Colorado bans radar jammers

william lynch > wrote in
m:

> Sherman L. Cahal wrote:
>
>> Howard Ford wrote:
>>
wrote:
>>>
>>>>I suppose you also think rearview mirrors should be banned. After all,
>>>>we use them to see if police cars are behind us when driving - and
>>>>avoid tickets that way.
>>>
>>>No, because rear view mirrors actually have a legitimate use, to view
>>>traffic in behind you.
>>>
>>>There aren't too many legitimate uses of radar detectors, if any. All
>>>they do is help people scout out the road so they don't get caught
>>>breaking the law.
>>
>> What "law" is this? Underposting speed limits for "safety" reasons
>> because some insurance safety institute says anything over 55 MPH is
>> too "dangerous"? Or because some politican is a crook and won't stand
>> up for what's right? The government has been lying to us for years, and
>> this lie that lower speed limits on high speed highwys are far safer is
>> stupid.
>
> So you've now officially joined the ranks of those who claim
> that science is just a bunch of hooey? Or do you just like
> the idea of giving Osama and his family even more money
> simply out of increased gas consumption?
>

Speed limits in the US are not set by any "scientific" method.

85th percentile would be a scientific method.But US speed limits are not
set that way.
There's a reference book that says "this type of road gets this speed
limit,regardless of circumstances".

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"C.H." > wrote in
news
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 12:18:05 -0700, wrote:
>
>> I suppose you also think rearview mirrors should be banned. After
>> all, we use them to see if police cars are behind us when driving -
>> and avoid tickets that way.
>
> Radar Jammers, which transmit on their own, are already illegal. They
> are unlicensed radio transmitters and as such are subject to a hefty
> fine.

FEDERAL law,which States are not empowered to enforce.
The chances of you getting caught by the Feds are slim to none.

> The 'bending' devices dont work anyway, so no great damage done.
>
> The article does not mention, that radar detectors are going to be
> illegal.
>
> Chris
>

Many states also have laws concerning interfering with police enforcement
that cover jammers,both radar and laser.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:55:51 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

> "C.H." > wrote in
> news >
>> Radar Jammers, which transmit on their own, are already illegal. They
>> are unlicensed radio transmitters and as such are subject to a hefty
>> fine.
>
> FEDERAL law,which States are not empowered to enforce. The chances of you
> getting caught by the Feds are slim to none.

That doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and dangerous to use
unlicensed and often underengineered hacked-together radar transmitters
and that it makes sense to enforce the already existing federal law.

Chris

"C.H." > wrote in
news
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:55:51 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:
>
>> "C.H." > wrote in
>> news >>
>>> Radar Jammers, which transmit on their own, are already illegal.
>>> They are unlicensed radio transmitters and as such are subject to a
>>> hefty fine.
>>
>> FEDERAL law,which States are not empowered to enforce. The chances of
>> you getting caught by the Feds are slim to none.
>
> That doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and dangerous

Dangerous? How's that? You don't know much about radar jammers.
The Gunn oscillators are common commercial items.They're everywhere;door
openers in most stores,burglar alarms.

> to use
> unlicensed and often underengineered hacked-together radar
> transmitters and that it makes sense to enforce the already existing
> federal law.
>
> Chris
>

Only the FCC has the authority to enforce Federal communications laws.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Howard Ford" > wrote in
oups.com:

> Sherman L. Cahal wrote:
>> Your point being?
>
> I'll admit, I overlooked that last sentence.
>
> However, on further review, it doesn't matter what method of
> determining the speed limit is--it's irrelevant to this.
>
> Regardless if the speed limit was created by engineers or a group of
> diseased, fly-infested bonobos with typewriters, if the state posts and
> enforces that limit, then it's LAW. Just because you disagree with it,
> or can drive faster safely, or whatever doesn't give you carte blanche
> to violate it, nor does it give you a right to own devices that
> interfere with enforcement of that law or that aid and assist you in
> violating that law.
>

If widespread disobedience of the 1973 55 mph NMSL had not occurred,we
still would be stuck with it.
The PEOPLE voted on that one with their right foot-on the accelerator
pedal.

Perhaps you are one of those drones who follow every rule to the letter?
It sounds like it.Although I suspect you exceed the SL,too,if only by 5mph
over.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 04:48:38 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

> "C.H." > wrote in
> news >
>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:55:51 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:
>>
>>> "C.H." > wrote in
>>> news >>>
>>>> Radar Jammers, which transmit on their own, are already illegal. They
>>>> are unlicensed radio transmitters and as such are subject to a hefty
>>>> fine.
>>>
>>> FEDERAL law,which States are not empowered to enforce. The chances of
>>> you getting caught by the Feds are slim to none.
>>
>> That doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and dangerous
>
> Dangerous? How's that? You don't know much about radar jammers.

Unfortunately I do know quite a few things about illegal transmitters. And
I know my life as a pilot depends on radio communication and that idiots,
whose hacked homebuilt transmitters' harmonics interrupt or garble this
radio communication are endangering my life and other people's life too.

