Best Laser Jammer for use in a state where they're ILLEGAL?

[KalJer]

Hi guys,

I live in Illinois where it seems Laser Jammers are now illegal. I have read the various test results (Guys of lidar, etc.) but am not sure how to analyze the results.

Obviously in my situation it is essential that the jammer heads be descreet and more importantly that the jammer functions in such a way that the LEO thinks he recieved a legitimate error message as opposed to something that screams "This guy has a jammer".

I have heard that the Lidatek units jam then stop allowing you time to slow down and the LEO to get a reading if he/she targets you again.

Any thoughts?

I am not sure exactly what car this is going on, but it is likely to be a mid-sized sedan of sorts.

Thanks,
KJ

EDIT: This will be used in conjunction with a V1 (1.8 ) and a a CB radio on occasion...if that is of any importance.

[vliou2173]

If the Laser Atlanta is used in your area (like in mine), I'd forget about it...

[Snake Plisken]

I would do some research in "area's" where laser jammers are illegal at this time where people are putting parking sensors on there rides. I live in a area where they are illegal and getting ready to squeeze the trigger for a parking sensor.

[ELVATO]

Which Lidatek are you referring to? The LE-10 will throw a jam code on anything, even the Ultralytes.

Most of the newer jammers have a kill switch that lets you turn off the jammer once you are down to speed limit. The diode jammers, like the AL and LPP, are also small compared to LED jammers, such as Blinders or the ZR3.

As previously said, if your area uses the newer Laser Atlanta guns, then any jammer you have will set off the jammer alert. the same goes for the Stalker, with the exception that with the Stalker, other things can set off it's jammer indicator.

[cell21633]

no Laser Atlanta has been found in Illinois. Vast majority is ProLaser III, with a few scattered Ultralytes.

you don't have anything to worry about with throwing a jamming code with AntiLaser or LPP. i'm running a laser defender and working on testing it.

[Lucky225]

Depends on what's used in your area, also if the statute is an intent statute you can get away with using a laser park pro as it's a 'parking sensor' not a jammer -- this method doesn't work in California though since California's statute says 'or capable of jamming', donno what illinois says though

[Snake Plisken]

The IL. law on laser jammers say they are illegal but it also states that a cop cant stop a car if they "Believe" a laser jammer is being used and that cant be the only reason to make a stop.

[Lucky225]

The IL. law on laser jammers say they are illegal but it also states that a cop cant stop a car if they "Believe" a laser jammer is being used and that cant be the only reason to make a stop.

Nice, like a secondary seat belt violation :P

[vliou2173]

"I also thought he was speeding" ==>Probable Cause

Or like police in the UK. "We don't need probable cause". And we don't carry guns.

I respect and admire police in the UK. US cops piss me off sometimes with their "I am god" mentality...much like the RCMP in Canada...

[KalJer]

The IL. law on laser jammers say they are illegal but it also states that a cop cant stop a car if they "Believe" a laser jammer is being used and that cant be the only reason to make a stop.

Yea that should be hard.... "he was clearly speeding", "I paced him" then discovered he had a jammer :lol:

[Lucky225]

The IL. law on laser jammers say they are illegal but it also states that a cop cant stop a car if they "Believe" a laser jammer is being used and that cant be the only reason to make a stop.

Yea that should be hard.... "he was clearly speeding", "I paced him" then discovered he had a jammer :lol:

well the jammer would have to be in plain view, unlike speeding where you only need reasonable suspicion to pull over and cite, you need probable cause to search and seize a vehicle. Some would say that the jammer heads are in plain view, but I argue they look exactly the same as laser receivers and would fall under reasonable suspicion, not probable cause.

I wonder if that hide-a-jammer-head kit is still on radarjammer's or if roy has any left, would be excellent for illinois :)

[twentyseventy]

Blinders and Lidateks are too big to be stealthy; 2 Blinder heads also are comparable-ish to 1 LPP/Head, so you'll have double the number of heads on your car.

LPP or Antilaser are good bets


If the Laser Atlanta is used in your area (like in mine), I'd forget about it...

Is this a joke? Jam codes are not always a jammer, LIDAR guns throw those for a lot of reasons even if you're not jamming them.


Depends on what's used in your area, also if the statute is an intent statute you can get away with using a laser park pro as it's a 'parking sensor' not a jammer -- this method doesn't work in California though since California's statute says 'or capable of jamming', donno what illinois says though

He's right - carry the manual in your glove compartment and use it if you get stopped.

[speederX50]

Whats the penalty if you do use one? If they arnt confiscated its probably worth it to use them anyway. Lets say it saves you from 5 tickets but on the 6th the cop writes you up for the jammer. It already paid for itself and the $ u save from avoiding the other tickets can be used for the jammer fine.

[ELVATO]

It depends on a state by state basis. Some places are more severe that others.

[sethy]

Id say the AL G8 would be the best if they use the stalker.

AL G8 reduces the amount of E04's while you are jamming the gun.

Stalkers will false E04's on vehicles that dont even have a jammer, so I think you'd get by just fine even if you have a few blips of an e04.

However, AL still throws a jam code on the laser atlanta, which i dont believe is used in illinois

[vliou2173]

Blinders and Lidateks are too big to be stealthy; 2 Blinder heads also are comparable-ish to 1 LPP/Head, so you'll have double the number of heads on your car.

LPP or Antilaser are good bets


If the Laser Atlanta is used in your area (like in mine), I'd forget about it...

Is this a joke? Jam codes are not always a jammer, LIDAR guns throw those for a lot of reasons even if you're not jamming them.


Depends on what's used in your area, also if the statute is an intent statute you can get away with using a laser park pro as it's a 'parking sensor' not a jammer -- this method doesn't work in California though since California's statute says 'or capable of jamming', donno what illinois says though

He's right - carry the manual in your glove compartment and use it if you get stopped.

On the contrary, the LA seldom throws a Jam code when there's no jammer...and it alerts to EVERY jammer...

Yes, carry the manual, that would help!

[cell21633]

Whats the penalty if you do use one? If they arnt confiscated its probably worth it to use them anyway. Lets say it saves you from 5 tickets but on the 6th the cop writes you up for the jammer. It already paid for itself and the $ u save from avoiding the other tickets can be used for the jammer fine.

Illinois statute:



(625 ILCS 5/12‑613)
Sec. 12‑613. Possession and use of radar or laser jamming devices prohibited.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a person may not operate or be in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while the motor vehicle is equipped with any instrument designed to interfere with microwaves or lasers at frequencies used by police radar for the purpose of monitoring vehicular speed.
(b) A person operating a motor vehicle who possesses within the vehicle a radar or laser jamming device that is contained in a locked opaque box or similar container, or that is not in the passenger compartment of the vehicle, and that is not in operation, is not in violation of this Section.
(c) Any person found guilty of violating this Section is guilty of a petty offense. A minimum fine of $50 shall be imposed for a first offense and a minimum fine of $100 for a second or subsequent offense.
(d) The radar or laser jamming device or mechanism shall be seized by the law enforcement officer at the time of the violation. This Section does not authorize the permanent forfeiture to the State of any radar or laser jamming device or mechanism. The device or mechanism shall be taken and held for the period when needed as evidence. When no longer needed for evidence, the defendant may petition the court for the return of the device or mechanism. The defendant, however, must prove to the court by a preponderance of the evidence that the device or mechanism will be used only for a legitimate and lawful purpose.
(d) A law enforcement officer may not stop or search any motor vehicle or the driver of any motor vehicle solely on the basis of a violation or suspected violation of this Section.
(Source: P.A. 94‑594, eff. 1‑1‑06.)



no reported sightings of laser guns in illinois except for the prolaser3 and ultralyte.

[BossMan4Life]

Just be careful while out on the road while speeding along and jamming cops, no matter if they are legal or not you can still get harassed, hassled, and hornswoggled. And to correct mr. twentyseventy on the Lidateks vs. Blinder sizes....the Lidatek is no doubt the smallest jammer ever made. I know this because I'm the proud father of two!!

[happy_arnaud]

I think the best option is to go for LPP:
1. one head is enough for the front
2. it's a good jammer, doesn't send jam codes as far as i know
3. if you get caught, you can play an innocent "it's a parking sensor" and show the doc; then you have to have a rear head as well if you want a minimum credit ;-)

Then, set it to jam a limited time, or add a switch button in order to allow a speed reading as soon as you're on the dark side of the force (below limit ;-) ).

[RR]

On the contrary, the LA seldom throws a Jam code when there's no jammer...and it alerts to EVERY jammer...

Yes, carry the manual, that would help!

Actually, the LA has a setting to detect jammers. If that is turned off, then no jam code.

For what it's worth, I know for a fact that even when the LA is in "detect jammers" mode that the LPP will either throw up no codes or will display intermittent codes. You never get a constant jam code like you will with at least some of the LED based jammers.

RR

[ELVATO]

Just be careful while out on the road while speeding along and jamming cops, no matter if they are legal or not you can still get harassed, hassled, and hornswoggled. And to correct mr. twentyseventy on the Lidateks vs. Blinder sizes....the Lidatek is no doubt the smallest jammer ever made. I know this because I'm the proud father of two!!

That's what I thought as well.

Oh, and the LPP comes included with a switch. No need to buy one :)

From the videos I've seen of the LA in jammer detect mode, it does a pretty a pretty good job of detecting the LPP pretty reliably.

