Hand held speed gun

W.B. Yeats

Folks

Dreiving to work this morning along N7 just before it becomes M7 at around 70mph/112kmh (limit is 100km) Was approaching a junction where I thought I saw a Garda car. Finished passing a truck in the middle lane and pulled in letting my speed go down.
Passed a marked garda car sitting up on one of the junctions onto the road at around 60mph. He had one of those hand held guns. He was sitting in the front seat of the car

Does he have to stop me to give me a fine/points?

I'd contest him giving me points on something that is hand held in the front of the car.

Thanks

TomMc

If he was using the hairdryer well then you are fine. Has to stop you. And for the record if the speed gun was outside the car window with him sitting inside, I wouldn't fancy your chances with a judge. You would need very expensive legal representation to get off on any technicalities. At the end of the day you were exceeding the speed limit so you are in the wrong most of all. Whether Garda's methods are within speed device guidelines or not.

W.B. Yeats

I suppose I have three questions really

1. Where do they take the reading from- when you pass? when you are approaching? How far away if approaching?

2. Do they have to stop you which seems to be yes

3. If its a hand held then how reliable are these machines? Why does it matter if it was inside or outside the car window? Whether the machine is calibrated and handled correctly (bumping around in the boot of a garda car?) is of major significance so I'd be well within my rights to see a written certified record of the machine that is proposing that I was speeding

Sizzler

Often wondered with these hairdryers how they can prove it was you that they actually caught. Guard standing on the side of the road clocking your speed but AFAIK these are not video linked and all they show is the speed, how exactly could it be proven that it was your car that was caught

Interceptor

Sizzler wrote: »

Often wondered with these hairdryers how they can prove it was you that they actually caught. Guard standing on the side of the road clocking your speed but AFAIK these are not video linked and all they show is the speed, how exactly could it be proven that it was your car that was caught

It is operated by a Garda who is trained to use it.

It has a sight like a telescope with cross-hairs which he places on your vehicle.

The gun only takes a reading when it gets an accurate read over a period of time (it can't be confused by passing jets for instance).

If you are speeding and you get caught then its just tough. If you were rushing someone to hospital then that might be sufficient excuse to plead your case. Being a doofus will not get you off...

As a guideline, most speed checks won't pursue you for ~10% over the limit in a 100kph area but over 120kph will bring pain.

'cptr

Sizzler

Interceptor wrote: »

It is operated by a Garda who is trained to use it.

It has a sight like a telescope with cross-hairs which he places on your vehicle.

The gun only takes a reading when it gets an accurate read over a period of time (it can't be confused by passing jets for instance).

If you are speeding and you get caught then its just tough. If you were rushing someone to hospital then that might be sufficient excuse to plead your case. Being a doofus will not get you off...

As a guideline, most speed checks won't pursue you for ~10% over the limit in a 100kph area but over 120kph will bring pain.

'cptr

Im not disputing the technology or training.

Scenario - Garda anchored up behind a bush on a dual carriageway with a har dryer, pulls you in, writes you a ticket and shows you a gun with a reading on it. Now wheres the burden of proof to say it was actually your car he zapped ? Wheres the photographic proof?

Henry Ford III

Sizzler wrote: »

Im not disputing the technology or training.

Scenario - Garda anchored up behind a bush on a dual carriageway with a har dryer, pulls you in, writes you a ticket and shows you a gun with a reading on it. Now wheres the burden of proof to say it was actually your car he zapped ? Wheres the photographic proof?

There isn't any. His word will however hold up in court most likely, if it goes that far.

Interceptor

Sizzler wrote: »

Wheres the photographic proof?

Gardai don't need photographic proof. Their word is sufficient.

dudara

Sizzler wrote: »

Im not disputing the technology or training.

Scenario - Garda anchored up behind a bush on a dual carriageway with a har dryer, pulls you in, writes you a ticket and shows you a gun with a reading on it. Now wheres the burden of proof to say it was actually your car he zapped ? Wheres the photographic proof?

it's the Garda's word. They operate in a position of trust, and their word that it was your car they zapped is good enough in such instances.

The Garda does have to go to the bother of chasing you and stopping you, so he's hardly going to do that on a whim.

Sizzler

Henry Ford III wrote: »

There isn't any. His word will however hold up in court most likely, if it goes that far.

Thought as much. TBH if you get a resolute judge and a citizen of good standing with a clean record and a decent lawyer you could well see a case struck out.

Logically speaking a guard showing you a reading on a hand held speed gun alledging it was you is akin to accusing someone of stealing from a shop just because they were seen leaving the premises. Its hardly damning evidence and in legal terms is far from being beyond the burden of proof.

Drummerboy08

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

Folks

Dreiving to work this morning along N7 just before it becomes M7 at around 70mph/112kmh (limit is 100km)
Thanks

Bare in mind, your speedo will have a certain percentage of error. Chances are you were really only doing ~ 100kmh. If you have a sat nav, drive along with your speedo reading 100kmp, and see what the actual speed your doing is.

Sizzler

Interceptor wrote: »

Gardai don't need photographic proof. Their word is sufficient.

Is that set in stone then? Pretty harsh legal system we operate under if a Guard can stand up in court and say anything he wants and the judge will just agree with him / her because they are a guard :rolleyes:

I'd like to think the Gardai have to present that small matter of evidence in court! It generally underpins the legal system...

De Hipster

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

I suppose I have three questions really

1. Where do they take the reading from- when you pass? when you are approaching? How far away if approaching?

2. Do they have to stop you which seems to be yes

3. If its a hand held then how reliable are these machines? Why does it matter if it was inside or outside the car window? Whether the machine is calibrated and handled correctly (bumping around in the boot of a garda car?) is of major significance so I'd be well within my rights to see a written certified record of the machine that is proposing that I was speeding

If stopped you should ask for the Guards Personal ID number & the callibration date & number of the gun...there are stringent regulations covering when where & how they are maintained.

W.B. Yeats

Interesting points folks- thanks

So just to be sure to be sure- a guard using a hairdryer out the window would stop you to issue you with the ticket.

I'd be surprised that a judge would take a Guard's word as evidence on a matter in court ( I know for instance that its difficult to get a warrant in court without some evidence). Where's the burden of proof?

W.B. Yeats

De Hipster wrote: »

If stopped you should ask for the Guards Personal ID number & the callibration date & number of the gun...there are stringent regulations covering when where & how they are maintained.

If I was caught speeding that's what I would be very interested in getting, I'm not sure what the storage methods are for these pieces of equipment but I imagine they are handled like fine china. A few days rattling around in a car could decalibrate a machine

Henry Ford III

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

.....I'd be surprised that a judge would take a Guard's word as evidence on a matter in court ( I know for instance that its difficult to get a warrant in court without some evidence). Where's the burden of proof?

Thousands of successful prosecutions would suggest you are incorrect there.

trad

to certain offences under Act of 2002.
15.—Section 21 of the Act of 2002 is amended—

(a) by substituting for subsection (1) the following:

“(1) The onus of establishing prima facie proof of a constituent of an offence (including the speed at which a person, whether the accused or another person, was driving) under section 47, 52, 53, 55, 91, 92, 93 or 94 of the Principal Act or section 35 of the Act of 1994 may be discharged by tendering evidence from which that constituent can be inferred of measurements or other indications which were given by—

(a) electronic or other apparatus (including a camera) capable of providing a permanent record (including a permanent visual record) and are contained in such a record produced by it, or

(b) electronic or other apparatus (including a radar gun) which is not capable of producing a permanent record.

It is not necessary to prove that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order.”,

(b) in subsection (2)(a), by substituting for subparagraph (i) the following:

“(i) purporting to be, or to be a copy of a record (which is not a visual record) referred to in subsection (1)(a) and to be signed by a member of the Garda Síochána, and”,

(c) in subsection (3), by substituting for paragraph (a) the following:

“(a) in the case of apparatus referred to in subsection (1)(a), be capable of producing a record of the measurements or other indications referred to in subsection (1), and”,

and

(d) by inserting after subsection (4) the following:

“(5) In proceedings for an offence referred to in subsection (1) it shall be presumed until the contrary is shown that—

(a) the electronic or other apparatus used for the tendering of evidence was provided and maintained by a member of the Garda Síochána, and

(b) that the development, production and viewing of records produced by such apparatus was carried out by a member of the Garda Síochána.

(6) In this section—

‘radar gun’ means an apparatus which—

(a) can be used to measure the speed of a moving object (such as a motor vehicle) by directing a signal from the apparatus at the object, and, if the signal is reflected off the object, the apparatus in turn receives the reflected signal, and

(b) is capable of measuring the speed of the object and displaying the speed on the apparatus;

‘record’ includes a visual record which can be stored permanently on the apparatus concerned.”.

I think that says it all.

W.B. Yeats

So lets be clear here

Is that act saying that
A. No permanent record of an alleged speeding occurrence has to be kept
B. That no proof that the machine that measured the alleged speeding is in working order has to be produced
C. If A and B are true then a guard can say anything about a member of the public and how they were driving and it is taken to be true unless proven otherwise:eek::eek::eek::eek:

TomMc

Road traffic offenses are a bit like tax evasion. Once you are accused it is not really a case of innocent till proven guilty, but guilty unless you can prove otherwise. In a local/district court most solicitors wouldn't say boo to the judge let along fight your case with any great vigour. You will get fined, points, banned whatever and if you want to take things further or make an appeal in a circuit court well then you can, at considerably more expense.

A Garda and his/her colleagues word will be taken as fact in a case of routine traffic offenses, regardless of who you are. Judges generally don't really see it as having to do everything by the book to catch someone, but punishing actual speeders, as that offense is the greater crime. Ends justifying the means if you like. You need a fancy lawyer at a higher court to highlight any shortcomings of a Garda, before methods are open to question/review.

I suspect in this country unlike others, rules and regulations on how to detect speeders and guidelines on proper usage of equipment aren't enforced or carried out exactly as they should a lot of the time, or openly available as public knowledge so joe public remains largely ignorant of same. If people do not know their rights, the less they will challenge authority.

W.B. Yeats

TomMc wrote: »

Road traffic offenses are a bit like tax evasion. Once you are accused it is not really a case of innocent till proven guilty, but guilty unless you can prove otherwise. In a local/district court most solicitors wouldn't say boo to the judge let along fight your case with any great vigour. You will get fined, points, banned whatever and if you want to take things further or make an appeal in a circuit court well then you can, at considerably more expense.

A Garda and his/her colleagues word will be taken as fact in a case of routine traffic offenses, regardless of who you are. Judges generally don't really see it as having to do everything by the book to catch someone, but punishing actual speeders, as that offense is the greater crime. Ends justifying the means if you like. You need a fancy lawyer at a higher court to highlight any shortcomings of a Garda, before methods are open to question/review.

I suspect in this country unlike others, rules and regulations on how to detect speeders and guidelines on proper usage of equipment aren't enforced or carried out exactly as they should a lot of the time, or openly available as public knowledge so joe public remains largely ignorant of same. If people do not know their rights, the less they will challenge authority.

Tom

I hope you're not a garda
Because what you've written ( however true it might be ) is a very scary proposition. It basically says that unless you can afford to defend yourself in a court higher than you should have to that you will be convicted of an offence on the word of somebody else. "The Law" is all about the details and if nobody questions the details on the small things like speeding then the situation can turn into something much more serious like what happened in Donegal

TomMc

Not a guard but have got a few (not many) speeding fines down the years. Where minor traffic offenses are concerned a Garda's word isn't really open to question in court. We are not talking about serious crimes, GBH, armed robbery or murder here, so a persons rights are not seen as that important by say an old fart of a Judge. If you are a young male for example, where speeding is concerned you are automatically perceived as a boy racer and guilty. Equally if you do not show the court a certain degree of respect by employing a solicitor or dressing well, again you may suffer from old fashioned prejudices. It may not be fair but it is the way the system works. The legal profession like to scratch each others backs so if you do not play by their rules, where certain offenses are concerned, you will be taken less seriously.

The problem in little old Ireland is that the more something is regulated (in theory), the less those regulations tend to be enforced (in practice). Think financial regulator. All the pillars of society too were put up on pedestals for so long, they became less and less open to question and therefore more complacent as a result.

And at the end of the day, you admitted you were speeding although only by fractions, and yet had you been stopped you were going to go all defensive, trying to find fault with a Garda rather than look at you own faults first. Is it any wonder where traffic offenses are concerned that the system is less open to question/more rigid as a result. You have let your imagination run amuck with what ifs, the Garda didn't pursue you, may be even showed a little discretion for the sake of a few kph.

Atomic Pineapple

speeding fines are a stealth tax in reality, someone on here recently calculated it brings in 20million a year by official figures he/she found and applied the €80 fine to the amount of successful speeding charges.

so they are going to make it as hard as possible for aggrieved motorists to try and get off on technicalities.

As others have stated you knew yourself you were speeding so had you been caught just accept it.

W.B. Yeats

TomMc wrote: »

Where minor traffic offenses are concerned a Garda's word isn't really open to question in court.
We are not talking about serious crimes, GBH, armed robbery or murder here, so a persons rights are not seen as that important by say an old fart of a Judge.
If you are a young male for example, where speeding is concerned you are automatically perceived as a boy racer and guilty.
Equally if you do not show the court a certain degree of respect by employing a solicitor or dressing well, again you may suffer from old fashioned prejudices.
It may not be fair but it is the way the system works. The legal profession like to scratch each others backs so if you do not play by their rules, where certain offenses are concerned, you will be taken less seriously.

Wow that's an amazing list of things that the aren't important, prejudices or issues that the legal system doesn't deem worthy of upholding.
All rights are worthy of being upheld not just those that a judge or a guard deems necessary at any given time
I'm glad I'm not a young male so that I won't be automatically perceived of being guilty. Shame on all young men. Guilty one and all

TomMc wrote: »

And at the end of the day, you admitted you were speeding although only by fractions, and yet had you been stopped you were going to go all defensive, trying to find fault with a Garda rather than look at you own faults first. Is it any wonder where traffic offenses are concerned that the system is less open to question/more rigid as a result. You have let your imagination run amuck with what ifs, the Garda didn't pursue you, may be even showed a little discretion for the sake of a few kph.

Whether or not I was speeding is irrelevant, the Garda has to prove that I was speeding. I'm well within my rights to make him or her do that. As many have stated on here, my speedo may be reading higher than I'm actually driving. Should I just have blind faith that the Garda has followed correct procedure when or if he tells me that I'm speeding. Perhaps I'm more cynical than you but I don't believe that just because someone says its so, means it is.

I'd be much more willing to take my medicine if I perceived that the garda was doing a good job, not sitting on the side of a 6 lane road clocking cars as they drive past. If he had been 10 miles further down the road on the 2 lane national route where I witness acts of lunacy on a daily basis then I'd be much more willing to think that it was a fair cop.

Anyway glad to know that we have such honest citizens in our midst.

TomMc

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

Whether or not I was speeding is irrelevant, the Garda has to prove that I was speeding. I'm well within my rights to make him or her do that. As many have stated on here, my speedo may be reading higher than I'm actually driving. Should I just have blind faith that the Garda has followed correct procedure when or if he tells me that I'm speeding. Perhaps I'm more cynical than you but I don't believe that just because someone says its so, means it is.

I'd be much more willing to take my medicine if I perceived that the garda was doing a good job, not sitting on the side of a 6 lane road clocking cars as they drive past. If he had been 10 miles further down the road on the 2 lane national route where I witness acts of lunacy on a daily basis then I'd be much more willing to think that it was a fair cop.

Anyway glad to know that we have such honest citizens in our midst.

Whether or not you were speeding is irrelevant. It is exactly the issue plain and simple. And if the Garda's speed gun confirms this well tough luck, bear the consequences. You even admitted yourself you were. While nobody likes Garda speed checks just inside 30mph/50kph zones on good/wide open roads (fish in a barrel), at the end of the day on busier roads with lots of traffic and a higher speed limit, their presence is more valid and relevant. And the lunatics who get away with things on lesser roads do get caught eventually. Bad habits follow them around and then they do it once too often, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

None of us are saints, most of us exceed the speed limit to a certain degree. It is not a case of preaching, but pointing out that if you get caught, well tough luck, take it on the chin. Usually if you are stopped by a mobile speed check / Garda (not a camera) it is because you are well over the limit. Learn from it and move on.

W.B. Yeats

TomMc wrote: »

Whether or not you were speeding is irrelevant. It is exactly the issue plain and simple. And if the Garda's speed gun confirms this well tough luck, bear the consequences. You even admitted yourself you were. While nobody likes Garda speed checks just inside 30mph/50kph zones on good/wide open roads (fish in a barrel), at the end of the day on busier roads with lots of traffic and a higher speed limit, their presence is more valid and relevant. And the lunatics who get away with things on lesser roads do get caught eventually. Bad habits follow them around and then they do it once too often, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

None of us are saints, most of us exceed the speed limit to a certain degree. It is not a case of preaching, but pointing out that if you get caught, well tough luck, take it on the chin. Usually if you are stopped by a mobile speed check / Garda (not a camera) it is because you are well over the limit. Learn from it and move on.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this so. I'm of the view that the Guard has to prove that I'm speeding you're not.

Bee

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

Folks

Dreiving to work this morning along N7 just before it becomes M7 at around 70mph/112kmh (limit is 100km) Was approaching a junction where I thought I saw a Garda car. Finished passing a truck in the middle lane and pulled in letting my speed go down.
Passed a marked garda car sitting up on one of the junctions onto the road at around 60mph. He had one of those hand held guns. He was sitting in the front seat of the car

Does he have to stop me to give me a fine/points?

I'd contest him giving me points on something that is hand held in the front of the car.

Thanks

Sorry if you were penalised by this mis-use of Garda resources.
These "Gardai" holding their tools out cash collecting are a disgrace as they do zilch for road safety.

Apart from anything else the cash collecting guns are notoriously un-reliable and are wide open to abuse by the Gardai in the interest of cash collecting and inflicting penalty points to meet their targets on road users.

Have a read:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/southwest/series7/speed-cameras.shtml

"He then pans the speed camera down the side of a stationary car and clocks it doing 4mph.

"This is of course very relevant. If a policeman is pointing at a vehicle going by and he moves it across [the vehicle] then he will get an increased, or indeed a decreased, speed reading."

Dr Clark says that all laser speed guns suffers from the same problem so we thought we would give it a go on a wall with one of the latest guns used by the police: an LTI 20.20.

We clocked a stationary wall at 58mph - now that's motoring
By aiming at the wall and pulling the trigger whilst panning with the device we managed to get a reading of 58mph from the stationary wall - enough to get three points and a fine in urban areas."

"

mondeo

I contested a speeding fine in 2007 but lost, i argued everything and I left the court furious. Judge took side of Garda and I had no choice but to accept it, I was verbaly pushed up against a wall and forced to accept it with no evidence other then the gardas word that i was speeding and a copy of the speeding fine sent out to me with the speed reading figure on it. There was no point in going to court that day as anything I said was deemed incorrect as far as the court was concerned. I was told i did not legally have to see calibration evidence of the device or proof device was maintained. They already made their minds up before i even walked into the court. I still believe today i was not speeding as the stretch i was suppose to be speeding on I knew all too well to be a regular speed trap zone so i always made sure i stuck bang on the limit. I have not driven down that stretch of road since.....

slimjimmc

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree on this so. I'm of the view that the Guard has to prove that I'm speeding you're not.

I'm afraid you'll be disagreeing with the Law too. There are many other minor charges where a Garda is not required to produce quantifiable hard evidence but merely has to "form the opinon" that an offence has been comitted.
For example, if a Garda forms the opinion that you're drunk and disorderly in a public place because of your behaviour, you can be arrested and charged without any hard proof such as a blood alchohol level or a video recording of you swinging from a lamp post. Gardaí are considered reliable witnesses and the law deems their evidence proof enough even if it is technically possible to obtain a measurement.

Until the law changes if a Garda points a speed gun at your car and detects you speeding then thats all the proof the law needs.

Hooch

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

Interesting points folks- thanks

So just to be sure to be sure- a guard using a hairdryer out the window would stop you to issue you with the ticket.

I'd be surprised that a judge would take a Guard's word as evidence on a matter in court ( I know for instance that its difficult to get a warrant in court without some evidence). Where's the burden of proof?

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

If I was caught speeding that's what I would be very interested in getting, I'm not sure what the storage methods are for these pieces of equipment but I imagine they are handled like fine china. A few days rattling around in a car could decalibrate a machine

Right...here it is.......again

Speed detection equiment is calibrated every year as standard. The ultra lyte detection equipment AGS use will NOT work if it goes out of calibration. It the calibration is knocked out it shuts down and gives an error message....no reading. The equipment is certified and the "gun" itself is stamped....the KMPH sticker on side faids after some time to reveil "void".

The equipment is kept in a padded case when not in use. They dont rattle around and as stated they cannot be decalibrated by lying in a car, andd if they do for some reason they wont detect.

If you point the lasor dot (not cross hairs) at a sign it returns zero.

A Garda does not have to stop you to give you a ticket (this is know as a non intercept), but for speeding the general policy is to stop the motorist unless it is a ROBOT van (new company name for GATSO).

Speed detection is well in place in legislation. It is the Gardas word on the vehicle he detected and the speed of that vehicle in its respective speed limit. As stated hundreds of thousands of these are argued in the state every year and never have I seen one thrown out because the judge didnt believe the Gardas word. It pains me to say, drink drivers can get off easier!!!

On your question about when the detection is made....well if your overtaking and break the limit.....your still breaking the limit. The detection is done at 600m for the handheld and up to 1000m with the larger one on tripod.

The burden of proof is always on the state, but in this case the word of a Garda is sufficient proof for a judge.

And finally......why would a Garda make it up.....we dont need to.

Hope this helps, anymore questions?

Terrontress

nice guy always wrote: »

And finally......why would a Garda make it up.....we dont need to.

If a Garda were to be sent out to do a speed check and sat for several hours with nobody speeding, would that not be incentive to make it up? Not wanting to return to his station empty handed?

eringobragh

nice guy always wrote: »

Right...here it is.......again

Speed detection equiment is calibrated every year as standard. The ultra lyte detection equipment AGS use will NOT work if it goes out of calibration. It the calibration is knocked out it shuts down and gives an error message....no reading. The equipment is certified and the "gun" itself is stamped....the KMPH sticker on side faids after some time to reveil "void".

The gun itself has a T sticker on the back (Tele-Traffic). and the Calibration info on the scope as in photo below. I wouldn't be suprised (being Ireland and all) that not all of the guns don't go throught the annual calibration when they're supposed to, but thats mere speculation



I see a fading KMPH but no sign of a VOID sticker or do you have to peel the sticker off.

Is the KMPH on every issue gun or just the guns pre-2005 that were in MPH firmware

nice guy always wrote: »

The equipment is kept in a padded case when not in use. They dont rattle around and as stated they cannot be decalibrated by lying in a car, andd if they do for some reason they wont detect.

Correct to a certain extent. If an issue with the LIDAR hardware happens it'll fail the POST (Power On Self Test), but a knock can alter the aligment of the scope itself and believe me it'll pass the POST everytime.

nice guy always wrote: »

If you point the lasor dot (not cross hairs) at a sign it returns zero.

Give the gun a slight flick of your wrist (size of a hair) and it'll bypass the error trapping on the gun E01 and E03 and you'll be suprised the sign is travelling at 3kmph Otherwise known as 'THE SLIP EFFECT'

nice guy always wrote: »

but for speeding the general policy is to stop the motorist unless it is a ROBOT van (new company name for GATSO).

GATSOMETER and ROBOT are completely different companies, ROBOT won the tender I guess this round.

GATSO vans (existing) use the GATSOMETER system (K-Band RADAR) but don't work in dark light and have trouble with rainy weather and can only monitor a single lane.
GATSO (Dutch)

ROBOT vans - ROBOT is basically a front-end system for the Multanova (MultaRadar C) which are a swiss company. ROBOT does all the filming, ticket work while the MultaRadar C (also K-Band RADAR albeit low horizonatally polarised) detects the speeder. The ROBOT system has none of the limitations of the GATSO, works well in the dark and rainy conditions and can monitor multiple lanes at the same time.
ROBOT (Germany)

nice guy always wrote: »

And finally......why would a Garda make it up.....we dont need to.

Hope this helps, anymore questions?

Maybe not deliberately. I know its not an LTI gun but they're prone to the
same error

BBC wrote:

The slip effect



If the laser doesn't focus on the same area you can get the slip

As the gun calculates speed by measuring the changing distance to a car, if the beam of the gun is moved along the car while taking a reading, this could affect the results.

As Dr Clark explains; "This instrument doesn't know if it [the speed gun] is moving. So it started measuring a little bit further away down the vehicle, now it's a bit closer so it thinks there's a speed reading".

He then pans the speed camera down the side of a stationary car and clocks it doing 4mph.

"This is of course very relevant. If a policeman is pointing at a vehicle going by and he moves it across [the vehicle] then he will get an increased, or indeed a decreased, speed reading."

Dr Clark says that all laser speed guns suffers from the same problem so we thought we would give it a go on a wall with one of the latest guns used by the police: an LTI 20.20.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/southwest/series7/speed-cameras.shtml

SLIP / Sweep Errors:

I know the below aren't LTI guns but Youtube and BBC have removed the video from the link above showing the Ultralyte with the exact SAME issues.

Laser Atlanta Slip error:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XinL5Dv_i3w

Stalker Laser Slip error:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyMjtq3IodU

I wonder how many people in Ireland have been incorrectly issued fines because of this issue. I've seen members of AGS operate a UL without the shoulder stock

A personal avourite of mine: The Traffic corps had a Taxi pulled for speed and where was the Ultralyte gun? face down on the road so the lenses can get a good and proper scratching, I'm sure that'll do wonders for future readings the transmitting and receiving lenses all scuffed up.

You'd know he didn't own that E6500 gun thats for sure:pac:

W.B. Yeats

nice guy always wrote: »

Right...here it is.......again

Speed detection equiment is calibrated every year as standard. The ultra lyte detection equipment AGS use will NOT work if it goes out of calibration. It the calibration is knocked out it shuts down and gives an error message....no reading. The equipment is certified and the "gun" itself is stamped....the KMPH sticker on side faids after some time to reveil "void".

The equipment is kept in a padded case when not in use. They dont rattle around and as stated they cannot be decalibrated by lying in a car, andd if they do for some reason they wont detect.

If you point the lasor dot (not cross hairs) at a sign it returns zero.

A Garda does not have to stop you to give you a ticket (this is know as a non intercept), but for speeding the general policy is to stop the motorist unless it is a ROBOT van (new company name for GATSO).

Speed detection is well in place in legislation. It is the Gardas word on the vehicle he detected and the speed of that vehicle in its respective speed limit. As stated hundreds of thousands of these are argued in the state every year and never have I seen one thrown out because the judge didnt believe the Gardas word. It pains me to say, drink drivers can get off easier!!!

On your question about when the detection is made....well if your overtaking and break the limit.....your still breaking the limit. The detection is done at 600m for the handheld and up to 1000m with the larger one on tripod.

The burden of proof is always on the state, but in this case the word of a Garda is sufficient proof for a judge.

And finally......why would a Garda make it up.....we dont need to.

Hope this helps, anymore questions?

Thanks for posting this answer (again...) - Very informative and good to know

Surely its not a stretch to imagine that a Garda could make something up? We've certainly evidence of this happening in the past for very serious things. Its human nature- there's a very interesting piece of statistical analysis done in the US that showed teachers cheating in standardised testing for their students so I'm in no way suggesting that this is limited to Gardai.

Hooch

eringobragh wrote: »

The gun itself has a T sticker on the back (Tele-Traffic). and the Calibration info on the scope as in photo below. I wouldn't be suprised (being Ireland and all) that not all of the guns don't go throught the annual calibration when they're supposed to, but thats mere speculation


I see a fading KMPH but no sign of a VOID sticker or do you have to peel the sticker off.

Is the KMPH on every issue gun or just the guns pre-2005 that were in MPH firmware

I can say with 100% certainty that all speed detection equipment is sent to tele traffic a month before its calibration runs out. If tele traffic do not recieve it they contact the station to arrange to get their service to collect.

On the KMPH sticker you cant see void because it is not void. The KMPH dissolves after the year and reviels void written at a 45 degree angle all over the sticker (hundreds of void written)

It is now on all guns which are KMPH (and all guns are now KMPH)

W.B. Yeats wrote: »

Thanks for posting this answer (again...) - Very informative and good to know

Surely its not a stretch to imagine that a Garda could make something up? We've certainly evidence of this happening in the past for very serious things. Its human nature- there's a very interesting piece of statistical analysis done in the US that showed teachers cheating in standardised testing for their students so I'm in no way suggesting that this is limited to Gardai.

Most posters here know me and I will say when Gardaí are wrong (like my attitude to the GATSO etc) but here I must say no way would member make up a speed. There is no need. Wait another 5, 10, 15 minutes and you'll have one. Sad fact but true im afraid. Normally members show a person the guns speed. This has to be their car as after a certain time the speed gun turns off (about 5 mins) Very few traffic stops for speed are complete (detect, stop, take details etc) in 5 mins.

bugsntinas

why is it that whenever someone gets caught for speeding the first thing they do is look for a way out?be a man and accept the fact that you are breaking the law and have got caught.if ya don't want a fine and points then stick to the speed limit it's as simple as that.

Sizzler

bugsntinas wrote: »

why is it that whenever someone gets caught for speeding the first thing they do is look for a way out?be a man and accept the fact that you are breaking the law and have got caught.if ya don't want a fine and points then stick to the speed limit it's as simple as that.

And why is it there is always a holy joe that is just as quick to post on the same thread about how dispicable it is that someone got caught for speeding and how they should stick to the speed limit. With that attitude I hope a copper jumps out from behind a bush some day and does you for going 62kmh in a 60 zone and see what your attitude is then. Oh wait....you don't speed do you :rolleyes:

bugsntinas

Sizzler wrote: »

And why is it there is always a holy joe that is just as quick to post on the same thread about how dispicable it is that someone got caught for speeding and how they should stick to the speed limit. With that attitude I hope a copper jumps out from behind a bush some day and does you for going 62kmh in a 60 zone and see what your attitude is then. Oh wait....you don't speed do you :rolleyes:

oi knob rot read what i wroye.i never mentioned anything about it being dispicable that someone was speeding i asked why can't they accept the fact they got caught and live with it.maybe one day i will get caught but it's been about 14 years since the last time and if i do i won't go asking how to get out of it.if ya can't do the time don't do the crime!!!!!
ye i do speed at times as 1 mph over is speeding unlike the pricks that see fit to carry on at 100 at a 60 limit.

I_am_Jebus

Sizzler wrote: »

And why is it there is always a holy joe that is just as quick to post on the same thread about how dispicable it is that someone got caught for speeding and how they should stick to the speed limit. With that attitude I hope a copper jumps out from behind a bush some day and does you for going 62kmh in a 60 zone and see what your attitude is then. Oh wait....you don't speed do you :rolleyes:

If you are doing 62 in a 60 zone you won't have to worry about a garda jumping out of anywhere.

the op in this case, didn't come on and say they got caught doing 2km/h over the limit. The op in this case, may not have been caught, but according to his speedometer was doing 12km/h over the limit. There's a margin of error of about 3km/h at speeds of 80km/h and under on speedometers. This raises to about 4-5km/h on speeds from 81 to 120km/h.

The op in that case was proboably in the region of a true 107km/h.
a couple of km/h over a speed limit is well within the range of momentary carlessness, or changing road factors, e.g downhill slope etc... and you won't get done for speeding in these cases. but 7, 12, 20 km/h is not momentarily careless but instead a a concisious decision to break the limit. If you do and you get caught, there really is nothing to argue about or contest, well nothing sensible anyway.

And if you unconciously go 7,12, 20 km/h etc.. over the limit, then you probably should not be behind the wheel of a vehicle.

I don't have a problem with speeders, well, those on motorways etc... anyway (residential zones, etc... are a different story). At times, I often break the limit on motorways primary dual carriage ways etc.... but the difference is, I know what I am doing and I also know I run the risk of getting caught and I know the consequences. Been there and done that and accepted my punishment.

There's a difference between a "holy joe" and someone that has some cop on. If you break the speed limit and get caught you know exactly what's coming. Stop whinging about it. Accept the risk or don't gamble, simple as.

Someone else's fault for me breaking the limit, conspiracy theories, :rolleyes: done to death at this stage.

PANADOL

Standing outside your house pointing a hairdryer at cars to see if they slow down

-Chris-

bugsntinas wrote: »

oi knob rot...
...unlike the pricks...

No need for this bugsntinas - infracted for insulting other posters.

bugsntinas

quote=-Chris-;61938521]No need for this bugsntinas - infracted for insulting other posters.[/quote]

the word prick wasn't aimed at anyone in particular

the phrase knob rot was

i feel insulted for being called a "holy joe" are you going to warn him them?

Hooch

eringobragh wrote: »

A personal favourite of mine: The Traffic corps had a Taxi pulled for speed and where was the Ultralyte gun? face down on the road so the lenses can get a good and proper scratching, I'm sure that'll do wonders for future readings the transmitting and receiving lenses all scuffed up.

Meant to reply to this too, the lens on the ultra lyte is sunk with a rubber lip all around the front. This allows about 20mm or more so as long as its placed on tarmac and not stones the lens cannot get scratched or scuffed.

eringobragh

nice guy always wrote: »

I can say with 100% certainty that all speed detection equipment is sent to tele traffic a month before its calibration runs out. If tele traffic do not recieve it they contact the station to arrange to get their service to collect.

On the KMPH sticker you cant see void because it is not void. The KMPH dissolves after the year and reviels void written at a 45 degree angle all over the sticker (hundreds of void written)

It is now on all guns which are KMPH (and all guns are now KMPH)
.

Good to know as I said that was speculation on my part . Last time I checked it was 300 yoyos for a calibration from Tele-Traffic

nice guy always wrote: »

Meant to reply to this too, the lens on the ultra lyte is sunk with a rubber lip all around the front. This allows about 20mm or more so as long as its placed on tarmac and not stones the lens cannot get scratched or scuffed.

I know that both lenses are recessed, but I was referring to exactly what you pointed out... if theres a stone on the ground it'll scrape it and the road I saw this guy do it on wasn't exactly the smoothest.

Anan1

bugsntinas wrote: »

the word prick wasn't aimed at anyone in particular

the phrase knob rot was

i feel insulted for being called a "holy joe" are you going to warn him them?

Come back in a week when you've learned to be civil. And next time you disagree with a mod's decision, PM them!

Sizzler

I_am_Jebus wrote: »

If you are doing 62 in a 60 zone you won't have to worry about a garda jumping out of anywhere.

I was using that as a real example. I know someone who got done for precisely this. So talk of the 10% is widely accepted but doesnt always hold water. This was a lady who didnt know any better and took it on the chin when the Guarda told her she was over the limit.

I_am_Jebus wrote: »

the op in this case, didn't come on and say they got caught doing 2km/h over the limit. The op in this case, may not have been caught, but according to his speedometer was doing 12km/h over the limit. There's a margin of error of about 3km/h at speeds of 80km/h and under on speedometers. This raises to about 4-5km/h on speeds from 81 to 120km/h.

I wasnt making my comments in the context of the OP's case tbh.

I_am_Jebus wrote: »

And if you unconciously go 7,12, 20 km/h etc.. over the limit, then you probably should not be behind the wheel of a vehicle.

WOW! Pretty damning stuff ! I would love to spend a day tailing you around and see well you comply with the speed limit at all times.

I_am_Jebus wrote: »

I don't have a problem with speeders, well, those on motorways etc... anyway (residential zones, etc... are a different story). At times, I often break the limit on motorways primary dual carriage ways etc.... but the difference is, I know what I am doing and I also know I run the risk of getting caught and I know the consequences. Been there and done that and accepted my punishment.

Can't have it both ways, either you are for or against speeding, why is it OK to consciously speed on a motorway Just because you know you are running the risk it makes it OK?

I_am_Jebus wrote: »

There's a difference between a "holy joe" and someone that has some cop on. If you break the speed limit and get caught you know exactly what's coming. Stop whinging about it. Accept the risk or don't gamble, simple as.

Holy joe comment was in reference to the multiples of people who come on here and are uber quick to say they don't speed and with a generally condescending tone in respect of anybody who posts on the subject. I am not saying I am condoning speeding, far from it but what I will say is the amount of people who ride in on their high horses as soon as someone raises the topic is sad to see, schadenfraude alive and well on this forum.

I think there also has to be some recognition given to the fact that its only human nature to be pi$$ed off about getting caught for a traffic misdemeanour, half the time people are blowing off steam and probably feel all the better for coming on here and seeing that other people can relate to what may be to them a petty offence, they can then go away feeling that other boardsies feel their pain or have been through the same etc. We are all human People bursting their bubble with the instant moral high ground doesnt help imo.

artielange

The exception to the rule.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/motoring/article-1122042/Motorist-beats-98mph-speeding-charge--buying-car-proving-manage-speed-85mph.html

Hooch

artielange wrote: »

The exception to the rule.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/motoring/article-1122042/Motorist-beats-98mph-speeding-charge--buying-car-proving-manage-speed-85mph.html

Firstly......were not talking about fixed cameras....

Secondly thats the UK.....slightly different place from us on the map:D

Anan1

Sizzler wrote: »

I think there also has to be some recognition given to the fact that its only human nature to be pi$$ed off about getting caught for a traffic misdemeanour, half the time people are blowing off steam and probably feel all the better for coming on here and seeing that other people can relate to what may be to them a petty offence, they can then go away feeling that other boardsies feel their pain or have been through the same etc. We are all human People bursting their bubble with the instant moral high ground doesnt help imo.

That's quite true, but don't you also think it's more than a little childish? I have the dark feeling I was photographed at 160-180km/h on the M4 last week. Am I happy about it? No. Do I feel that it was all the fault of the vindictive, spiteful Garda hiding on a perfectly safe stretch of motorway? Also no. I was speeding, and if it comes to it i'll take it like a man.

Sizzler

Anan1 wrote: »

That's quite true, but don't you also think it's more than a little childish?

Blowing off steam, childish? Honestly? No. If it makes someone feel better than chocs away

Maybe there should some of the threads though should be in ranting & raving

Hooch

Anan1 wrote: »

i'll take it like a man.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

real men dont take "it"

Sorry had to point it out.......i'll get my coat

pippip

Do speed cameras have any sort of magnification? Cause doing 100kph i'd say you'd be hard pushed to take a reg! Might be the stronger defense in court.

Just a thought.

-Chris-

If you've seen a photo taken by a speed camera or an M50 gantry you'd think again - they're crystal clear!