Oh, and before I forget: One of the lives they endanger may be yours.
Imagine you sit comfortably in a Boeing 737 approaching SFO and a plane
approaching the parallel runway gets their runway assignment wrong because
half a dozen other Jim Janiks had to fool some trooper on nearby 101...

I don't mind speeding and I do mind low speed limits, but illegal radar
jammers are NOT the way to go.

> The Gunn oscillators are common commercial items.They're
> everywhere;door openers in most stores,burglar alarms.

All these devices are build according to FCC regulations. Not so these
illegal hacked together devices. As they are illegal their manufacturers
don't

>> to use unlicensed and often underengineered hacked-together radar
>> transmitters and that it makes sense to enforce the already existing
>> federal law.
>>
> Only the FCC has the authority to enforce Federal communications laws.

One more reason to find another way to take away these 'jammers'.

Btw, newsflash: They don't work anyway.

Chris

In article .com>,
Mike Tantillo > wrote:

>Massachusetts has quirky signage (in many ways...). You are in a 40
>MPH zone. You see a curve warning sign with a "speed limit 25" sign
>underneath. Thats the advisory speed. Once you clear that curve, you
>are free to resume 40 MPH....despite the fact that there is no
>additional 40 MPH sign at the end of the curve "speed zone".

These are intended to be regulatory speed limits and there is supposed
to be a sign after the curve showing the new speed limit. Curve
advisory speeds are almost nonexistent on roads with posted speed
limits because until the 1990s state policy was to use regulatory
speed limits at curves and other hazards.

--
John Carr )

"C.H." > wrote in
news
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 04:48:38 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:
>
>> "C.H." > wrote in
>> news >>
>>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:55:51 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:
>>>
>>>> "C.H." > wrote in
>>>> news >>>>
>>>>> Radar Jammers, which transmit on their own, are already illegal.
>>>>> They are unlicensed radio transmitters and as such are subject to
>>>>> a hefty fine.
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL law,which States are not empowered to enforce. The chances
>>>> of you getting caught by the Feds are slim to none.
>>>
>>> That doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and dangerous
>>
>> Dangerous? How's that? You don't know much about radar jammers.
>
> Unfortunately I do know quite a few things about illegal transmitters.
> And I know my life as a pilot depends on radio communication and that
> idiots, whose hacked homebuilt transmitters' harmonics interrupt or
> garble this radio communication are endangering my life and other
> people's life too.

Again,the tranmitter in homemade radar gun jammers are common COMMERCIAL
Gunn oscillators.Only the modulating signal/power source is made by the
constructor.

So,they are NOT "dangerous".
>
> Oh, and before I forget: One of the lives they endanger may be yours.
> Imagine you sit comfortably in a Boeing 737 approaching SFO and a
> plane approaching the parallel runway gets their runway assignment
> wrong because half a dozen other Jim Janiks had to fool some trooper
> on nearby 101...

Unfortunately,the scenario you describe is not gonna happen.
Not for a low powered radar jammer operating in bands not used by com-
aviation.
>
> I don't mind speeding and I do mind low speed limits, but illegal
> radar jammers are NOT the way to go.
>
>> The Gunn oscillators are common commercial items.They're
>> everywhere;door openers in most stores,burglar alarms.
>
> All these devices are build according to FCC regulations. Not so these
> illegal hacked together devices.

Uh,the transmitter IS the Gunn oscillator.Manufactured to FCC regulations.

> As they are illegal their
> manufacturers don't
>
>>> to use unlicensed and often underengineered hacked-together radar
>>> transmitters and that it makes sense to enforce the already existing
>>> federal law.
>>>
>> Only the FCC has the authority to enforce Federal communications
>> laws.
>
> One more reason to find another way to take away these 'jammers'.
>
> Btw, newsflash: They don't work anyway.
>
> Chris
>

Agreed;Car and Driver mag's tests of several years ago showed that half of
them worked. Not good enough for me.

That may only be a lack of knowledge about the radar guns in current
use,thus not being able to design the proper,effective modulation
circuitry,or due to better training by the speedgun's users.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:19:44 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

[tons of excuses for using an illegal hacked together radar jammer]

I don't think you have the knowledge to understand that the oscillator is
not the only component in a transmitter, that influences its freqency
characteristics. I also don't think you ever have been in a situation
where you had no radio contact to the tower.

If you are incapable of dealing with cops without illegal transmitters,
don't drive or at least don't speed.

Chris

Around 6/12/2005 5:43 AM, Dave wrote:

> Let me get this straight . . . you are the one in a MILLION driver who
> actually never breaks the speed limit? NEVER???? -Dave

Oh, I doubt there are that many... A million isn't what it used to be.

I don't think you'll find *any* driver (that has ever driven on a public
road) that either hasn't yet or won't ever break a speed limit.


--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)