Back on New Year’s Day two drivers from Illinois racked up $1400 in speeding tickets in one day. The story goes Piotr Pac drove 180 miles from a Chicago suburb to Wisconsin Dells to pick up his girlfriend who had a bad time at a New Year’s party. So on the most patrolled day of the year how fast was Pac driving his 2004 Nissan Altima? Well his girlfriend got the fourth ticket clocked at 108 mph. The patrolman that stopped them said he rarely goes that fast even when pulling someone over. And while it all may seem funny I’m really shocked Pac has gotten to keep his license. He shows no remorse for the speed and the pair wasn’t wearing seatbelts. In the past Pac has had to hire a lawyer to bail him out of similar trouble. He admits that he’s on his father’s insurance because he couldn’t afford his premiums (fraud?). I think a judge should revoke Pac’s license, although I have a feeling he’ll wind up driving without one anyway. His first words about the experience “I’m famous.”

http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/jan05/292574.asp

Glad it's not me!:cool:

In the past Pac has had to hire a lawyer to bail him out of similar trouble.

Is he an NMA member? :)

These are my comments to the story when it was posted a few days ago on autoblog:

$1400 is not easy to rack up in illinois. A normal speeding ticket is $75, 20 over bumps it to $95. That's a deal around here.
Then you can choose to take a drivers class, which clears the conviction from your record.
This can be done 3 times per year, but if I remember correctly the 4th ticket in a years time means license suspension.
God bless those classes, they left me with a clear record and saved me thousands when moving back east. :)

Is he an NMA member? :)

I don't think so - NMA members are smarter than that :D

Well today was my magistrate hearing and due to a technicality (the officer's citation could not be found) I was let go w/ a stern warning. Whew! I was all prepared w/ questions, etc.

Saved a $180 fine and thousands of $$$'s of add'l insurance money. I'm a happy camper.

Ivan, can I get a refund on my NMA membership? JUST KIDDING!

Well today was my magistrate hearing and due to a technicality (the officer's citation could not be found) I was let go w/ a stern warning. Whew! I was all prepared w/ questions, etc.

Saved a $180 fine and thousands of $$$'s of add'l insurance money. I'm a happy camper.

Ivan, can I get a refund on my NMA membership? JUST KIDDING!


If you're not satisfied, you can :)

If you're not satisfied, you can :)

Nope, I'm in for good, especially to be eligible for the guarantee....hopefully not necessary...

Looks like they've dropped a section of 95 from 55 to 45. Ugh.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=383&e=1&u=/WCVB/20050316/lo_WCVB/2630110

"Speed has been a factor in all of these crashes."
Well if every car is exceeding the speed limit because it is already unreasonably low, then they are always "speeding" and therefore speed will always be a factor.

Maybe if they instead raised the limit to 75, then the person is no longer speeding and they would instead find that it was their bad driving that is the real factor!

And of course be ready for the newest radar trap spot.

Looks like they've dropped a section of 95 from 55 to 45. Ugh.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=383&e=1&u=/WCVB/20050316/lo_WCVB/2630110

"Speed has been a factor in all of these crashes."
Well if every car is exceeding the speed limit because it is already unreasonably low, then they are always "speeding" and therefore speed will always be a factor.

Maybe if they instead raised the limit to 75, then the person is no longer speeding and they would instead find that it was their bad driving that is the real factor!

And of course be ready for the newest radar trap spot.

Thanks Josh, I couldn've said it better myself :)

Fed up? Click here (http://www.motorists.org/ma)

"Speed has been a factor in all of these crashes."
Well if every car is exceeding the speed limit because it is already unreasonably low, then they are always "speeding" and therefore speed will always be a factor.

Come on, Josh... you know there's a difference between saying "speed has been a factor in all of these crashes" and "exceeding the speed limit has been a factor in all these crashes".

Come on, Josh... you know there's a difference between saying "speed has been a factor in all of these crashes" and "exceeding the speed limit has been a factor in all these crashes".

Sorry, but there isn't. Do you know how they deternine if "speed was a factor?" The examine the evidence and compare it against the speed limit. Even if they can't determine an exact speed, the next question on the official form asks something like "Was the speed too hazardous for conditions? Check yes/no." So if you crashed, obviously it must have been...

