/FAQ.htm
"There have been no reported cases on the use of laser jammers and there is no law outlawing them or their use. The only reference to an action brought by the police against a driver using a jamming device (although not a laser jamming device) was brought in 1999 under s5 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1947. This case established that provided radio/microwave emissions did not attempt to transmit to a receiver whether specific or otherwise no offence had been committed. Therefore simply surrounding an object (e.g. a car) with transmitted radio/microwaves is not an illegal act notwithstanding the fact that the effect would be to disrupt the lawful use of another transmitting device (e.g. a radar gun). It seems to me that the same principle should apply to lasers but as far as I can tell this has never been tested in court."
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff