UPDATE: 2-0 on tickets

[GoCougs]

I'm sure Cougs was guilty as sin for the speeding charge he got written up for.

But that's not relevant really; it's only if it can be proven. It also goes to show the inherent irrationality and anti-liberty (and even more sad, counter productive) paradigm of modern traffic enforcement - why should a citizen accept as sole "proof" the statement of a vested state agent relying on technology purposefully held from the public's purview?

[rohan]

Um, except he admitted to it when I called him out:

LEO:  I got you at 70.
Me:  So how did you get a bead on me at 70 coming head on with cars in front of me?
LEO:  <shrugs, gets a pit pissy> I got the car in front of you, and you were behind that car. I paced you behind that car.
Me:  How can you pace me coming head on?
LEO:  I asked the driver if you'd been behind her since xxxx town (5-7 miles back.) (I almost lol'd at this answer, but being respectful I did not, but I did smile a bit knowing he knew I got 'em.)
Me:  That's not true - I bypassed that town and took the (well known) cutoff (which was true - doubt he asked the other driver).
LEO:  Well that's what I'm putting on the affidavit to the court. (The citation was marked "SMD" (speed measurement device).)

So in this instance I was correct - he didn't get a bead, came up with two stupid answers, and then lied on the citation (or, if I'm more generous, mistakenly did not mark "pace"). WinSPIN.

God you're a liar.  Anyone who's ever had training in speed measurement devices - or any doppler radar- understands how they work.

[GoCougs]

God you're a liar.  Anyone who's ever had training in speed measurement devices - or any doppler radar- understands how they work.

YoufailedtoreadproperlySPIN.

[rohan]

Yeah- right.  because that's how radar works and that's really what happened. 

You're stupid and you're a liar.

[GoCougs]

Yeah- right.  because that's how radar works and that's really what happened. 

You're stupid and you're a liar.

You didn't know that SMDs can get a vehicle coming in the opposite direction???

[rohan]

You didn't know that SMDs can get a vehicle coming in the opposite direction???

I'm a Michigan Speed Measurement Task Force certified radar and lidar instructor- I think I got it covered.    The problem is what you don't know about them is coming through loud and clear. 

[GoCougs]

I'm a Michigan Speed Measurement Task Force certified radar and lidar instructor- I think I got it covered.    The problem is what you don't know about them is coming through loud and clear.  

You don't have it covered, or you can't understand what has been written.

I beat the system twice and you simply have to accept it. No amount of HateSPIN is going to change that.  

[rohan]

Your "explenation" of what happened is both unlikely and implausible.  Any first year radar operator can tell you why. 

[GoCougs]

Your "explenation" of what happened is both unlikely and implausible.  Any first year radar operator can tell you why. 

Perhaps you guys need to buy more modern equipment...

[AutobahnSHO]

what I did was winspin. Cougs got PaySpin'd.

[rohan]

Perhaps you guys need to buy more modern equipment...

yeah uh- modern radars can track anywhere between 6 and 10 cars at once targeting anything from the three fastest to just one or even all of them.  They can even track several targets behind moving tractor trailers now.      DSP makes them faster- easier to use- and more reliable than ever before and you have no idea what you're talking about.  Again. 

[TurboDan]

Not too bad, man.  Mine is similar.

Same here. The LR2 comes out to $90-something per month, but I pay it in one shot when the policy is up every year.

[GoCougs]

yeah uh- modern radars can track anywhere between 6 and 10 cars at once targeting anything from the three fastest to just one or even all of them.  They can even track several targets behind moving tractor trailers now.      DSP makes them faster- easier to use- and more reliable than ever before and you have no idea what you're talking about.  Again. 

Please reread the above; or, do you not understand things like aspect ratios and sight lines? No amount of fancy will read through ~3,500 lbs of metal, plastic and rubber. He was coming head on - he physically was unable to get a bead on my car as there was a car in front of me. When I called him out on this fact he admitted it - he only got the car in front of me and "paced" me behind it.

[rohan]

Please reread the above; or, do you not understand things like aspect ratios and sight lines? No amount of fancy will read through ~3,500 lbs of metal, plastic and rubber. He was coming head on - he physically was unable to get a bead on my car as there was a car in front of me. When I called him out on this fact he admitted it - he only got the car in front of me and "paced" me behind it.

You are so out of your element here.....

[TurboDan]

From what I understand, the radar is simply a "backup" when it comes to speeding tickets. What actually counts is the certified expert testimony of the police officer who has been trained to visually detect the speed of a vehicle.

Now, I'm not arguing that this line of thinking is particularly fair to the defendant, but to my knowledge that's how it works.

[GoCougs]

From what I understand, the radar is simply a "backup" when it comes to speeding tickets. What actually counts is the certified expert testimony of the police officer who has been trained to visually detect the speed of a vehicle.

Now, I'm not arguing that this line of thinking is particularly fair to the defendant, but to my knowledge that's how it works.

Not so much, at least in my state. Apparently unbeknownst to rohan, many cruisers have in-car systems that can determine speed of cars coming in both the opposite direction of travel of the cruiser and coming up behind a cruiser traveling in the same direction. In both instances, owing to aspect ratios, it is impossible to accurately (within 10-20%) visually detect speed. My state also has its fair share of aerial enforcement in which the same issues apply (impossible to accurately determine speed thousands of feet from the speeding vehicle without objective means; in this case, SMDs or stop watches and known distance markers).

This is actually a good thing. Relying on subjective measurements is by definition the tool of tyrants. SMDs are at least objective, and thus can be objectively challenged.

[rohan]

Not so much, at least in my state. Apparently unbeknownst to rohan, many cruisers have in-car systems that can determine speed of cars coming in both the opposite direction of travel of the cruiser and coming up behind a cruiser traveling in the same direction. In both instances, owing to aspect ratios, it is impossible to accurately (within 10-20%) visually detect speed. My state also has its fair share of aerial enforcement in which the same issues apply (impossible to accurately determine speed thousands of feet from the speeding vehicle without objective means; in this case, SMDs or stop watches and known distance markers).

This is actually a good thing. Relying on subjective measurements is by definition the tool of tyrants. SMDs are at least objective, and thus can be objectively challenged.

How does directional speed measurement have anything to do with oppositional speed measurement?  Do you even begin to understand how Doppler Radar works?  Do you understand the basic principles of digital signal processing? 

LOL @   

you


being


totally


out


of


your


depth


.

[rohan]

rohan takes his second trip to LoseSPIN today; scary given the subject - both in fact and in context.

TL;DR - I beat the system twice - ha, ha!!! Next?

Not so much, at least in my state. Apparently unbeknownst to rohan, many cruisers have in-car systems that can determine speed of cars coming in both the opposite direction of travel of the cruiser and coming up behind a cruiser traveling in the same direction. In both instances, owing to aspect ratios, it is impossible to accurately (within 10-20%) visually detect speed. My state also has its fair share of aerial enforcement in which the same issues apply (impossible to accurately determine speed thousands of feet from the speeding vehicle without objective means; in this case, SMDs or stop watches and known distance markers).

This is actually a good thing. Relying on subjective measurements is by definition the tool of tyrants. SMDs are at least objective, and thus can be objectively challenged.

http://www.radartest.com/article.asp?articleid=1064
http://radartest.com/article.asp?articleid=5000


yeah, you're so knowledgable.  

[Rupert]

Your "explenation" of what happened is both unlikely and implausible.  Any first year radar operator can tell you why. 

Feel free to fill us in, chief.

[GoCougs]

Feel free to fill us in, chief.

He's not quite getting it; deconstructing the discussion into the technology of SMDs is a diversion. He went for a pre-emptive WinSPIN but did so too soon (i.e., without reading/understanding that the LEO was traveling in the opposite direction) and this is the result. It was impossible to get both the me and the car in front of me; I was masked as I was blocked; the LEO admitted this.

[rohan]

He's not quite getting it; deconstructing the discussion into the technology of SMDs is a diversion. He went for a pre-emptive WinSPIN but did so too soon (i.e., without reading/understanding that the LEO was traveling in the opposite direction) and this is the result. It was impossible to get both the me and the car in front of me; I was masked as I was blocked; the LEO admitted this.

Yeah - and you have no clue as to how radar works- at all.  Oppositional speed measurement is about as hard as tossing a baseball to another person from 3 feet away.    Keep deflecting.  The LEO never admitted such a thing because it's no longer a problem- being behind another car does NOTHING for protecting you even if you were right on the bumper.   You still have reflective surfaces showing at different distances from the car in front which give you two targets- and modern radars as I said can track more than two targets at once- which gives you this. 

[Rupert]

I LOL'd.

[rohan]

Oh, Jesus, we're in for a treat...

And yet you've done nothing to counter with anything that actually resembles knowledge of radar on any level whatsoever- and- you've done nothing more than "He did so say it."   You're a liar on several levels plain and simple.  

[AutobahnSHO]

I was gonna say- even *I* know that radar can pick up more than one object at a time. Otherwise those air traffic towers and C-RAM systems would never ever work..  (Counter rocket and mortar- it's a gatling gun that shoots inbound InDirect Fire (IDF).)

[GoCougs]

I was gonna say- even *I* know that radar can pick up more than one object at a time. Otherwise those air traffic towers and C-RAM systems would never ever work..  (Counter rocket and mortar- it's a gatling gun that shoots inbound InDirect Fire (IDF).)

Duh. But can't pick it up if it can't see it. Rohan still ain't getting that the cruiser was heading in the opposite direction with a car in front of me. The LEO admitted that he did not get a bead on me. It's a non issue, at least in my situation.

He doesn't like I beat the system and in fine semi-literate, bully, and childish form, simply has no option but to call me a "liar." One wonders why he spends time here as this is pretty much all the does. Dude needs a hobby (other than burning 'SPIN bytes that is).

[rohan]

And your too fucking stupid to understand that it's all but impossible to be hidden from modern radar- even though your bumper is hidden you still have visible relective surfaces that are... visible.  How is it that you're not able to grasp that incredibly simple fact?  And forgive me if I doubt your less then honorable words- you've gotten caught lying on this site many times.

[GoCougs]

And your too fucking stupid to understand that it's all but impossible to be hidden from modern radar- even though your bumper is hidden you still have visible relective surfaces that are... visible.  How is it that you're not able to grasp that incredibly simple fact?  And forgive me if I doubt your less then honorable words- you've gotten caught lying on this site many times.

D'oh! And I thought we had you trained on the proper use of "you're" vs. "your."

Mega LoseSPIN for doing so in the very same sentence in which you called someone stupid. Ha, ha!

[rohan]

D'oh! And I thought we had you trained on the proper use of "you're" vs. "your."

Mega LoseSPIN for doing so in the very same sentence in which you called someone stupid. Ha, ha!

Deflecting.....again.  And yet- nothing to substantiate your "knowledge" of radar in any way.  Shocking.  Just admit it- you're a fraud on every single level. 

[dazzleman]

 
You guys could argue about anything.  Joe, you need to get another speeding ticket, so we can stop arguing over this one....

[rohan]

You guys could argue about anything. 

No we can't.