20 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRadar/Laser jammer install
Leading reported evidence
Use police have about a 3ft target area at 1000ft
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
Most laser devices used my police have about a 3ft target area at 1000ft.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
(b) A person, other than a law enforcement officer in the discharge of the officer's official duties, may not use, attempt to use, install, operate, or attempt to operate a radar interference device in a motor vehicle operated by the person.
Leading evidence: 'Use police have about a 3ft target area at 1000ft' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'anything is out of the norm' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Use install, operate, or attempt' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause
Once they get a reading, there will be little reason to suspect anything is out of the norm.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
(b) A person, other than a law enforcement officer in the discharge of the officer's official duties, may not use, attempt to use, install, operate, or attempt to operate a radar interference device in a motor vehicle operated by the person.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
That will give you plenty of info about how to travel safely in areas that use laser for speed traps.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Any reason not to just use like a Valentine One, are these really that superior?
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Use install, operate, or attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
(b) A person, other than a law enforcement officer in the discharge of the officer's official duties, may not use, attempt to use, install, operate, or attempt to operate a radar interference device in a motor vehicle operated by the person.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
20 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T005001Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Just a few pics of my new radar/laser jammer install.Bel-tronics radar detector,Laser Interceptor laser jammers,and a Kenwood backup camera,also a Kuda iphone mount in matching OEM leather,radar readout display mounted below kenwood unit and checkout the radar and laser switches custom mounted in ashtray....enjoy...thanks goes out to Eddie and Mat of Detailing Dynamics,Mineola,New York.
Huh? Federal law prohibits Radar Jammers, but not Radar detectors or Laser Jammers.
http://www.guysoflidar.com/usa-laser-jammer-laws.html
http://www.afn.org/~afn09444/scanlaws/radar4.html
+1 on moving the Laser jammers closer to the plates. Mine are built into the license plate frames.
all legal here in new york,installed at detailing dynamics ,mineola ny,lasers are positioned equal from plate and headlamps,witch are also targets for the laser,cops are pretty savvy around here,looked into this setup pretty closely before pulling the trigger,supposed to be the best ,we will see!
Effective Sept. 01, 2011
Sec. 547.616. RADAR INTERFERENCE DEVICES; OFFENSE.
(a) In this section, "radar interference device" means a device, a mechanism, an instrument, or equipment that is designed, manufactured, used, or intended to be used to interfere with, scramble, disrupt, or otherwise cause to malfunction a radar or laser device used to measure the speed of a motor vehicle by a law enforcement agency of this state or a political subdivision of this state, including a "radar jamming device," "jammer," "scrambler," or "diffuser." The term does not include a ham radio, band radio, or similar electronic device.
(b) A person, other than a law enforcement officer in the discharge of the officer's official duties, may not use, attempt to use, install, operate, or attempt to operate a radar interference device in a motor vehicle operated by the person.
(c) A person may not purchase, sell, or offer for sale a radar interference device to be used in a manner described by Subsection (b).
(d) A person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this subsection is a Class C misdemeanor.
Hmmm? Looks like your device fits within this law in our state. I would be careful with it. Many states now have a similar law.
Also, even if its not a STATE law you can have a CITY ordinance that prohibits it. Just be careful. Seems kind of strange to go to all this trouble of the install anyway. Who are you? Bandit One?
Most laser devices used my police have about a 3ft target area at 1000ft. Most laser-tag spots are more like 300-500 ft. Thus, the laser light that hits the car is about 1-2 ft. On our 996 cars, that is close to covering the headlights and license plate. A Rennline (or other brand) front, Tow-Hook license plate holder which get it closer to the headlight and it can be angled slightly on the ball joint.
LI = very effective
BTW: LI has a switch convert to "Parking Assist." While this does work well, you could still have a hard time convincing an officer that did not get a speed reading from your car. It is better to slow down, turn off the LI device and make sure the officer gets you Speed-Limit speed reading. Once they get a reading, there will be little reason to suspect anything is out of the norm. The lasers take 1-2 seconds to get a "lock" and a variety of things can slow it down to where a small delay before getting the speed would not be considered abnormal.
Also, this a good reason to program the LI to start in OFF position and have a manual switch to turn it ON. Thus, no guest driver, wife etc. will not accidentally blast by an officer and not let them get a reading, which of course could attract their attention.
Keep in mind that laser does work from the rear. So you should cover the rear license plate if you want full protection.
I suggest looking at YouTube videos to see how the laser targeting systems work. That will give you plenty of info about how to travel safely in areas that use laser for speed traps.
Lastly, laser does require line-of-sight to work. If you keep your eyes on the road, you will usually be able to see laser traps. Laser tickets are so easy to hand out, the officers typically do not have to be too sneaky to "make their quotas." However, I have seen motorcycle cops hiding behind walls and other objects with barely the laser gun and head poking out.
I too have the laser jammer and frankly the 1-2 seconds you have to react to the alarm, hit the jammer switch and slow down make it pretty tough to avoid being locked onto without giving away that you have the device. I was just tagged by laser at 55 in a 35 for a $325 ticket.
I don't understand your post. Do you drive your car 55 mph on the highway? I'm not a reckless driver but I like to drive fast when the conditions permit (i.e., clear day, no traffic, etc). Our cars are perfectly safe going 90 mph on an open highway. Unfortunately, no judge would see it that way. The majority of speeding tickets are merely another form of tax. I'm shocked any Porsche owner that bought his car to drive would adopt your tone.
What do you do when/if you drive fast? Simply pray there are no cops? Ridiculous.
I'm just curious if the laser jammers truly work. Most of the articles I've read say NO
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
