Busted with laser? Read on !!

This was received by the NMA office but I don't know precisely what day it was aired. If you were busted by a bear using one of these guns, you may want to investigate the situation a bit further. " BBC program "Inside Out" tonight will air results of tests of one of the most popular laser speed detection guns used by police forces in the US and UK. In the program, a pair of American specification LTI 20-20 guns, manufactured by Laser Technology Inc. of Colorado, point at the same moving vehicle but record substantially different speeds. The source of the error is well-known. When the aiming point of the laser gun, which is designed to be hand-held, moves or "slips" across the target vehicle, an extra distance is either added to or subtracted from the speed calculation. A tiny movement can add up to a substantial difference. Engineering Professor John Brignell describes the amount of motion needed to cause a slip error at a distance of 500 meters: "Very roughly, without doing any calculations, we are talking about the camera moving about the thickness of a human hair." The hosts of the BBC program were able to clock a stationary car at 6 MPH. In tests of a moving vehicle, the laser gun produced erroneous readings almost a third of the time, displaying speeds that were off by as much as 26 MPH. The devices can be upgraded and used as mobile speed cameras, particularly in the UK where an estimated five million drivers have been convicted based on laser speed readings over the past five years. "I am 100 percent certain that these devices are not suitable for gathering legal evidence of vehicle speeds," said Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign. "They make mistakes and the BBC film proves it. Millions of drivers will be entitled to refunds, licence points removed and in some cases a large amount of compensation." I am trying to do a Google search to locate this tape on the BBC. If I am successful, I will post the link. An NMA activist friend is considering how to legally document this information to present as a defense. I am as interested as anyone, and will stay on top of it. We will be back, to quote Ahnald. http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/sout...d-cameras.shtml http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/224.asp http://www.theagitator.com/archives/019495.php And if you get busted, check here: http://primarylaw.com/primarylaw/fo...ckets/speeding/ See you later. Happy motoring.

Thanks! I haven't been lased, but it's good to know there is some ammunition to fight back with, should the occassion arise.

This isn't really new information, when lidar was first introduced it had to be tripod mounted because of this issue. While mounted it still had to be pointed successfully at a license plate which is a moving target.

Haven't there been attempts to refute radar and laser for years? Do the courts really entertain these concepts in practice? I find it hard to believe that one would be able to present these findings, which will naturally be challenged by the policy department and manufacturer, and get a court to place much weight on them. Not that I wouldn't try :-D! Also, doesn't the policy department need to "cerfity" the accuracy before placing them in service? I am very interested in understanding how we could overcome the overwhelming hurdle of disproving those "givens."

Laser was similarly tested in New Jersey when they first came out, and declared not reliable and unconstitutional to issue speeding tickets using them. That ruling was quietly over turned and now they're in use all over. The only side "benefit" to the cops using laser is they have to be dead on your vehicle which makes them easier to spot (as long as they don't pop you immediately). There are also proven countermeasures, which I should probably investigate.