Validity Of Radar Speeding Tickets Gets Challenged

I have no problem with radar because my Valentine 1 can sniff it out a mile away. Laser is the bane of my existence. It is so hard to detect and when you finally do get a detection, it is usually too late (and your car is being painted with LIDAR).

I wish somebody would sue saying police lasers could be endangering motorists' eyes.

I've found my V1 works decently for LIDAR when mounted higher in the w/s. Incidentally, and this opens a whole other can of worms, my V1 (with all the latest software, I keep up on this!) cannot tell the difference between police K-band and the annoying-as-hell blind-spot-monitoring devices such as on the new E-class. My neighbor is driving a new E350 with that option, left just in front of me this morning and his car kept making the V1 go berserk- it was saying one or two K-band signals, and strong ones! Most police in town here use Ka, but nearby towns use K-band routinely. Additionally, laser-cruise control and the pre-collision warning systems like on Volvo S80s set off the laser alert at full-tilt, scares the bejesus out of me every time!

I don't know what's scarier, police writing bogus tickets or tracking devices in cars for the normal public.......

There is too much conflicting evidence to give this kid a ticket, the Police are famous for road tax, or I mean speeding tickets, may have something to do with the economy, fund raising.

For the most part, everyone exceeds the speed limit. 65 limit, people average 75-80, I've never seen anyone pulled over unless they are driving like idiots, or their car is painted, "Hi I'm a criminal, pull-me over".

Though I've seen too many times, while driving 75-80mph, cars blowing by me at triple digits, endangering the lives of me and the other people on the road. When is enough enough?

Anyone on this board know someone who was killed by an aggressive driver? I do....That's when I wish there was a cop on the median and there wasn't a retard to warn him of his presence so he can slow down and continue his rampage afterwards.

While there is no doubt Mario Andretti can handle a car, safely, at triple digit speeds, our laws are not setup to be partial to some, but fair to all.

If 95% of the drivers out there are responsible(pushing it) at 100mph, great, so you propose we should not punish them, in-turn, allow 5 million maniacs do whatever they want on the road?

Don't like that logic at all.

Or maybe, we should ONLY allow Porsche's etc. to drive over 100mph? How would you setup these types of laws that are selective based on the person's driving ability and vehicle's capabilities?

No matter what you say, 100mph on 99% of the roads in America is reckless and dangerous. There is no excuse for it. There are even speed limits on 1/4 of the Autobahn, not including the limits when it rains/snows, construction etc. and that is arguably one of the best maintained/designed road-network in the world. Not to mention, the driver's education in Germany is light years ahead of that in America.

While there is no known correlation between unrestricted speed limit and accident rates, there is, obviously, a directly correlation between survivability and the increased speeds.

You can survive a car crash at 65mph, you will not at 100mph. It's just physics, stopping distances increase exponentially above 60mph.

On your comment about EPA guidelines, the EPA added to it's normal battery of tests(city/highway)what's known as the US06 and the vehicles doesn't stay at 75+ mph for more than a minute total. Average speed on this new "High Speed" test is still 48mph. They also added, rightfully so, a run with Air Conditioning on and a cold-environment simulation.

i plan on going to Drexel university for my engineering degree btw.

this satellite tracking thing doesnt seem like a bad idea actually, especially if someone does it to their own car. i definitely need to learn more about this.

Which engineering discipline, or are you undecided?