Device that spots police vehicles near you
Discussion
Mk3Spitfire said:
"Police knocked on my door...threw a mobile in the fire that would have seen me go to prison for years.."
Yes years ago - in response to someone saying that if the police don't find anything you are innocent. In your view do people who have broken the law in the past not have a right to post an opinion on things? photosnob said:
Yes years ago - in response to someone saying that if the police don't find anything you are innocent. In your view do people who have broken the law in the past not have a right to post an opinion on things?
I didn't say that, but based on your last couple of posts, it looks a bit like you're boasting about your criminal past. Maybe I'm completely wrong. If so, my sincere apologies.
The sheer volume of users using Tetra in the UK is vast. I used to have Tetra in my car and personal radios for years and I'm neither police, fire or ambulance. So many organisations use Tetra that I would imagine it would be going off all the time, plus there are over 4000 masts in the UK for Tetra which won't help. This device would basically be useless I would imagine and in the wrong hands could be very dangerous highlighting the presence on people who really don't want to be identified. I can see it works in the same way as a radar detector basically just detecting the presence of a signal on a frequency and not interpreting it, therefore is legal but it really shouldn't be!
No, because, the Airwave frequencies for civil use differ from the frequencies used for emergency services. Therefore Target Blu Eye does not recognize Airwave signals for civil use."
Hmmm, there are a lot of civil users on Airwave with TEA2 encrypted radios on the Airwave network so this is really nonsense. Probably 6-8 times out of 10 it won't be Police.
- edit* it claims base stations don't set it off so that's 4000 signals to be removed from the 100,000+ other Tetra radio users!
No, because, the Airwave frequencies for civil use differ from the frequencies used for emergency services. Therefore Target Blu Eye does not recognize Airwave signals for civil use."
Hmmm, there are a lot of civil users on Airwave with TEA2 encrypted radios on the Airwave network so this is really nonsense. Probably 6-8 times out of 10 it won't be Police.
Edited by RobbyJ on Monday 15th December 12:35
Mk3Spitfire said:
photosnob said:
It it actually works then I can think of plenty of better uses for it than to help people get away with speeding. Burgling, mugging drug dealing... You will know if anyone is within half a mile off you.
Quite the gangster, aren't you?Talking of discussion: "AA spokesman Luke Bosdet added: ‘The only person who will have one of these fitted to their cars is the type of person who is trying to dodge the law.’"
The AA should sell those crystal balls, they'd make a fortune and we'd all win the lottery and get a fiver every draw as our share of the jackpot. Otherwise it looks like they're having problems with recruitment.
Mk3Spitfire said:
Referring to "better uses" being burgling etc and couple with other recent posts about his criminal past.
Not being familiar with any previous instances, I had commented on what was in the recent post only, which seemed little different to the article's content. That said, photosnob can respond in due course.If a police radio has been stolen at any time, would that not be an even better criminal's companion? Does it never happen?
I'm not in favour of criminality. Nor am I in favour of over-reactions in the media from people looking for 15 minutes of infamy.
Gwent Police Crime Commissioner Ian Johnston said:
This device is a passport to villainy and there is no legitimate reason for a law-abiding person to have one. The sellers are being very naive if they believe that they will be used to reduce accidents.
RELATED ARTICLES
‘A criminal will carry out a drug deal, see a light on their dashboard and then ditch their illegal stash, only to pick it up when the police aren’t around – or a motorist will be speeding on the motorway, an alert will pop up and they’ll slow down
My god, just imagine how terrible it would be if this device caused speeding drivers to slow down. RELATED ARTICLES
‘A criminal will carry out a drug deal, see a light on their dashboard and then ditch their illegal stash, only to pick it up when the police aren’t around – or a motorist will be speeding on the motorway, an alert will pop up and they’ll slow down
I like the way he has bunched the drug dealer and speeding motorist examples together as though they were somehow equivalent.
Mr2Mike said:
Gwent Police Crime Commissioner Ian Johnston said:
This device is a passport to villainy and there is no legitimate reason for a law-abiding person to have one. The sellers are being very naive if they believe that they will be used to reduce accidents.
RELATED ARTICLES
‘A criminal will carry out a drug deal, see a light on their dashboard and then ditch their illegal stash, only to pick it up when the police aren’t around – or a motorist will be speeding on the motorway, an alert will pop up and they’ll slow down
My god, just imagine how terrible it would be if this device caused speeding drivers to slow down. RELATED ARTICLES
‘A criminal will carry out a drug deal, see a light on their dashboard and then ditch their illegal stash, only to pick it up when the police aren’t around – or a motorist will be speeding on the motorway, an alert will pop up and they’ll slow down
I like the way he has bunched the drug dealer and speeding motorist examples together as though they were somehow equivalent.
Mk3Spitfire said:
They do get stolen from time to time but can generally be "stunned" by the ops room, making them useless. They can also be tracked.
Correct, they can be stunned which means they look like they are dead but they are still on and can be tracked and listened in to. They can also be killed which basically bricks the radio so it can't be used in any way.Mk3Spitfire said:
Referring to "better uses" being burgling etc and couple with other recent posts about his criminal past.
I think you have a chip on your shoulder about me now... Yes I've been open about some of my past. I've used my own personal experiences to talk about things, in exactly the same way you have when talking about criminal maters - you are just doing it from a police perspective. Better uses - because amazingly thats what I'd have used it for. I was trying to comment on the legitimacy of this sort of stuff. My other "recent posting" which you talk off I've already explained. I was referring to comments that people are innocent unless evidence of guilt is found - I was explaining that this isn't always the case.
I'll go back to a previous question I asked. Because I have previously committed criminal offences, am I not entitled to express an opinion on things? Can I not offer a different perspective on these sort of things? No one is going to learn anything bad from me - those who would do it will know anyway. Your gripe with me seems to be that I've dared to admit that previously I've been involved in crime. That's fine - however just be open about it, and stop all the b
hy comments and come out and say it. I actually quite like your posting - and think you offer a reasonable insight to users on here. But I think you are out of order in trying to hound those who can offer an alternative view point into how the criminal justice system works. That is all I have to say on the matter.
I appreciate your comments, and in all honesty, my gangster comment was a bit of a throw away one.
It appears I have interpreted you're meaning of your posts incorrectly.
You are as much entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I just thought it a little brash to boast (which is what it appeared to me you were doing) about your criminal past and successes. Like I said, I clearly missunderstood, and for that I offer my apologies. It wasn't really a personal attack. Sorry for any offence I might have caused. Without yours/mine and other comments, the whole website would fall apart, and while there are some on here who's posts I would risk saying we are better off without, yours aren't one. Once again, sorry.
It appears I have interpreted you're meaning of your posts incorrectly.
You are as much entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I just thought it a little brash to boast (which is what it appeared to me you were doing) about your criminal past and successes. Like I said, I clearly missunderstood, and for that I offer my apologies. It wasn't really a personal attack. Sorry for any offence I might have caused. Without yours/mine and other comments, the whole website would fall apart, and while there are some on here who's posts I would risk saying we are better off without, yours aren't one. Once again, sorry.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff