radar gun question

[J-Owner]

Does anyone know if a cop can have the radar gun on and it not trigger a radar detector? Specifically, I have a valentine one and I got pulled over today.

I won't bore you with details and I intend to fight it but I was being passed by a car at the same time we passed a cop on the interstate in Oklahoma and the prick pulled me over for going 85 in a 70 which is interesting considering I had my cruise control set at 75 so I was actually 5 miles over the limit if you want to get technical.

Anyway, for the three full minutes it took him to see us, get out of the median, follow me for a mile and pull me over, approach my car, ask for the usual items and then return to his car, my detector did not beep one single time.

The funny thing is after I confronted him about the fact through all of his attempting to catch up the detector never beeped, he said he has no idea but it his radar gun was on. When he returned to his car to run my plate about five seconds later my detector went crazy!!!!!

So, my question is......do you know if a cop can have a radar gun on and not set off a detector or is this cop like I assume and full of s*^t! I am not talking about instant on as I know that would set it off.

He had a choice between pulling over a blue GMC Acadia with a pretty blonde girl OR a silver G35 with a dude in it.

I plan to drive the two hours from Dallas to BFE hickville Oklahoma armed with my attorney who will no doubt do nothing for me and attempt to fight the ticket that Barney Fife issued.

On another note, I have not had a ticket in ages so I guess I am due, I just wish it was for an offense I actually committed. I am sure I will get screwed in the end though.

If anyone knows about radar guns and could lend some advice I would appreciate it.

Thanks,Brandon

[smockers83]

I'm not sure on the radar gun. They do have radar now that is like instant on, point and shoot, or whatever its called...instead of having it constantly on, they can pick and choose. Do you have all of the bands operating?

What you could have done is asked to see the radar gun since it never set your alarm off. They can't deny letting you see it and if he can't prove it, then no ticket. So if he has already cleared the gun by the time he's pulled you over, no ticket if you ask to see it. That's what I understood from a friend who has a bunch of guys in law enforcement.

[WESIDE]

It sounds like he was pacing you with his own speedo. And that is legit but also not as worthy of a fight in court. If you have a V-1 and it was not going ape sh*t on you then he did not have his radar on. He is giving you the ticket at the speed he was traveling and what he thought you were traveling. I would fight this. Hope it helps.

[RED_DET]

Maybe you should call the radar detector company and tell them you got a ticket, they might pay for it. Next, what idiot would confront a cop with "hey buddy, my radar detector didn't go off". You are getting an instant ticket every time.

By the way, I do know quite a bit about radar guns, but I be damned if I give you any advice.

[RED_DET]

What you could have done is asked to see the radar gun since it never set your alarm off. They can't deny letting you see it and if he can't prove it, then no ticket. So if he has already cleared the gun by the time he's pulled you over, no ticket if you ask to see it. That's what I understood from a friend who has a bunch of guys in law enforcement.

thats the biggest pile of bs ever. It is not required by any law for the officer to show you the radar gun reading, period. so please don't repeat that information. it is a myth that what ever fool came up with needs to be smacked in the head.

[C-Kwik]

Maybe you should call the radar detector company and tell them you got a ticket, they might pay for it. Next, what idiot would confront a cop with "hey buddy, my radar detector didn't go off". You are getting an instant ticket every time.

By the way, I do know quite a bit about radar guns, but I be damned if I give you any advice.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Provided it's a pretty reliable unit, it could be a good defense (traffic violations must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt). Of course, I doubt radar detectors have gone through the same paces in court as radar guns so its accuracy could be easily questioned.

But having a radar detector or even claiming it didn't go off should not be the basis for a ticket. The officer's observations confirmed by the appropriate tools (radar/laser or the speedo) should be the reason he is issung a ticket...

[RED_DET]

I agree. There is always the possibility the reliable tool malfunctioned. It is made my man. Most if not all traffic court cases are pretty simple.

Judge: Officer explain the circumstances of the case.Officer: Yes, your honor, I Observed a vehicle, insert description, traveling whatever direction @ high rate of speed. Speed was confirmed with radar unit blah blah. The operator of the vehicle was identified as the defendant here in court today.Judge: Was your radar working properly.Officer: Yes judge, the unit completed an internal circuit test and also was within -/+ 1 mph of calibration check with tuning forks.

Judge: Mr. Defendant, please explain your side of the story.Defendant: blah blah blah blah and my radar detector didn't go off your honor.

Judge: OK, I'm going to find you guilty of speeding, please see the clerk on your way out.

The courts don't like radar detectors either, thats why they are prohibited in some states.

[Sentientbydesign]

I love how some of us have legitimate issues with law enforcement, but we are all found guilty by other forum members.

Good luck with the ticket. I would emphasize the CC over the radar detector.

[RED_DET]

Having legitimate issues and the way you go about them are two different things. I personally take offense to any kind of name calling, especially those of officers that are out doing their jobs. But hey, what do I know, I'm just a barney fife prick myself.

[Focusedintntions]

In VA, if you ask the officer to see the radar gun or display for you speed...they legally have to show it you. If they cannot produce it, and still ticket you, when you go to court, the judge will dismiss it b/c they could not prove how fast you were going.

[rn79870]

I love how some of us have legitimate issues with law enforcement, but we are all found guilty by other forum members....

Can you point to one example of a legitimate issue with law enforcement, that is, where the cop was clearly wrong?

[RED_DET]

Point me in the direction of this law.

Aren't radar detectors and jamming devices banned in VA?

[C-Kwik]

One could easily argue the same case by beginning their arguments with, "Your honor, I was not speeding and I do not believe the officer actually used his radar gun as the officer testified. I have a XXX radar detector that would have picked up on the officers radar which never went off..." Done correctly, it can be made into a good defense. And if the officer had refused to allow said person to see the radar results, then it could look even worse. If one can raise enough doubt to sway the judge, then it should net a win. Of course, traffic judges are not know for being liberal in their decisions.

I'd say radar dectectors are not prohibited in states because the courts don't like them, but because it lowers the "income" generated by tickets to some degree. Courts don't make the law. They interpret them. Doesn't mean the courts don't like radar detectors, its just not the reason the laws exist...

[ArizonaG35]

I would recommend that instead of spending 4 hours in the car and a HEFTY lawyers fee to fight a losing battle, then you should just invest less than $100 on an online defensive driving course and get certified in Oklahoma. I got pulled over in Illinois on my way to my Grandfathers funeral doing 87 in a 65... It was a speed trap on the Illinois/Missouri border... I found out that Illinois has approved online defensive driving courses through Blockbuster video... I went and rented the DVD from Blockbuster and took the online course in about two hours... I faxed my certification of completion to the county that I was pulled over in and paid my fine. The points were never deducted from my license and my insurance was not affected.

Just a thought... here's a website for you... it appears that Oklahoma approves online courses as well. Good luck!http://www.dmv.org/ok-oklahoma...g.php

Dave

[RED_DET]

You can use any argument that you can fathom up in your head. The simple fact is that radar detectors and their operation aren't used in the court system. Testimony is all about credibility and 99% of the time, the Officer will have that on his side. There is that 1% of judges that are anti-law enforcement.

There are other tickets to write than just speeding, which require only the use of your eyes. Out of the 1200 officers on our dept, I bet only 1/3 of them have radar guns and less than 100 of them actually go out and write tickets for speeding.

[RED_DET]

I have found nothing that states anywhere that a radar reading has to be shown to the violator. What if the speed wasn't locked in or the highest speed wasn't locked in? I stand by my statement that readings don't have to be shown and they surely aren't shown here.

[Focusedintntions]

Yeah but we all know that in KY people do things backwards... haha j/k

In all seriousness...they have to be able to prove w/o a reasonable shadow of doubt to a normal person that you are guilty of the charge. If they cannot show you the radar gun with your clocked speed...that creates room for doubt....once that is there...case dimissed.

[rn79870]

You've quoted the wrong standard of proof. In a criminal trial it is only "beyond a reasonable doubt." Never is it "beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt."

Since traffic infractions are not even misdemeanors, the proof may be as low as "by a preponderance of evidence", which means, 50.1% of the evidence.

An officers testimony is direct evidence of an infraction, and sufficient to convict in every jurisdiction, whether or not he used a certified speedometer, or a radar gun.

[C-Kwik]

Can you point to one example of a legitimate issue with law enforcement, that is, where the cop was clearly wrong?

2 words. Rodney King.

Actually though, there have been a few instances where officers were quite wrong.

1. I went to Tijuana with some friends. I was 19 or 20 at the time so no drinking for me. We parked in the US and walked to TJ. All my friends were clearly inebriated as we walked back, and got into my car. An officer watched us and soon after leaving the parking lot, I was pulled over. I had only gotten far enough to turn onto the street and make the next right. The officers came up on both sides with their flashlights. They very quickly realized I wasn't drunk. Then they told me I ran a stop sign. I asked what stopsign as I was sure I didn't see one. She gve me nothing but general answers. Unfortunately, it was a bit far for me to go back to later, so I bit the bullet and paid the ticket when it came in the mail. Months later I went back to the same parking lot to go to TJ again and sure enough, there were no stop signs between the parking lot and the spot I was pulled over at.

2. I was cited for an illegally modified exhaust. The cop insisted it was illegal because no modifications were allowed to the exhaust. The vehicle code indicates otherwise. I fought it and while I made a strong case, citing the specific vehicle codes that applied and pointing out that the officer only quoted a small part of the vehicle code he cited me for, the judge still sided with the cop. Unfortunately, this was common place at the time. Consequently, SEMA fought to get the law more clearly defined so that such gross interpretations of law couldn't be used to harrass people.

3. I was once caught driving with a suspended license. I did it. I even ran a red light on accident. But the cop had it in for me (perhaps with good reason as I almost ran into him in the process ). But he looked for anything and everything he could write me up for. Of particular note was a citation for unsafe start. When I asked him what that was for, he said it was because I was peeling out. I explained that I wasn't peeling out, but that I spun out when I swerved to avoid him. He retorted by saying "If you don't like it, then FIGHT ME!" as he stepped up towards me. It was the most unprofessional thing I've seen out of a cop as it insinuated a physical challenge under the guise of the one in court.

Ironically, I fought it on principle and the DA actually lowered the misdemeanor to an infraction, which dropped the fine by $700 and removed all the other violations. Unfortunately, this was during the pre-trial so the officer couldn't see the result of his overzealous law enforcement technique or known that had the violations all been things I actually did, I would have just paid the fines and been done with it.

Of course this doesn't represent all cops and should not be taken as a generalization as in the case of my suspended license, all but the Tijuana incident were valid tickets that led to the suspension. The local sheriff also pulled me over once and gave me a ticket for speeding years ago. The same officer also wrote off a ticket for exhaust noise violation that the citing officer marked needed to be corrected. The Sheriff seemed annoyed that the citation was ever issued and told me to go put my aftermarket exhaust back on.

[RED_DET]

Yeah but we all know that in KY people do things backwards... haha j/k

I remind myself of that everyday, especially how people drive.

What if I used VASCAR to determine your speed. Very simple calculation and only requires distance between two points and how long it took you to travel those points. The constant never changes so a monkey could figure out the speed.

[RED_DET]

sounds like you were a straight ricer back in the day....

[rn79870]

I was referring to matters posted here at NICO and SbD's claim that " I love how some of us have legitimate issues with law enforcement, but we are all found guilty by other forum members.

And Rodney King has proven to be a worthless member of society. But even worthless members have constitutional rights.

[Sentientbydesign]

Here is the situation.

The left side is before. The right side is after.

Gray- Wife's carRed- "Wonderful Driver"Blue- "Speed Racer"

My wife is at a rail road track, she pulls up and intends to dip into the far right lane a little in order to get around the "Wonderful Driver". "Speed Racer" zooms through and fills in the spot she needed to get around the "Wonderful Driver". The Cop sees the whole incident and gives her a ticket ($380).

She tries reasoning with him, but he doesn't budge. He tells her to take it to court and she might have a chance.

