Talk:Radar detector

message: the topic is Radar detectors, not LIDAR speed detection methods, and not Radar and LIDAR jammers.
:That's why they are just briefly touched as relevant technologies. --Shaddack 18:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a partial list of countries and areas where radar detectors are illegal. Please expand if you know more.--Jusjih 14:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If the subject mater is large enough to warrant its own article then maybe some one should be created out of the jammers/scramblers. The only other WP mention that I can find is at the very bottom of Radar jamming and deception. We could elaborate their as well.?.R00m c 06:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Many thanks-- I remembered the CT situation from years ago.  Based on your source, I changed the US entry to "39 of the 50 states" and DC.  Even if the source isn't dead on, it's closer that what we had. -- Mwanner | Talk 23:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome! Cheers --AbsolutDan (talk) 00:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled comments

message: This article states that RADAR Detectors are illegal in 39 of the 50 states and D.C. This contradicts many things I have read (Example: http://www.afn.org/~afn09444/scanlaws/radar4.html) and my commonly held belief that RADAR detectors are only illegal in D.C. and Virginia. For example, when driving through Virginia, there are large signs proclaiming that RADAR detector use is illegal.
previous post not signed, new post starts here:
Somebody recently edited the legality section for Bulgaria and Iceland, changing the status from legal to illegal. Can somebody confirm or deny this is correct?
89.36.245.53 (talk) 13:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: RADAR detector laws

message: http://www.valentine1.com/lab/Previously3.asp
Somebody who knows more about it should add to this. My old detector had it and I have received the following voice messages:
"Danger - Emergency Vehicle Approaching" (ambulance - but I have heard that it MAY have been picking up the infrared they use to change light signals)
"Danger - Train Approaching" 
"Toll booth ahead" 
"Construction area ahead"
-- RevRagnarok Talk Contrib Reverts 14:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Safety Radar 

message: There is a proposed ban on radar detectors in the State of Florida. The bill was introduced on 2/26/2007 by Florida senator Steve Oelrich (a former sheriff). Link to bill status at the Florida Senate. Joneboi 03:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the link, it died in committee.  Removing.  Caeculus  talk  09:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Ban in Florida

message: "This resulted in a wave of detector manufacturers changing their local oscillator frequency. Today, practically every radar detector on the market is immune to the VG-2 Interceptor"
LOL  71.86.66.86 07:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   This part is funny: 

message: Why is there a "worldwide view" tag at the top of this page, but then no discussion about why it is there? The article primarily deals with the US and Canada because, as can be seen from the list, radar detectors are illegal just about anywhere else. I don't get you people sometimes. If you're going to insert a tag, explain why you are doing it. Otherwise there is absolutely no point in doing so. Primium mobile 23:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are lots of places other than the US where they are legal.  If you look at the comments in the revision that inserted this tag, they state: "first section uses phrases such as "highly illegal" and "FCC" as if they were global concepts".    Socrates2008 02:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And it doesn't say that now. So why is the tag still there? In addition, show me one English-speaking country on that list where they are legal. This is the English Wikipedia. Primium mobile 15:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, not relevant anymore Socrates2008 21:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Sorry about getting a little hot there. Sometimes stupid things annoy me. Primium mobile 06:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tag at the top of the page

message: This article is about RADAR, so not sure why so much info about LIDAR is creaping in... 06:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LIDAR

message: Truly comical phrases stemming from ignorance? Total inability to decipher and translate legalese? I’m not sure what exactly but it’s becoming quite funny.
“although not legal to own, but was technically illegal to use under a 1949 wireless act until 1998, due to legal loophole causing them to be legalized suddenly”
Let’s parse this—though not legal to own, technically illegal to use, due to…legal loophole when they are suddenly legalized…
For crying out loud, no wonder Wikipedia is a joke. 72.0.175.144 (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Laughable

message: I use my radar detector because sometimes when I am motoring on highways, I just cruise along Fahrvergnuegening. 
Of course while I am Fahrvergnuegening, I occasionally look down at my speedomoter. But I am grateful when my radar detector reminds me that I should check my speed.
I don't use my radar detector to usurp authority of law enforcement. I think the reason radar detectors are legal in so many jurisdictions is because they are seen as tools to remind motorists to control their speed.
Radar detectors should be legal globally.
The One and Only Worldwise Dave Shaver 03:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silly laws! 

message: Check here the radar frequencies in European countries:
http://www.detect.ro
~~radar_detect~~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Detect radar (talk • contribs) 09:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radar frequencies in European countries 

message: Check here the radar frequencies in European countries:
http://www.detect.ro
Detect radar (talk) 09:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radar frequencies in European countries 

message: According to the article: "It is illegal in many countries to sell or possess any products that actively transmit radar signals intended to jam radar equipment.[3] Actively transmitting on an FCC licensed frequency without a license is a violation of FCC regulations and a felony in the USA."
I don't believe this is true. According to http://www.guysoflidar.com/usa-radar-jammer-laws.html, the penalty for having/using a Radar Jammer is the same as the General Penalty specified under 47 U.S.C. 501 (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf), which is specified as a $10,000 fine or 1 year of imprisionment (or both) unless the perpetrator has committed the same crime before. This would imply that the first offense would be a misdemeanor, since the prison term is limited to 1 year or less. 
--71.111.123.218 (talk) 06:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A felony includes crimes with fines over $1,000. PvsKllKsVp (talk) 23:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Felony? 

message: This article fails to explain the question that led me to read it in the first place.  If a police officer has pointed a Radar gun at my car, doesn't that use electromagnetic radiation, which travels at light speed (or nearly so, given Earth's gravity).  So then the detector makes a sound, which must travel (at merely the speed of sound) to my ears, which must then transmit the nerve impulse to my brain, which must then react (1/10th of a second minimum), which must then send a nerve impulse to my foot, which must then begin pressing on the brake, which then takes time to actually slow my car down.
Meanwhile, the cop's original lightspeed signal has long since returned to him, registered my speed as being too high, and logged it as a data object which can be used in court.  The fact that I slowed down after being caught isn't going to impress the cop, after all.  So how exactly do radar detectors actually help anyone not get caught?  Do they intercept reflected radar emissions from the cop radaring a car *ahead* of you in traffic?  I'm sure that would be useful, but doesn't that mean you're out of luck if you're the first person the cop happens to radar as he comes on duty?
This puzzles me.  I feel like there's something obvious I should be getting.  -Kasreyn (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Radar detectors are most effective against radar guns in constant-on mode... when the police officer operating a radar gun leaves it on whether he is actively targeting a car or not.  In instant-on  or quick trigger modes, where an officer keeps the gun off until he has a target, then yes, the detector will be a lot less effective.  In these situations, the best hope is that a car ahead of you is targeted when the gun is in range of your detector. --Aka042 (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this work? 

message: Under Section 3368(c2) of Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes (better known as the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code), "...electronic devices such as radio-microwave devices (commonly referred to as electronic speed meters or radar) may be used only by members of the Pennsylvania State Police."  Local police are prohibited from using radar for speed enforcement, although they are unofficially permitted to use it for non-enforcement purposes such as speed display signs, which are used in an attempt to slow traffic but cannot be used to issue citations.  The use of radar detectors in the Commonwealth is legal, but rarely encountered, and when these devices are used, they are usually only used on Interstate highways.  Not all members of the PSP use radar, but instead, use VASCAR or certified speedometers, which must be used to pace a driver for at least . Bill S. (talk) 19:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pennsylvania restricts radar usage to state police only 

message: Could the author do me a favor and correct cite # 19.  My site, which the author obviously collected a good portion of his information from, was obviously used and, while I think he meant to include a proper link to me, somewhere along the way he forgot just how he meant to do that and instead incorrectly attributed the Communications Act of 1934 as being a legit excuse for radar detector use, stating that CA-1934 ALLOWS THE USE of them.  That's not actually stated anywhere in the radar detector portion of my web site.
My site covers two subjects:  laws regarding 1) scanner use and 2) radar detector use.  Monitoring of (most) frequencies using mobile...SCANNERS...is protected by CA-1934; but not the use of radar detectors.  That being said, regardless of what federal laws may state, most hams are already familliar with the fact that States often try to encroach upon the scanning laws territory and often make laws which tend to conflict, causing the end user some high degree of difficulty and expense.  It's unfortunate, yes.
I think I know where the author was going, though; he just got lost.  :)  There's a lot to update and you can lose your train of thought easily.  Being a web page author, I know how that goes, myself.  :)
That being said, I would REALLY appreciate a more highly recognizeable link back to us, though. A hidden "ref" cite (watering my link down to a "[19]") seemed kinda excruitiatingly/painfully unfair.  ...Especially if a good portion of the US laws info was indeed gleaned from there.  That would be nice.
Also, people should be aware...  The laws aren't updated every day, or every week, or every month.  If you see that the "Last Updated" for any particular law is a couple years old or so, it doesn't mean that it's outdated or old, or that I'm not doing my work keeping the pages updated.  It just means that the statutory updates haven't been *published* yet.  (Normally, they're published in "supplementes" about every two years.)  I DO check these laws to make sure that the verbiage is always current, though.
Thanks!
Todd Sherman, Owner/Webmaster
Mobile Scanner & RADAR-Detector Laws In The U.S.
http://www.afn.org/~afn09444/scanlaws  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormspottertodd (talk • contribs) 21:43, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect cite information in article... 

message: I heard that the Radar detectors are legal in all of Mexico, what about China? Are there some provinces where radar detectors/jammers are illegal. In the Philippines, only a few people have heard of that gadget.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.147.156.50 (talk) 03:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  China (incl Hong Kong, Macau), Mexico, Philippines, South Africa, etc. 

message: The table in the Legality section does not differentiate between detectors and jammers.  It's impossible to tell whether the info for each country is talking about detectors or jammers. Unrequestedsillything (talk) 04:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detector VS. Jammer