Legality of a 'parking sensor'...
Discussion
What's the legal deal with devices such as these...
I mean, they're just parking assistors aren't they?
They seem to work quite well, as shown here...
I know the problem with <ahem!> 'Garage Door Openers' can be that it is fairly easy to prove you don't have the correct door (or indeed the garage to house one), but surely these are something else...
Let's say, a Laser Operator 'pings' you, nothing shows up, and they decide to pull you.
They find the offending gadget (quite easily - as you wouldn't have to make any effort to hide it - it's just a parking sensor after all!)...
What could they do about it? You're not trying to pervert the course of justice, you're just trying to avoid the missus hitting things while parking!
Where would you stand?
Just curious...
I mean, they're just parking assistors aren't they?
They seem to work quite well, as shown here...
I know the problem with <ahem!> 'Garage Door Openers' can be that it is fairly easy to prove you don't have the correct door (or indeed the garage to house one), but surely these are something else...
Let's say, a Laser Operator 'pings' you, nothing shows up, and they decide to pull you.
They find the offending gadget (quite easily - as you wouldn't have to make any effort to hide it - it's just a parking sensor after all!)...
What could they do about it? You're not trying to pervert the course of justice, you're just trying to avoid the missus hitting things while parking!
Where would you stand?
Just curious...
Edited by nelly1 on Thursday 20th March 22:23
I'm sure someone should come with a proximity system based on "similar" technlogy for constant monitoring of braking distances between you & the vehicle in front of eben behind Purely safety reasons of course, a little indicator light, system linked to speedo, etc. If your too close it'll beep etc.
After all they do is only measure distances at the end of the day, 100% legit & working for your safety 24/7 wherever you drive
Purely safety reasons of course, a little indicator light, system linked to speedo, etc. If your too close it'll beep etc. After all they do is only measure distances at the end of the day, 100% legit & working for your safety 24/7 wherever you drive
Precisely!
They have perfectly ligitimate primary function.
The fact that they 'may' interfere with 'safety' equipment (of dubious accuracy and integrity) is the basis for my OP.
Given the ease with which a license can be lost due to a few minor transgressions of ever more draconian and seemingly arbitrary limits, who could be blamed for employing the use of such a device?
...waits for the reply of "mindless, dangerous, reckless speed-freaks who have no regard for the law or the ickle children...
They have perfectly ligitimate primary function.
The fact that they 'may' interfere with 'safety' equipment (of dubious accuracy and integrity) is the basis for my OP.
Given the ease with which a license can be lost due to a few minor transgressions of ever more draconian and seemingly arbitrary limits, who could be blamed for employing the use of such a device?
...waits for the reply of "mindless, dangerous, reckless speed-freaks who have no regard for the law or the ickle children...
catso said:
nelly1 said:
I know the problem with <ahem!> 'Garage Door Openers' can be that it is fairly easy to prove you don't have the correct door (or indeed the garage to house one)
But what if you actually do have the door etc? then what happens?He promptly got zapped from the rear of the car about a week after installing it on the front!
D'oh
nelly 1 said:
What could they do about it? You're not trying to pervert the course of justice, you're just trying to avoid the missus hitting things while parking!
It is not just a parking sensor. It is blatantly disrupting a laser signalnelly 1 said:
Where would you stand?
In court explaining about the fact your partner was unable to abide by speed limits and needed a device to interfere with evidence collection!The advert asks what the reader thinks the device is. It is quite obviously a device to interfere with a laser signal from speed detection equipment.
I would be happy to oblige in making that decision should I be in a position where I had an opportunity to deal with such a driver using this device!
That might mean seizing the device as evidence that it was such and pulling it out of its mountings to have it available for a court to make an assessment and corroborate mine!
Edited by Mg6b on Friday 21st March 10:45
^^ Mg6b,
IMO the prosecution would have to proof intent otherwise the owner is using it as a parking aid and if the owner has had the odd parking mishap then that would assist with the defence case.
How would you proove that the device in question was interfering with your laser if you couldn't get a reading or at best an error code?
IMO the prosecution would have to proof intent otherwise the owner is using it as a parking aid and if the owner has had the odd parking mishap then that would assist with the defence case.
How would you proove that the device in question was interfering with your laser if you couldn't get a reading or at best an error code?
Edited by Boosted LS1 on Friday 21st March 11:39
Mg6b said:
nelly 1 said:
What could they do about it? You're not trying to pervert the course of justice, you're just trying to avoid the missus hitting things while parking!
It is not just a parking sensor. It is blatantly disrupting a laser signalnelly 1 said:
Where would you stand?
In court explaining about the fact your partner was unable to abide by speed limits and needed a device to interfere with evidence collection!The advert asks what the reader thinks the device is. It is quite obviously a device to interfere with a laser signal from speed detection equipment.
I would be happy to oblige in making that decision should I be in a position where I had an opportunity to deal with such a driver using this device!
That might mean seizing the device as evidence that it was such and pulling it out of its mountings to have it available for a court to make an assessment and corroborate mine!
Edited by Mg6b on Friday 21st March 10:45
Remember it was the choice of the Police to use a public wavelength for the use of their speed measuring. If they wanted to be "safe", they should have used a protected wavelength - not the freely available one.
As you will see in the demo videos from the manufacturer of this device, the error code it produces on a laser gun these days will often be a specific one which tells the operator it's being jammed, not just a generic 'error' code.
Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
Edited by fastfreddy on Friday 21st March 13:35
Mg6b said:
nelly 1 said:
What could they do about it? You're not trying to pervert the course of justice, you're just trying to avoid the missus hitting things while parking!
It is not just a parking sensor. It is blatantly disrupting a laser signalnelly 1 said:
Where would you stand?
In court explaining about the fact your partner was unable to abide by speed limits and needed a device to interfere with evidence collection!The advert asks what the reader thinks the device is. It is quite obviously a device to interfere with a laser signal from speed detection equipment.
I would be happy to oblige in making that decision should I be in a position where I had an opportunity to deal with such a driver using this device!
That might mean seizing the device as evidence that it was such and pulling it out of its mountings to have it available for a court to make an assessment and corroborate mine!
Edited by Mg6b on Friday 21st March 10:45
To be honest if you speed then you are breaking the law and depending on the level of infringement you deserve to be punished. I was and still am. It was a fair cop guv!
I am not saying that 3mph over the limit deserves points but if your doing something like 140 then you should get the ban. I knew the risks and I took them. I was banned. Simple.
fastfreddy said:
As you will see in the demo videos from the manufacturer of this device, the error code it produces on a laser gun these days will often be a specific one which tells the operator it's being jammed, not just a generic 'error' code.
Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
SPOT ON!!!!Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
Edited by fastfreddy on Friday 21st March 13:35
Still the onus is on the CPS to prove intention.
fastfreddy said:
As you will see in the demo videos from the manufacturer of this device, the error code it produces on a laser gun these days will often be a specific one which tells the operator it's being jammed, not just a generic 'error' code.
Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
You are wrong there:Several UK police forces have now assigned resources to go around investigating the owners of any cars which have caused one of these jamming error codes on their guns.
You would then be facing a charge of 'perverting the course of justice' if they could prove that you had the device fitted to your car for the purpose of disrupting their speed measuring activities. It makes no difference whether you were speeding at the time or not.
At least one case recently did get to court and the driver was convicted, so the risk of this happening to you if you have one of these fitted to your car is real.
And we're talking about light here, so there's no such thing as a 'public' or 'private' wavelength. I'm afraid that regardless of the manufacturer's intended use for a device fitted to your car, the courts can and will decide whether or not the driver has intentionally used it to 'pervert the course of justice' and if they think you have, that's that.
Adaptive braking technologies are all likely to use ultrasonics or similar wavelengths. Laser light really wouldn't be the way to do that sort of job.
Edited by fastfreddy on Friday 21st March 13:35
http://www.vdo.com/press/releases/drivers-assistan...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff