Why are laser jammers illegal?
Discussion
First of all it has yet to be determined by a competent court that these toys are illegal. It is unlikely that they would ever be found illegal. Their use may be determined illegal one day.
Secondly laserguns do not just measure distance. They measure distance/time interval /distance. From this they compute speed (speed is made up of two elements - distance covered over time).
Secondly laserguns do not just measure distance. They measure distance/time interval /distance. From this they compute speed (speed is made up of two elements - distance covered over time).
Yes, but technically it aint stopping him reading speed is it?
If he decides to use a device to calculate my speed based on my distance well how am I to know??? If he gives a warning then no doubt people would only be too pleased to turn off their devices and stop to enable him to measure the distance more easily!!
If he decides to use a device to calculate my speed based on my distance well how am I to know??? If he gives a warning then no doubt people would only be too pleased to turn off their devices and stop to enable him to measure the distance more easily!!
Thats a very good point toymota. The lti does indeed measure RANGE and NOT speed, theres an algorithym incorporated into its software which does calcs to determine speed.....hmmmmm now, why would an officer want to measure your range, and how can they do anything about the transmission of light anyway? Its not illegal, and its not illegal to transmit invisible light. I think you may be onto something there mate. 
deltaf said:
Thats a very good point toymota. The lti does indeed measure RANGE and NOT speed, theres an algorithym incorporated into its software which does calcs to determine speed.....hmmmmm now, why would an officer want to measure your range, and how can they do anything about the transmission of light anyway? Its not illegal, and its not illegal to transmit invisible light. I think you may be onto something there mate.
Any "illegality" will probably rest upon the receipt and interpretation of the signal, or more specifically upon the accused having taken an action following this; or it could be "obstructing a police officer in the execution ...". Worryingly, given the Aldershot decision (Harding's scamera warning sign), the latter might succeed even today (if the same idiotic magistrates were sitting)
- Streaky >> Edited by streaky on Sunday 20th June 07:20
streaky said:
Thats a very good point toymota. The lti does indeed measure RANGE and NOT speed, theres an algorithym incorporated into its software which does calcs to determine speed.....hmmmmm now, why would an officer want to measure your range, and how can they do anything about the transmission of light anyway? Its not illegal, and its not illegal to transmit invisible light. I think you may be onto something there mate.
Any "illegality" will probably rest upon the receipt and interpretation of the signal, or more specifically upon the accused having taken an action following this; or it could be "obstructing a police officer in the execution ...". Worryingly, given the Aldershot decision (Harding's scamera warning sign), the latter might succeed even today (if the same idiotic magistrates were sitting)
>> Edited by streaky on Sunday 20th June 07:20
Well Streaky, the way around that accusation is as follows. The laser jammer is set to emit pulses continuously that equate to a 30mph reading on an lti.
Youre then driving around and continually pulsing, so you havent "reacted" to being probed (ooerr) by the laser in the first place.
deltaf said:
Thats a very good point toymota. The lti does indeed measure RANGE and NOT speed, theres an algorithym incorporated into its software which does calcs to determine speed.....hmmmmm now, why would an officer want to measure your range, and how can they do anything about the transmission of light anyway? Its not illegal, and its not illegal to transmit invisible light. I think you may be onto something there mate.
I am sorry but I think that we are losing touch with reality here. A lasergun may not measure time, but that is only because time intervals are predetermined. You may as well say that a car's speedo does not measure speed but only distance covered. Everything must be viewed in context. Transmission of light may not be illegal but nor is speaking. Try speaking about the joys of sex to a PC whilst he is trying to caution somebody. Try telling him that you are going to kill him and rely on the defence that you are allowed to speak.
gemini said:
I think it simply boils down to mens rea (not some homo term!
Why do you have the need to fit one?
Answer to spoil the cops fun?
To prevent detection of your unlawful act?
Then case likely!
Yes but if its fitted as a gararge door opener (which some of the models are marketed as and can act as) then there is no mens rea to fit with.
gh0st said:
Yes but if its fitted as a gararge door opener (which some of the models are marketed as and can act as) then there is no mens rea to fit with.
Patient mode on and takes time to try and be explain asking for some honesty in return
When theyre being used as door openers fine
But you know when they are not - "mens rea"
Marketing is one thing - "USE" is another !
gemini said:
Yes but if its fitted as a gararge door opener (which some of the models are marketed as and can act as) then there is no mens rea to fit with.
Patient mode on and takes time to try and be explain asking for some honesty in return
When theyre being used as door openers fine
But you know when they are not - "mens rea"
Marketing is one thing - "USE" is another !
Fair point,
However, if you were in court for having "accidentially" jammed a scamera van, and you also owned a garage door that opened with said jammer, how would one prove that you were out to use it as a jammer in the first place?
B*llocks to the etical side of things, the SCP's threw that out the window when they were formed...
This obstruction thing seems a bit daft to me. The 'mens rea' which I believe from the bit of law I did means the intent. what happens if you change lane and get behind a lorry with the intention of preventing a police constable getting a speed reading. Is that obstruction?. Or suddenly slowing down perhaps so he can't read the speed you were origninally travelling at? Obstruction?
Both of them satisfy the 'mens rea', so would the driver be guilty of an offense?
Both of them satisfy the 'mens rea', so would the driver be guilty of an offense?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff