My top 10 enforcement & countermeasure pet peeves

Not sure if this belongs in the Lounge, but it's countermeasure related so I'll post it here and if someone wants to move it, I won't pout for too long. ;)

I'm going to try and keep this to a top 10 list. Feel free to post your own.

My Top 10 Enforcement and Countermeasure Pet Peeves

10. LIDAR
In the hands of a skilled operator LIDAR is deadly. But why is it only #10 on my list? Because I rarely encounter it, and if I did, I'd get a laser jammer.

9. Cobras
They give the countermeasure users a bad rap. They are among the poorest performing RDs on the market, but the top selling brand. But worst of all is their annoying tendency to leak at frequencies that set off other RDs.

8. "Speed Kills"
Every time I see this phrase, especially when it's used to justify additional speed enforcement, it makes my blood boil. Proponents tend to filter the facts to fit their agenda. Exceeding an arbitrary and underposted speed limit is not dangerous at all. Driving like an idiot or driving drunk, those are far more dangerous than "speeding".

7. Laws making countermeasures illegal
Well, any laws that are purely anti-consumer or anti-motorist are peeves of mine (don't get me started on the DMCA). Most relevant to the discussion are laws that make detectors or laser jammers illegal in certain locations or for certain classes of drivers. The fact is, smart RD users tend to be more alert than those without them, so making them illegal is counterproductive from a safety standpoint. They're only illegal because they impact speeding ticket revenue, and such laws are justified due to our countermeasures being used as "tools to break the law."

6. Radar-based door openers
Once upon a time, automatic doors were triggered by pressure pads that emitted no signal whatsoever. Then, someone got the bright idea that a wireless solution would be cheaper to install, so someone invented radar based door openers. While these originally polluted the X band, nowadays they primarily occupy K band, which in the good old days was a reasonably false free band, and still popular with LEOs. Why they don't use cheap, reliable passive infrared sensors is beyond me.

5. Infiniti LCC (and other radar or laser based adaptive cruise controls)
Another "bright idea" that wasn't really thought through very well. These are primarily annoyances for V1 users, but they can trigger laser jammers as well. But worse is that some may come to rely on the adaptive cruise to handle the task of driving (well, braking) for them. And these things will only appear in more and cheaper cars over time.

4. Points and Insurance Surcharges
If the fact that speeding tickets are used as a revenue source for local/state governments isn't bad enough, insurance surcharges are the ultimate scam. The argument is that drivers with tickets are at a higher risk for accident claims, but that doesn't necessarily hold true for those with only speeding tickets. Get nailed in a speed trap at 65 in a 55 or something equally ridiculous, and you're branded as a "risky" driver and your rates go up. Even worse, some insurance companies use the extra money to donate radar/laser guns to police departments, so they can do what? Give out more tickets, resulting in even more insurance surcharges. These are the kinds of things that should be illegal, not RDs and jammers.

3. Tickets given for "70 in a 55"
More proof of speeding enforcement being used as a revenue scheme. Many stretches of highway are engineered for safe travel at over 70 mph, but are underposted at 55. Then, since everyone "speeds" through these stretches, they are constantly patrolled and they become ticket factories. Route 3 in southern NH/northern MA is a classic example of this. How many unfair tickets have been issued on highways such as this, when the victim was traveling at a perfectly safe and reasonable speed for conditions? Look in our "beat a ticket" forum for many examples.

2. Hidden and/or Unmarked vehicles used for speed enforcement.
Once again, proof of enforcement for revenue. If speed enforcement was done for safety reasons, a LEO would park out in the open, and if using radar, would run it constant. This provides a visible presence which encourages drivers to watch their speed and in general, be more alert while driving. Hiding or using unmarked vehicles doesn't encourage better driving, it just causes more tickets, and more revenue.

and Numero Uno is...

1. INSTANT ON!!!!!!!!
I *HATE* instant on. HATE HATE HATE HATE it. If anything should be outlawed as a speed trap scam, this is it. This is the one and only thing we don't have a truly reliable defense against. Rabbits help but not always. Everytime I read of "increased enforcement" in an area and then hear that they're using I/O, laser, or other sneaky tactics, the big dollar sign appears above my head. My worst close calls have been I/O attacks.

Ok, so what are yours?

Can't disagree more on that kpatz. I think this goes for a sticky.

I think you pretty much covered it my friend

~


:dito:



Amen to all your ideas and conclusions, kpatz... Amen.

I don't think anybody could improve on your list as it relates to this forum.

Thanks!


~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnightHawk

Can't disagree more on that kpatz. I think this goes for a sticky.

---

I think you mean "can't agree more". =)

I think you got it on this one.

Instant on is my number one :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

8. "Speed Kills"
Every time I see this phrase, especially when it's used to justify additional speed enforcement, it makes my blood boil. Proponents tend to filter the facts to fit their agenda. Exceeding an arbitrary and underposted speed limit is not dangerous at all. Driving like an idiot or driving drunk, those are far more dangerous than "speeding".

---

Sorry, but you guys are all wet on this one. You're intentionally ignoring the laws of physics to suit a dishonest agenda. Simply being an idiot or drunk is no more dangerous than simply speeding. Why? Because the level of danger is determined by behaviour, not by mental status. It's not the drunk driver's alcohol that kills you. It's his driving that kills you. Now, answer this simple question. Would you rather him hit you at 75 mph, or at 30 mph? How about this: would you rather be doing 75 mph when he pulls out in front of you, or 30 mph? There's no way to parse that one. Speed kills. Whining about it does not change the law of physics. And it doesn't matter if it was the other guy's fault that you crashed. You still lose.

If you want to say you simply don't care because you are teh aw3some driver, that's an honest position. But arguing that speed doesn't kill is dishonest, and frankly silly.

I disagree its like saying guns kill people.. not quite, people kill people with guns. Using your situation if that driver hadn't been drunk then he would have regonized that a speeding or vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed was coing in his direction and him pulling out would result in an accident or near accident. The driver speeding wasn't really doing anything... wrong... or dangerous per say, clarification he wasn't necesarily driving recklessly if LEO's say 20 over is where reckless begins. So I disagree and agree with Kpatz in his observation with regards to the saying of Speed kills. I believe that there are smart and idiot drivers out there, they both can cause accidents regardless of speeding or not speeding.

I strongly agree with your #2. Those are spreading like a disease here in Texas