SLD920X radar detector/jammer - does it actually work??

Interesting , thanks.

Nope, just putting a brat in it's place.How do I know the PP is a brat? If s/he was a mature pedant we'd have got chapter and verse on the history and the why and wherefores of registration plates.

Actually there are several exceptions to the rule , if you had bothered to look instead of sprouting crap

Ooh, touchy.

Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have satisfied you? Since the motoring NG this is posted in is primarily about car driving my phrasing was in context. It#s tossers like you that make groups such as this such bloody hard work. Now FOAD.

Actually you posted this in Alt. uk law and Uk legal which are primarly a legal discussion group so my point was valid if you cant understand that then you must be a bigger f****it then you first appeared , and its tossas likeYOU that make groups such as this hard work now f*ck off back to uk rec driving and next time ask mommy before you come out to play with the big boys

Your "point" was no more valid than any of the other crap you you've spouted. You're just an analy retentive moron who is so inadequate that you have to show off how much you think you know, i.e. f*ck all. Now crawl back in your hole and fill it in behind you.

I'm not, but don't tell him that. ;-)

Gareth A. wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

The specs I've seen were 18 inches at 1000ft.Too wide,and you could be measuring the car next to the desired one. After all,the laser spot is invisible,and there's no method of verifying that the beam is actually striking what you believe you're aiming it at.

The Lidatek laser jammer mounts above the license plate,and one can fit additional jammers -if one can afford them.

"Wrong time of the month". ROFL. What a tango alpha roger tango.

So, what's so important about doing 100 MPH when 50 will get you there in time for lunch anyway? Alive, without killing innocent bystanders?

If you want to jam something, jam those fuckheads who talk on the telephone while they're supposed to be operating a ton of heavy machinery.

Thanks, Rich

Except that, the way I understand it, there are states that don't (yet) require a front license plate.

But why put so much effort into defeating a system that's only intended to keep you from killing people?

If you're in _that_ much of a hurry to get where you're going, just leave two minutes earlier. I read a write-up of a study once, or maybe just heard it anecdotally, where they put two guys on the road, and they told one guy, "Get there as fast as you can, and screw the traffic laws!" and they told the other guy, "Get there safe, and obey all of the traffic laws."

The fast guy, in about a 400 mile (600 km) trip, beat the law-abiding guy by about two minutes. Less time than it takes to take a pee.

So, if you're in that much of a hurry, just piss in your car!

Cheers! Rich

So, obviously, if you are really impelled to flout the traffic safety laws, you should move to Arizona! ;-P

(Personally, I don't have a problem with going 35 in a 35 zone and so on. And hell, my car is only calibrated to about 85!)

Good Luck! Rich

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:53:45 +0000, Brimstone wrote: ...

I don't know. What's a "human knowledge tosser"?

Thanks, Rich

No, he could drive a newer car.

I happen to have a '99 Camaro SS that came with Z-rated tires. The speedometer (and the car) goes to 155 mph. A V-6 Camaro shipped without speed-rated tires has an 85 mph speedometer and a limiter to match.

I also happen to live in Arizona and was once passed on one of our interstate highways by an 18-wheel truck (lorry). I was doing about

OTOH, the (appropriate) speed limit in my neighborhood is 25 and my wife and I are the only two people around who observe it. Simply depends on what is prudent, not what some legislator sitting behind a desk determines is "safe."

You sound like one of the nut-jobs that brought us 55-and-alive. Driving fast killing people. No link has ever been shown, limiting the discussion to highways designed for speed, as the Ike system is.

A couple of times a year I go out to visit my mother, which is a 1100mi trip. 100MPH would add two days to time there or cut out two days in a hotel in some dump along the way. In fact, 85MPH limits would likely do it.

This is just too silly for words. Higher speed faster. Ok, if you say so Rich! Yikes!

Whay don't you walk everywhere, if speed doesn't matter?

You must drive an *old* POS.

With you on the road, we'll need it!

People just don't understand the necessity for well-maintained tires in good condition. A guy was seriously injured just yesterday on our Interstate highway after a tire failure cause him to roll. As I write the temperature is 105 F and projected to be 109 F later today.

The weather is perfectly clear and you can imagine the temperature of the blacktop. At 75 mph (our current limit) the heat buildup in tires is huge. For a non-speed rated tire, it is perfectly appropriate to limit the max speed of the automobile. This is easily done in a computer-controlled fuel-injected engine. No different than the electronic rev limiter in my car that starts a purposeful misfire at

Our legislature actually tried to pass a law that set the max limits at the 85 percentile. It failed to pass, since the cops are against it and the loonies who believe that "speed kills" were against it too.

As a general rule (correct 85% of the time) people will drive at the appropriate speed. I have seen streets that were in poor condition where the limit was 45 and most everyone drove 35-40. This is akin to the story of the architects that build a campus, but leave out the sidewalks until they can observe where the people actually walk, then they put in the sidewalks.

In case you'd care to check, the discussion was about defeating law enforcement systems that catch people who are breaking existing laws.

Yes, the laws are wrong, and stupid. I don't argue that. Albeit I do take exception to you equating me to a nut-job. That's Thompson's job. What I argue is, how stupid do you have to be to walk up and spit in the face of a guy who's three times your size, has a gun and a club, and is authorized by the prince to use them on you?

OK, so work towards changing the laws. Admittedly, it's not speed that kills, it's stupidity and negligence.

But in the interim, going and being all in their face isn't the action that gets them to change their mind, is it?

Well, I was talking about an experiment conducted on real roads in real life here. Yeah, if you're on a race track, faster == faster. But if you're breezing through some backwater whistlestop, there are kids who have not yet been trained to stay off the road wif da prose.[sic] And I did say that I had read a "study." The one guy went balls-to-the-walls, the other guy drove gently, and the fast guy only beat the slow guy by a matter of a few minutes - less time than it takes you to finish your beer.

Why do they put speed traps where they put speed traps?

I've even heard that the cops DON'T MIND when the locations of the speed traps are revealed, because "officially" their purpose is to reduce risk; if people slow down to a sane speed during the speed trap, the cops are "officially" just as happy as can be.

Now, given that, if you're up in arms about entrapment, then I'm with you a hunnert[sic] percent. They shouldn't hang out in speedy spots just to nail people. They also shouldn't dress nazis up in drag to entrap lonely old men who are only looking for some companionship. Unfortunately, they _can_ do that, wrong as it is.

In the interim, the pigs are only doing their job, and we all know that jobs are scarce these days, expecially[sic] jobs that pay like a union cop job. And they still have guns and clubs.

AND, now that I proofread, you're not a very good proofreader. "100 MPH would add two days..." um I think you got that ass- backwards. I personally have driven from Minneapolis, MN to Biloxi, MS, in three days, at a rather leisurely pace. I've also driven from So. Cal. to Minneapolis (or its suburbs) more than once - AND BACK! - and an extra mile or two per hour really didn't make all that much of a difference. I once even submitted a "safety slogan": "Strive to Drive to Arrive Alive."

My point is, why go to such great lengths to defeat a system that's intended to deter lawbreakers, when you could back off a little, get there within MINUTES of the target time, and not endanger innocent bystanders - and not set yourself up to get accosted by troops of uniformed goons, each of which is armed with guns, clubs, and mace?

Well, notwithstanding I don't know what "Whay" means, this would resolve to the kind of question that's "baiting", AKA "trolling". I drive my car, but I don't drive my car a thousand miles an hour. I drive, at a sane speed, so there's no need for me to be paranoid about speed traps.

Checkpoints, however...

Cheers! Rich