In Court the officer lies to the judge and says that she just pulled into the RR crossing and the arm was coming down while she was in there (didn't happen until after he pulled her over).

She confronts him after the appearance and he says "I really don't remember the incident. I just get hyped and want to maintain everybody's safety"

You tell me that was a Great officer doing his job. I've had numerous times when I needed law enforcement and they were nowhere to be found and numerous times that they've pulled stupid stunts like this one. I sometimes wonder if (some) traffic cops screw around all day, then decide to write a few tickets to make it look like they are doing their job.

[RED_DET]

We don't have both sides of the story nor were I either one of us there, so I won't comment. What was the citation for?

[Sentientbydesign]

I believe my wife. She isn't the type to fabricate things and she's a very competent driver.

Stopping in a rail road crossing.

[RED_DET]

fines in CA are a rip off, 380 dollars? At most here that would have been $150 and probably could have gone to traffic school for $115.

We can't have a perfect society, because I know quite a few idiots in my line of work as well, just as every other job has them too.

[smockers83]

thats the biggest pile of bs ever. It is not required by any law for the officer to show you the radar gun reading, period. so please don't repeat that information. it is a myth that what ever fool came up with needs to be smacked in the head.

Umm, ok...my bad. Chill. A simple not true would have done just fine. However, in MI you can request to see it. Or a tab from it if capable. Or when it was calibrated, or the officer's training with that particular gun. But I feel there needs to be more credibility somehow in this area because I've been pulled over, told I was doing 70 (in a 55) and I was at 60 or just under by my speedo. How do I know that's what he actually clocked me at, how do I know my speedo is right, how do I know he's not just making it up because it looked like I was speeding because I passed someone? Denying someone to see it reduces the sense of credibility.

[Sentientbydesign]

fines in CA are a rip off, 380 dollars? At most here that would have been $150 and probably could have gone to traffic school for $115.

We can't have a perfect society, because I know quite a few idiots in my line of work as well, just as every other job has them too.

Agreed, but public service professions make the largest impact right up there with doctors.

Other incidents:

Found friend's stolen car and called to have an officer help us recover it (they would have never found it, 2 blocks from where it was stolen). They took 4 hours to get there despite us having seen at least on patrol car driving past us.

Father getting beat up by 3 guys, one with a knife. My grandfather who was 45 mins away got there before the police did. By that time, the offenders had left. I was 6-7 y/o.

Camaro does donuts outside our apartment complex and nearly hits cross traffic. Police are called, but can't do anything because they didn't witness it.

Cop gives me a ticket for violating a "DO NOT ENTER" sign while I was exiting a gas station. I guess a bunch of idiots were exiting that side and making dangerous u-turns, so they installed the sign there. I just exited, went down the road, then pulled into another parking lot and the jerk cited me.

I consider myself a law abiding citizen, but I can't seem to think of a situation where a member of law enforcement has come to my aid. They're only there to catch me make mistakes.

[RED_DET]

If a simple not true was necessary, then I would have said that instead. But it always seems that someone always knows how to or more about somebody's job than the person doing it. You can request to see anything you want, doesn't mean it has to be shown to you. All those questions you want answers to, need to be done in court, not on the side of the road, because last time I checked there wasn't a courtroom out there or a judge. If I could get a dollar for every time somebody told me they were going that fast when I stopped them I would be a millionaire. Most people have no clue how fast they are going and when they do realize the police officer was setting up the road, his radar has the ability to determine your speed well before you ever see him and begin to slow down. RADAR works farther than 200ft, I have a range of about 8/10 of a mile. So a rule of thumb you should think about is, that if you see the cop, your speed was determined long before that. How does not allowing someone to get out of their car on a busy roadway and not knowing this person from Adam or what they are up to reduce credibility? Its called Officer safety, which comes first and foremost before someone demanding to see my radar. We all forget that radar is just one of the tools used to determine speed. Observation is the first step. Like I said in a previous post, I don't need a radar gun to determine your speed.

[Sentientbydesign]

When is anti-cocky going to be added to officer training?

Real Estate Professionals (in CA) have to take ethics courses every 2 years. Do police have to go through anti-cocky training as often?