Finally, in cases involving other cops, would the investigating officers ever write in "yeah, it was out guys fault," or simply tick off the pre-printed box that says "was speed a contributing factor?"

Do you know how they deternine if "speed was a factor?" The examine the evidence and compare it against the speed limit.

So.... I'm on the interstate on my way home from work. The speed limit is 65mph. The road is a sheet of ice. I'm travelling 64mph. I crash. Since I'm not exceeding the speed limit, speed cannot be a factor. :confused:

Yes, obviously the road conditions were a major factor... When I hear someone say "speed was a factor in the accident" I assume that means in relation to the road conditions, not in relation to the speed limit. Perhaps that's not true for all people.

Finally, in cases involving other cops, would the investigating officers ever write in "yeah, it was out guys fault,"

Yes.

I guess that's the [one of] difference[s] between you and me.

.... Even if they can't determine an exact speed, the next question on the official form asks something like "Was the speed too hazardous for conditions? Check yes/no." So if you crashed, obviously it must have been...


Pardon me for quoting myself....

Yes.

I guess that's the [one of] difference[s] between you and me.

Yeah. And another one is I don't keep picking arguments with you.

Yeah. And another one is I don't keep picking arguments with you.

Sorry.

In my defense, I was picking an argument with Josh first. :) I'll avoid this thread from now on.

Looks like they've dropped a section of 95 from 55 to 45. Ugh.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=383&e=1&u=/WCVB/20050316/lo_WCVB/2630110

"Speed has been a factor in all of these crashes."
Well if every car is exceeding the speed limit because it is already unreasonably low, then they are always "speeding" and therefore speed will always be a factor.

Maybe if they instead raised the limit to 75, then the person is no longer speeding and they would instead find that it was their bad driving that is the real factor!

And of course be ready for the newest radar trap spot.

Odd, on WROR (105.7) this AM, they were discussing this and saying it was due to the road surface being in terrible shape. A caller said that it was the new type of paint they're using for the lane stripes. Apparently it's a combo paint & plastic solution, so that the plows are tearing up the stripes and the surface below 'em. Nothing about speed being the issue from them.

One caller said they'd been thru 4 windshields, another said he can barely see thru his due to the pitting.

The road surface is shot. The area from around the Georgetown/Topsfield line to the southern Rt-1 split had the top layer stripped. (The area north of the G/T split to NH border was repaved last summer.)

The police lowered the speed limit during construction, but people continued driving normally. So as of today, the posted limit on the effected area is 45.

I have a better idea: pave the damn road! :rolleyes:

Snid my argument was that the article (and the police through their limit adjustment action) is saying that speed was the cause. We know full well that 75 is not too fast for conditions.

I am of course by no means defending the driver, who not only was too dumb to slow down for two cops on the side of the road, but then got so startled (or was paying too much attention to her phone I bet!) that she hit two parked police cars.

We DO all know that parked police cars are a hazard, causing people to slam on their brakes and take other actions that can easily cause an accident.

Hey everyone! I'm a V1 owner moving to MA around August. From what I can tell it isn't going to be of much use because they're using newer equipment to tag speeders.

Without reading the 12 pages of this thread, is there a detector that works best for MA troopers? I would imagine that jamming is illegal as it is here in CA.

Hey everyone! I'm a V1 owner moving to MA around August. From what I can tell it isn't going to be of much use because they're using newer equipment to tag speeders.

Without reading the 12 pages of this thread, is there a detector that works best for MA troopers? I would imagine that jamming is illegal as it is here in CA.


Hey Kurtster,

Coupla of things:
1. Make sure your V1 is upgraded to the latest version
2. Pay attention when you drive
3. Join the NMA (http://www.motorists.org/ma)

Radar jamming is illegal everyone. Laser jamming is not illegal in MA.

Kurt you have the best detector already.
Get a laser jammer when you can.
Of course...since installing mine, I have yet to pass any more laser sites. See how well it works! :D

I sure hope you're prepared for a weather shock.

Adding to the list:
4. Don't draw attention to yourself when you drive.

And your V1 will work fine in Mass and the surrounding areas. I love mine.

Winslow
:eb:

Hey Kurtster,

Coupla of things:
1. Make sure your V1 is upgraded to the latest version
2. Pay attention when you drive
3. Join the NMA (http://www.motorists.org/ma)

Radar jamming is illegal everyone. Laser jamming is not illegal in MA.

I have a theory on how to beat LIDAR...
- Drive a car with flip-up headlights (flipped down, daylight of course).
- Have no plate in front (I still have my single green MA plate!!)
- Use a black nose bra that covers as much as possible (non-reflective)
- or spraypaint your car with dull black primer :eek:
The reduction in reflectivity should do the trick!

Another Argument for BLACK cars:
My last three cars were black, or dark charcoal, I have no plate in front. (Maximas)
Driving up 95 through Topsfield, I have been hit with Lidar 4-5 times doing 80+. And stupid, daydreaming me, I would immediately see them standing next to their cars in the breakdown lane. But for whatever reason, I never got pulled over. Usually the road was uncongested and I was an easy target. Each time I was sure I was nailed.

A Speeding Story:
A few years ago I was blasting from Las Vegas to the Grand Canyon in a rented Volvo. I brought my radar detector.. and was doing about 110 when it went off (roads are long, flat & straight of course) then immediately slowed down. Arizona state trooper pulled me over and in a friendly voice greeted me and asked if I knew how fast I was going. I said something to the effect that the roads were so nice around here that I let it get away from me. He smiled, left and returned with a written warning saying I did 83 in a 75 zone, Before leaving he cheerfully welcomed me to the state of Arizona and told me to take it easy. I was so pleased.

Detectors:
I will be removing an Escort SR1 remote radar/laser detector from my old car, but haven't decided if I'll put it in the new MINI. Not sure if I should count on my luck with LIDAR or get a jamming device. Will finish reading this long thread to see what your recommendations are.. legality is an important one to me, as well as a unit that works!

By the way, I'm still a 9!

Hey Ivan, did you see this one:
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/025474.php

The interesting part is that lidar readings produce an error when the camera is moved as little as the width of a human hair. Their tests produced errors as great as 26mph.

Voodoo no matter how great your detector you use, all it will tell you is when you've already been caught by laser. Youre best defense is a pricey grill-mounted jammer.

Mine has been working so well, that I have only crossed paths with one lidar gun since installing it. :rolleyes: murphy's law I guess. But that's fine with me.

Hey Ivan, did you see this one:
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/025474.php

The interesting part is that lidar readings produce an error when the camera is moved as little as the width of a human hair. Their tests produced errors as great as 26mph.



Well,
-the beam is invisible
-the "cross hairs" show just a dot on the finder, and not the actual beam
-the beam is hitting the indicated dot only if there has been a precise calibration, EXTERNAL to the unit, since any slight offset can change the reading or hit another vehicle.
-the device must be held absolutely steady. (COULD HE OR SHE HIT WITH A REAL GUN A LICENSE PLATE AT 1000 FEET?)
-a highway is a windy place, with buffeting wind by other cars and trucks
-the officer doesn't have a physics or optics degree
-everything the officer knows about the device is based on what he learned from materials provided by the manufacturer - just like Boston police officers involved in the fatal shooting last fall of 21-year-old Victoria Snelgrove ....

LTI is a company that has teetered on the brink of bankruptcy for some time -- although they finally posted a first quarter profit. They just settled a shareholder lawsuit that accused the company of misleading shareholders and the public. They were in trouble with the SEC for violating securities laws (artificially inflating their stock price), their accounting firm quit, and their stock was halted.

Speed Camera Error

That article is great! Let's hope this is for real and word gets out that LIDAR isn't so foolproof, that it's own worst enemy is its accuracy (over changing surfaces of a moving car). I thought when LIDAR came out, we were all in for a lot more speeding tickets. Maybe not.


Josh, I keep seeing a Black Cooper around Rts. 2/128 in Lexington.. by chance, that wouldn't be you? Saw another black Cooper around the Fenway area today.

P.S. I am considering a jammer..

Yeah, that's me, if it's my car.

The mythbusters on the discovery channel just did an episode this weekend on myths to beat radar and laser.
They tested black mat paint, gold foil, tin foil, lxtera led lights, disco balls, rotating refecting mirrors. nothing worked.
They did not try jambers.
The real benefit of radar detectors is learning how the police thing and their favorite hangout.
Drive smart, in traffic unless you trust and know the area you are in.
Good luck

I didn't think we would get speed cameras around here but they are creeping in:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2005/11/04/cranston_introduces_high_tech_system_to_catch_spee ders/