[RR]

Just be careful while out on the road while speeding along and jamming cops, no matter if they are legal or not you can still get harassed, hassled, and hornswoggled. And to correct mr. twentyseventy on the Lidateks vs. Blinder sizes....the Lidatek is no doubt the smallest jammer ever made. I know this because I'm the proud father of two!!

That's what I thought as well.

Oh, and the LPP comes included with a switch. No need to buy one :)

From the videos I've seen of the LA in jammer detect mode, it does a pretty a pretty good job of detecting the LPP pretty reliably.

Yes, switch plus your choice of 4/8 second or continuous mode.

From my personal experience testing the LA against LPP, the LA had intermittent JA-3 jam codes. It would also bleep out range but no speed reading, then nothing, etc.

Much depends on the setup and vehicle you are testing against. Some setups will do better than others, but that is true of any such device.

My thinking is that you don't want a constant jam code, as that arouses suspicion. Intermittent codes on the other hand could be shrugged off - maybe, maybe not. Depends on the view of the LEO holding the LA gun. :) But again, I'd rather have intermittent versus constant. With LA's most recent software version, I don't think there are any devices which trigger no JA-3 code at all on the LA, provided the LA operator has it in detection mode.

I tested a LA gun calibrated and software updated in June 2007, and LPP version 8.3na

No matter what protection you have, the LA is a formidable opponent.

RR

[sethy]

I think the best option is to go for LPP:
1. one head is enough for the front
2. it's a good jammer, doesn't send jam codes as far as i know
3. if you get caught, you can play an innocent "it's a parking sensor" and show the doc; then you have to have a rear head as well if you want a minimum credit ;-)

Then, set it to jam a limited time, or add a switch button in order to allow a speed reading as soon as you're on the dark side of the force (below limit ;-) ).

playing the innocent parking sensor game wouldn't work. the Leo that came to the GOL testing said he would say "well it interferes with my laser gun, so take it up with the judge"

LPP throws jam codes on the stalker constantly, this is why I would recomend the AL.

[Homer_Simpson]

I remember seeing a thread somewhere about compromised performance while reducing jam code on the Stalker? If AL is set at max power mode, it would be the same thing.



I think the best option is to go for LPP:
1. one head is enough for the front
2. it's a good jammer, doesn't send jam codes as far as i know
3. if you get caught, you can play an innocent "it's a parking sensor" and show the doc; then you have to have a rear head as well if you want a minimum credit ;-)

Then, set it to jam a limited time, or add a switch button in order to allow a speed reading as soon as you're on the dark side of the force (below limit ;-) ).

playing the innocent parking sensor game wouldn't work. the Leo that came to the GOL testing said he would say "well it interferes with my laser gun, so take it up with the judge"

LPP throws jam codes on the stalker constantly, this is why I would recomend the AL.

[RR]

I think the best option is to go for LPP:
1. one head is enough for the front
2. it's a good jammer, doesn't send jam codes as far as i know
3. if you get caught, you can play an innocent "it's a parking sensor" and show the doc; then you have to have a rear head as well if you want a minimum credit ;-)

Then, set it to jam a limited time, or add a switch button in order to allow a speed reading as soon as you're on the dark side of the force (below limit ;-) ).

playing the innocent parking sensor game wouldn't work. the Leo that came to the GOL testing said he would say "well it interferes with my laser gun, so take it up with the judge"



The LEO you mentioned is just that particular LEO. And that's you telling him about it. So, what did you expect him to say, "OK fine then?"

You have a defense if you have a LPP (versus no defense if you don't).

If it goes to Court, you will fare better there anyway versus trying to convince a LEO. At a traffic stop the best defense is to be polite and keep your mouth shut as much as possible.

95% of people incriminate themselves at the traffic stop. Be the 5% which don't.

Present your case in court if necessary, not at the traffic stop.

RR

[Asleeper]

LPP throws jam codes on the stalker constantly, this is why I would recomend the AL.

I'm with sethy on this one, I've tested my LPP against a stalker and it was a constant E-04 every run.

I'm also going to back up RR's comments on the LA too, as I was there and observed the same results. While JA-3's did appear, they were not constant like the stalker. On the LA, there were times I got weird speed reading like 2mph and no distance, or a distance reading with no speed. It also seemed that JA-3's appeared less frequently <500ft than they did further out. The results were the same for both vehicles vs. the LA(both had dual head LPP's up front)

[corkguykev]

if you carry the LPP manual with you in the car you should show it to the cop (but dont unless you have no choice). its better than nothing cos it mentions nothing about jamming, just a few lines on possible interference with other 904 nm gadgets? ":Laser officer? whats that?" play dumb.