I have a black maxima with no front license plate, whose front bumper I never wash, and whose headlights have Veil Stealth Coating. I also have a Passport 8500.

I was going 85 in a 55 on a deserted highway tonight when I was zapped with laser. I slammed on my brakes and slowed to 55. The cop did not pull me over.

I reckon that I was about 1000ft or so when I was initially hit with laser. He kept the laser on me until I was about 100ft or so away from him. That Veil stuff really works. I credit it with saving my bacon from a very expensive ticket.

 

So you believe those are what saved you? Hmmm, interesting. Havent thought of that.

To bad, I gotta wash my white car...! haha.

 

Yes, I do because all those things reduce the range of Lidar.

 

would have been a bad start for the new year had he pulled you over. That woul have been a very expensive ticket, plus points.

 

Score another victory for a black car against lidar.

 

Slow down!!!!

 

Screw you. You weren't there. What's wrong with driving 80 on a empty 6 lane highway on dry pavement with no fog?

I've never been in an accident in 200,000 miles of driving.

Driving fast doesn't necessarily mean dangerous. Speed limits in general, esp in portland are artificially low so as to create revenue. Studies have shown that faster drivers are also the safest because of their situational awareness.

According to an Institute of Transportation Engineers Study, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are six times as likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is far more likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80 mph.

 

he is right.

HOWEVER. this dosent apply to the teenager who just got his liscence with a cockey attitude thinking he is fast.....those are the ******** that get tickets. and as far as your LIDAR myth....busted....he just let you go trust me. NONE of that civilian stuff available will work its all been tried over and over. you got lucky thats it.

 

http://www.laserveil.com/veil-certif...ountermeasures

The independent data shows that veil really does work.

What doesn't work is the BS rocky mountain radar "jammers" or the bs laser wax. Even having a black car with no front license plate reduces the range of lidar over a white car with a front license plate.

It's all about reflectivity. The more reflective a car is, the farther lidar can measure it's speed. As far as radar goes, nothing civilian is effective at all. The only thing you can do against radar is to have a jammer, but an active jammer is highly illegal.

 

someone's a little angry.


driving fast is all fine and good, as long as you don't blame anyone but yourself if and when you do get that massive ticket.

 

Veil does work, But, a jammer is illegal? only in a few states, a Radar jammer (which a working one doesnt exist) is illegal, but laser in almost all states is regulated by the dept of agriculture and they don't care about jamming or not...something to look into

 

hey im not putting any thing down if you can get something to work by all means....ill subscribe to this.

 

Radar jammers are illegal mainly because you are transmitting RF without a license.

Laser jammers are illegal in a couple of states.

Veil does nothing agaist radar though.

 

You got lucky this time.

 

I agree with you guys about the cocky teen drivers, i should know ive only had my license for about 2.5 years. unlike most new drivers i didnt suffer from new driver over confidence but i had several freinds that did, most of which ended up with fines or no cars because they think they are the pre - Schumacher's. Ive had lots of experience driving, in my 2.5 years ive put over 70,000KM on my own car, and an easy 20,000 on other cars. I use to be a lot boy and did parts driver for awhile. I still do not think i am the best driver around, nor will i ever, and ive had my share of stupid events i could have avoided but it all helps experience.

I believe its true about slower drivers causing accidents, possibly because they know they are going under the speedlimit so they dont have to pay as much attention, atleast the people driver faster know they are doing something illegal and will pay more attention. Atleast thats what happens to me when i go over the speed limit. Slow drivers also cause faster drivers to pull stupid lane changes/manuevers to get around slow drivers which also causes accidents.

You got lucky this time, drivers like us and many other drivers who are responsible drivers dont deserve tickets, the people who deserve them are the idiots who weave in and out of traffic, chronically street race and do stupid stuff, its unfortunate that we usually end up getting them.

 

Did your passport catch the Lidar at all?

 

I know, u mad?

 

Im a state trooper intern in MA and i work w/ lidar quite a bit... he def just let you go... most likely for your above reasoning... 6 lanes, no traffic, good road conditions... you posed no real danger so he didnt feel like being a ****... take that as one of ur free passes and drive safe bro

 

Sexual tension..







J/K

 

From what I understand,a cop need not have electronic evidence to pull you over.You cant dodge his eyesight,which is all he really needs when u blow past at 80+. ... I found out the hard way last new years that you dont need radar to get a speeding ticket..

 

I have to think you got lucky as well. The one thing people keep forgetting about situations like this is their reaction time. Think of it. You're traveling at 85MPH. That ain't slow. Your detector goes off. You have to move your foot from gas to brake (unless you drive on the highway withyour left foot poised above the brake pedal???). You have to press the pedal. The car has to react to that, THEN it takes further time to slow down from 85 to 55 (unless, again, you have carbon brakes???)
This is interesting tho. At 85mph, you're traveling at about 124.6 feet per second. If you can estimate how long it took you to get from 85 to 55, that could give you a better idea of how the car reacts to heavy braking.

 

His reaction time compared to the acquring time of the lidar is the key. He reacts to the passport and hits the brakes in less than a second, the lidar is trying to acquire a good signal in that time. If the lidar doesn't acquire a good signal before he hits the brakes, the signal the lidar picks up is a decelerating signal. So, while the lidar might have picked him up speeding slightly, say 70, or 65 and not 85, at 70 or 65 I doubt most officers would bother, especially since he slowed down to pass the cop. So, in this case I would argue it's a matter of degree, did he slow down enough for the cop not to bother since his lidar said ~70 or less?

 

This guy is on point. I know for a fact that cops will not budge when you slam on those brakes before you pass them. If they cant see your brake lights glaring into their face, they wont be able to prove you slowed down. Ever tried gauging someone's speed from a stationary position? Your best indication is when they pass your position. Radar, like any electronic measuring device, will fluctuate readings for a second before giving the proper calibrated reading so you have that 2 second window to slow your *** down. I've heard of Radar-Jammer type electronics working, but I would rather just exercise sensibility and save my money.

 

Check out the tv series Mythbuster's "Beat the Radar" episode.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_2)

 

ze mythbustaz waz tryin to beat the radar while continuing to speed, essentially truly "beating" the radar. Slowing down after a radar detector goes off is not one of the things they did.

 

I'm not sure if it's possible in OUR car, to get from gas to brake in LESS than a second. Just physically speaking, our pedals aren't that close together as it is. Either way, I'm glad he got off.

This is also debatable as cops can also look for nose dive on the car (IF they're watching carefully). Unless you're real low, the nose is gonna come down some if you get on the brakes heavily. I've heard of this before here in NC and the judge accepted it...

 

This is correct and incorrect at the same time.

Law enforcement are required to establish what is called a "tracking history" prior to pulling the motorist over for speeding. I can't speak for other states but in Indiana this is accomplished by first assessing the perpetrator's speed with radar, lidar, VASCAR (computed speed) or speedometer-monitoring and then following the vehicle for an unspecified amount of time in order to establish the "tracking history" of the speeding offense. The biggest problem is that even if an officer did not actually establish the tracking history, he can say he did. Your word against his.

BUT.....here's a funny way to fight it in court:

Killer Cross-Examination

 

Man,yall in Indiana got it good.Seems like the only requirement in IL for a traffic stop is a blind corner and bad luck. Not much history involved with instant on radar

 

Read the "Killer Cross-Examination" link I posted. The argument is sound and is a good reson for a judge to throw out an "instant-on" radar speeding ticket.

But as with most things, the judge can pretty much do what he or she wants to do (supposedly within the law). My experience with the court system is that they will side with LE when there is "grey area."

And we all know that tickets are a major revenue stream for most agencies so.....chances are if you are busted, you are going to pay.

 

In both of my speeding tickets, both 20 mph over, i had to go to court. If you go up to the judge and act like he is God and you are nothing more than an ant it plays into their ego and they will let you off with class or a reduced sentence. I did that and got the driving class both times in less than a year.

 

I think I was far enough away that he couldn't visually judge my speed. I didn't even see him until after I had slowed down. Since this was portland, I'm sure that if he thought I was going 85 I would have gotten a ticket in a heartbeat.

As far as reaction time goes, 1 sec is more than enough time to go to gas to brake unless you're a granny.

That mythbuster episode primarily dealt with radar.

 

WHat is this physics class now hahaha

 

I thought this was interesting. Read the abstract for this paper:
http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/vi...sp?lbid=540178

 

while i agree that slower drivers are more prone to getting into accidents than faster drivers, think about if something out of the blue jumps into your path, im sure hitting an object at 85 is more dangerous than hitting the same object at 55. moral - drive slower.

 

Or take that to the nth degree and just STAY HOME!

 

sure......drive at zero.now that's safe!!111one!

think about it, if an asteroid can jump out of the blue and hit you, and you're driving in a straight line, shouldn't you just zigzag all over the road to increase you chances of not getting hit by the asteroid. moral-you present bad logic and I'm betting mommy told you to drive slower.

Is your first name Alex?

 

Chances are he was looking for drunk drivers... I agree with the notion he probably let you go. I believe if you are 15 mph over they can take you to jail at their discretion.

 

o snap

 

i know thats a load of BS because ive gotten tickets for 17 over and 24 over and they just wrote the ticket and said have a nice day.

 

He said "at their discretion..."