MPH hypes POP in Nevada

[KnightHawk]

The sole purpose of POP is speed check without being detected by radar detector and not a means to issue citations which is very clear in the manual. Regardless of what radar unit a well experienced LEO uses, all radar units are deadly to me because no one can beat I/O. The issue here is not merely the type of radar unit a particular LEO uses but "it is how it is being used." If I were LEO, will I use POP? Sure. Will a LEO always use POP? No. A well trained LEO knows when to use POP and when not to use POP. In fact, one of my Z35 POP guns is being used by my local LEO. Never think that LEO's are dumb. Some may be but not all. Fact is, they lurk around here and that's aside from Fritter of course.

[swarga]

Do they have a complete lack of critical thinking skills in Nevada?

Without POP, these drivers’ radar detectors would alert them in time to slow down before being measured by police.

OK, suppose the LEO triggers a POP blip and sees that the car is going 76 in a 65. Being a "by the book" kind of guy, he now triggers a regular RADAR burst. This latter signal is readily detectable, and, according to MPH, allows the driver to slow down to a legal speed before the speed reading can be locked in. The LEO thus clocks the driver at 64 MPH.

How has POP helped the LEO in this case?

[KnightHawk]

OK, suppose the LEO triggers a POP blip and sees that the car is going 76 in a 65. Being a "by the book" kind of guy, he now triggers a regular RADAR burst. This latter signal is readily detectable, and, according to MPH, allows the driver to slow down to a legal speed before the speed reading can be locked in. The LEO thus clocks the driver at 64 MPH.

How has POP helped the LEO in this case?

POP was introduced for speed checks and an alternative to visual estimate because it is hard to do visual estimate. In this case, when I/O is done properly, your speed is captured instantly and you can hear the audio tone from a high pitch to a lower pitch tone that matches the speed from 76 mph down to 65 mph and at the same time the speed decreases in the radar's reading soon after the brakes are applied. This is were LEO knows the vehicle has a radar detector onboard. If the target vehicle does not have a radar detector, the speed and audio tone remains the same. That is why when doing instant on, you have to leave it on for a few seconds to get good solid tone, a means to verify if the driver of the vehicle was using a radar detector and a good lock on a vehicle - basically tracking history(a process of identifying a violator). Next thing LEO does is to stop the violator. If indeed he has noticed signs of use of a radar detector, he'll try to confirm it by carefully looking for signs of use of a radar detector. LEO's case in any traffic stop whether it be I/O or C/O depends on how LEO makes his case. A good example is a note on your ticket stating
"ONLY VEHICLE". What will you say then and what possible reason's can you make?

When done properly, no one can beat I/O. This is the only radar threat that I know of to this date that a radar detector user cannot beat.

There is a misconception here that I/O is beatable which is partly true depending on distance and experience of the radar operator. When done properly, you will never beat it.

[justin81]

I recently emailed an MPH rep asking a legitimate question about POP. Never got a response. Are they forbidden from discussing POP with the public at large?

[swarga]

When done properly, no one can beat I/O. This is the only radar threat that I know of to this date that a radar detector user cannot beat.

There is a misconception here that I/O is beatable which is partly true depending on distance and experience of the radar operator. When done properly, you will never beat it.

MPH appears to be spreading many such misconceptions... And the suckers in Nevada fell for it.

If what you're saying is correct, cops don't need POP in order to bag speeders, even smart ones with RADAR detectors. And yet POP made the difference and got the contract awarded to MPH.

[justin81]

MPH appears to be spreading many such misconceptions... And the suckers in Nevada fell for it.

If what you're saying is correct, cops don't need POP in order to bag speeders, even smart ones with RADAR detectors. And yet POP made the difference and got the contract awarded to MPH.

Check out this report from MPH Industries...

http://www.mphindustries.com/pdfs/Ra...uzzbusters.pdf

It basically says that IO is useless.

[Stealth Stalker]

A knowledgeable police officer (one who actually understands POP and radar in general) views POP in the same way we view "parking sensors". It may be made for one purpose, but we have no problem using it for the other purpose. A cop would be naive to believe a "parking sensor" story. And we would be naive to believe that cops don't use POP to issue tickets.

[9500ier]

MPH appears to be spreading many such misconceptions... And the suckers in Nevada fell for it.

If what you're saying is correct, cops don't need POP in order to bag speeders, even smart ones with RADAR detectors. And yet POP made the difference and got the contract awarded to MPH.

Check out this report from MPH Industries...

http://www.mphindustries.com/pdfs/Ra...uzzbusters.pdf

It basically says that IO is useless.

BS flag right here:

"All three detectors picked up standard radars (X, K, and Ka-bands) at the
eleven mile distance."

[proudNMAmember]

LOL Alpinestars, I like listening to that too.