• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should radar detectors be legal (as in the USA) or illegal (as in Canada)?

Should radar detectors be legal (as in the USA) or illegal (as in Canada)?

  • Legal. The USA's got it right. Legal radar detectors are a blow for freedom.

    Votes: 21 75.0%

  • Illegal. Canada's got it right. Radar detectors help law breakers.

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • Total voters
    28
Luna Tick

Luna Tick

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
2,148
Reaction score
867
Location
Nebraska
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Should radar detectors be legal (as in the USA) or illegal (as in Canada)?
 
They should be legal.
 
I should clarify. They're illegal in some provinces in Canada, but not all.
 
Luna Tick said:
I should clarify. They're illegal in some provinces in Canada, but not all.
Click to expand...
They're illegal in some states in the US but not all. Why don't you find out before posting, and then posting a poll that is against radar detectors in each choice.
 
Luna Tick said:
I should clarify. They're illegal in some provinces in Canada, but not all.
Click to expand...

Similarly, they're illegal in certain states. They should be illegal. There is not a single purpose for them other than to help someone break the law.

One way to avoid this discussion completely is my project I'm working on for self-driving automobiles. Just for those who like to speed to get to their destination faster, note that a system of self-driving automobiles would allow us to use speeds greater than current speed limits in many areas and would prevent traffic jams.

Just as a little math to support my statement, let's suppose your job is on the weekdays and my system saves you 5 minutes getting to work. Then you'll save 52,000 minutes over the course of your standard 20 year career. Furthermore, when you are in the car you can do what you want (eat, sleep, read, etc.), so you're actually saving more.
 
Last edited:
Radar and speed camera (GPS) detectors are legal in the UK. The logic is that speed cameras are set up in places with an increased risk of speed related incidents, so the sites are freely advertised in order to reduce speeds, not catch speeders per se.
Personally I reckon the radar detectors are a waste of money, since if you can detect the radar, it's detected you, and you don't have time to slow down.
 
American said:
They're illegal in some states in the US but not all. Why don't you find out before posting, and then posting a poll that is against radar detectors in each choice.
Click to expand...

You need to re-read. The first choice is pro radar detector, calling them a blow for freedom.

Mathematician said:
Similarly, they're illegal in certain states. They should be illegal. There is not a single purpose for them other than to help someone break the law.

One way to avoid this discussion completely is my project I'm working on for self-driving automobiles. Just for those who like to speed to get to their destination faster, note that a system of self-driving automobiles would allow us to use speeds greater than current speed limits in many areas and would prevent traffic jams.

Just as a little math to support my statement, let's suppose your job is on the weekdays and my system saves you 5 minutes getting to work. Then you'll save 52,000 minutes over the course of your standard 20 year career. Furthermore, when you are in the car you can do what you want (eat, sleep, read, etc.), so you're actually saving more.
Click to expand...

I remember reading an article about computer-driven cars. There are big tech hurdles before it's feasible. One existing technology to prevent speeding is cruise control. It's really easy to accidentally speed, especially on long trips where you can forget to pay attention to your speed. With cruise control, you can just put in what speed you want to go and it keeps it that way.
 
Last edited:
Manc Skipper said:
Radar and speed camera (GPS) detectors are legal in the UK. The logic is that speed cameras are set up in places with an increased risk of speed related incidents, so the sites are freely advertised in order to reduce speeds, not catch speeders per se.
Personally I reckon the radar detectors are a waste of money, since if you can detect the radar, it's detected you, and you don't have time to slow down.
Click to expand...

With Lidar the chances of detecting it before it has caught you is small, but in the case of radar, provided it is not instant on, and being used on a low traffic area, the ability of the detector to catch the X or K band radar is very good before it gets you
 
Luna Tick said:
I remember reading an article about computer-driven cars. There are big tech hurdles before it's feasible. One existing technology to prevent speeding is cruise control. It's really easy to accidentally speed, especially on long trips where you can forget to pay attention to your speed. With cruise control, you can just put in what speed you want to go and it keeps it that way.
Click to expand...

The tech hurdles aren't as challenging as you might think. A missing feature from cruise control which we're looking for is to prevent intentional speeding. I can confidently say that with respect to the set of people who buy radar detectors, the number of people who buy them to prevent accidentally speeding is miniscule. Furthermore, cruise is practically only useful for roads where your expected speed rarely changes, e.g. highways. I especially like some of the benefits of an auto-drive system which are not immediately obvious. It's funny to think of what a getaway car would be like then.
 
Since I don't know anyone who even owns one, I'm finding it difficult to care. Over all, I believe people should have the right to legally own something that has been lawfully manufactured.
 
Luna Tick said:
Should radar detectors be legal (as in the USA) or illegal (as in Canada)?
Click to expand...

They should be perfectly legal.If LEOs can use radar guns, phone taps and what ever else then the rest of the population should be allowed to use what ever counter and detection measures they wish.
 
I couldn't care less whether they're legal or not. I can speed just fine without one, and since LIDAR is becoming more popular, the detectors are becoming more and more useless.
 
Luna Tick said:
I remember reading an article about computer-driven cars. There are big tech hurdles before it's feasible.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's a lot closer than you think. Google already has a fleet of computer-driven cars that have logged several million miles on California public roads with pretty much no problems.

The psychological hurdles are going to be a much bigger problem for that kind of thing taking off.
 
I honestly do not care.
I wasn't given the nickname 'Leadfoot' for nothing ~LoL~
I have an issue about speeding, I have gotten more than my fair share of speeding tickets, but I'm doing better (about not getting any), as I get older *ha*
I try to watch my speed more often, the tickets do get costly.
Around where I live, if there is a copper up ahead, the oncoming traffic usually flashes their lights, to let those that are headed that way- know that there is a police man up there!
 
If the primary concern of law enforcement is "public safety", and not revenue generation, then radar detectors should be illegal.
I think that the "law" can communicate better; also the "law" can use their head better ....nothing wrong with going 100 mph on a deserted thruway at 2 in the morn,IMO.... I'm sure that the Germans do this without a problem...
 
They should be legal.
 
earthworm said:
If the primary concern of law enforcement is "public safety", and not revenue generation, then radar detectors should be illegal.
I think that the "law" can communicate better; also the "law" can use their head better ....nothing wrong with going 100 mph on a deserted thruway at 2 in the morn,IMO.... I'm sure that the Germans do this without a problem...
Click to expand...

All of this will be solved when the public is willing to adopt strictly using auto-drive: safety, speeds variable with traffic a factor, no speeding tickets, cops can put themselves to better use.
 
Maybe we just need more sensible traffic laws, and to stop fining people for driving at a comfortable and safe speed. Reckless drivers absolutely should be stopped, but going fast does not always entail reckless. Traffic tickets exist almost entirely as a source of revenue for police precincts. How about we actually fund our law enforcement, so they don't have to harass us in order to stay employed? And let's stop with all the stupid drug war crap, which also fuels the behavior of pulling people over all the time. Yes, a lot of it is in order to find a reason to search your car for drugs.

So really, I don't care about the radar stuff... I'd rather fix the root problem than get into an arms race with police.
 
jamesrage said:
They should be perfectly legal.If LEOs can use radar guns, phone taps and what ever else then the rest of the population should be allowed to use what ever counter and detection measures they wish.
Click to expand...

aye... that's how i see it too.
 
Where I live (150,000) the police have some of those mobile radar units. You know, those clunky-boxy things with the big amber/red digital readout. Trouble is, these units also have a camera which snaps a pic of your plate/tag if the readout turns red. Your ticket arrives in the mail (with pic). Have a nice day.
 
Radar detectors are not Legal Virginia, Washington DC. and on military bases.

Many police are using Lazar and laser jammers are legal in most U.S. states, but laws vary, so before you buy one check with local Police and State Highway Patrol, or D.P.S. before you turn on a jammer.
 
Last edited:
Tashah said:
Where I live (150,000) the police have some of those mobile radar units. You know, those clunky-boxy things with the big amber/red digital readout. Trouble is, these units also have a camera which snaps a pic of your plate/tag if the readout turns red. Your ticket arrives in the mail (with pic). Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

It boggles my mind how this doesn't violate a person's right to confront their accuser. How do you impeach the credibility of something so far removed from a person? I've gotten hit by traffic cameras before. By the time I got the ticket in the mail, a month had passed. I had absolutely no idea if I had been speeding or not. I had no practical and honest means to contest the charge against me. I had no idea if the camera was accurate, nor even if the picture was real. When you're pulled over by a cop, at least there's a person there accusing you of a crime. And when you get to court, the cop is there to testify. The only way to cross-examine an unmanned camera is for the people who built and maintain it would have to be there when you went to court. Has that ever happened?
 
Paschendale said:
It boggles my mind how this doesn't violate a person's right to confront their accuser. How do you impeach the credibility of something so far removed from a person? I've gotten hit by traffic cameras before. By the time I got the ticket in the mail, a month had passed. I had absolutely no idea if I had been speeding or not. I had no practical and honest means to contest the charge against me. I had no idea if the camera was accurate, nor even if the picture was real. When you're pulled over by a cop, at least there's a person there accusing you of a crime. And when you get to court, the cop is there to testify. The only way to cross-examine an unmanned camera is for the people who built and maintain it would have to be there when you went to court. Has that ever happened?
Click to expand...

Quite simply your right to confront your accuser is violated with photo radar. Photo radar also violates the law that states that only a police officer may write a traffic citation. Instead, an automaton does it. Photo radar also assumes the owner of the car was driving. Someone else could borrow or steal your car and get you tickets. It also violates your privacy rights. It documents where and when and with whom you're traveling in a car. Imagine a woman living with a violent husband gets a photo radar ticket in the mail showing she was driving in a car with another man.

In short, with photo radar, law enforcement is breaking the law in order to enforce the law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom