Speed Trap detectors

Walker34

Hi,
are these legal or not and do they work?........even my iphone has 2 and some versions of tomtom cover speed traps. I am curious, but it is now so easy to hit 35 in a 30 km/hr zone, and penalty points are an expensive oversight.

BaronVon

Yes, they're illegal by way of some SI in '91, I think.

Not sure how the iPhone ones work, but the other ones detect the frequency of the speed gun.

The speed gun the Gardaí use can detect these jammers, so you escape 2 points but end up in court as well.

Walker34

I thought they only warned the driver rather than "jamming" anything......I can see how preventing them from checking would be illegal,...... but just warning the driver would be less so......no?

source

Iphone apps, like trapster are information sharing apps, ie motorists update the app with the location of speed traps they have seen.

The tomtom and garmins of the world use mapping tech to notify you when you come into an area where speed cameras are, the map simply informs you that you are approaching an area where speed cameras are known to operate. (info that is freely available online on the Garda website.)

The snoopers which are radar detectors are illegal, as they interfere with more than just Garda equipment.

Walker34

foinse wrote: »

Iphone apps, like trapster are information sharing apps, ie motorists update the app with the location of speed traps they have seen.


The snoopers which are radar detectors are illegal, as they interfere with more than just Garda equipment.

Surely this is a very dubious use of the word "interfere"......the gun user is bombarding the car with laser pulses and the detector is just reporting this intrusion. Im just wearing my solicitors wig at the moment for the sake of argument?

murphthesmurf

These radar detectors are a bit of a grey area from what I understand. The argument is that they are interfering in the course of justice as they are preventing the Gardai from doing their job correctly as they warn you of his presence, the same as a look out would.
TomToms etc are legal as they notify you of an area with a 'traffic safety camera' and whether or not you are within the legal limit. So tend to get round the law as they are warning you of an accident blackspot or that you are travelling too fast.
There's a lot more to it than this, but I believe this is the jist of it.
You would be using the radar detector as a means of escaping detection.
But as I said, legally its quite a grey area, and there are many different types of these detectors. There are some detectors that, when they detect the radar from the speed gun, they beam out their own radar, which confuses the speed gun and it gives an error message. These are def illegal as this is interfering with the course of justice.
Detectors though, do not interfere as such.

source

The radar gun is basically a radio transmitter and receiver using the doppler effect to measure the speed of the vehicle that the radio waves are transmitted at.

The detector is also a radio device which operates at certain frequencies, these frequencies it has been said can interfere with things like emergency equipment, aeronautical equipment etc etc While this may not always be the case, it is a possibility and that is, as far as I'm aware the reason for them being illegal in a number of countries across the world.

murphthesmurf

hand held speed detectors are also notoriously inaccurate. Any slight movement of the device whilst measuring a vehicles speed effects the reading. Even if the gardai has the device on a tripod, if he aims it at the front of an oncoming car, but moves it slightly so that the laser goes to the windscreen then back to the front of the car, this would put 3 or 4 mph on your speed.
Trying to prove this would be something else though.
I remember from a few yrs back, a guy got caught speeding in the US by such a device. He challenged it and said that he would prove that the reading was incorrect. They dropped the charges against him..........he was a NASA scientist

murphthesmurf

I used to have a motorbike, and enjoyed a bit of speed. I once toyed with the idea of fitting high intensity infa red led's around my number plate. Infa red is the same as in a tv remote, its invisible to the human eye, but not to cameras.
The idea was to put quite a few of these around my number plate, so if a speed camera took a photo of the number plate the bright lights would dazzle it making the number plate unreadable. Yet when an officer of the law was behind me, or looked at it, the light would not be visible.
Never tried it though. It would be highly illegal too

MOD NOTE: Yes, it would be highly illegal to do this; don't do this.

Walker34

Thanks for the replies folks......you all present different perspectives which are interesting, ranging from what I would judge to be benign to blatant interference in the law. Then again I`m not a judge nor am I an accountant.

That being said, the net effect is the same ........a reduction in revenue for the state and the insurance industry. I accept that speeding is dangerous to others as well as to the speeder.......but I kinda view "altruism and the caring state/insurance company" with extreme skepticism,.....in this, the year of the dog, 2011.:-)

murphthesmurf

murphthesmurf wrote: »

MOD NOTE: Yes, it would be highly illegal to do this; don't do this.

:cool:

* Murphthesmurf accepts no liability for anyone trying out his 'ideas', they are not intended to pervert the course of justice in anyway, and Murphthesmurf
was merely discussing a hypothetical possibility.

Seriously though, if speed cameras follow the same pattern as the UK they'll be strategically positioned at areas where they are most likely to catch people. I have no problems with speed cameras and speed enforcement when its done properly. I would like to see speed cameras and mobile cameras by every school and area that children play. But usually you'll find them in the middle of nowhere on a long straight road or just around a bend. These cameras are there to trap, rather than protect. Traffic police in the UK are virtually non existant now, as policing motorists is left to the cameras. Cameras dont catch bad drivers, careless drivers, drunk or drugged drivers, uninsured drivers, or drivers with no licence. As a consequence the number of uninsured drivers in the UK has shot up.

Ps, do cameras in Ireland have to be painted yellow and clearly visible, as per UK? ?

Our man in Havana

Ps, do cameras in Ireland have to be painted yellow and clearly visible, as per UK? ?

Nope. Battleship grey is standard here.

loremolis

I was in Maplin this afternoon and bought a set of 12volt red LED's.

I've just fitted them around my numberplate and I'm heading out on the road tomorrow to find out if they work.

First stop is the Electronic Toll on the M50. From there I'm going to head out to some well known camera speed traps on the Navan Road and maybe I'll finish of by heading into the Port Tunnell to see if their CCTV picks me up when I stop to have a slash.

By this time tomorrow I'll either be locked up o on Dragons Den showing them my new invention.

I'll of course give recognition to murphthesmurf.

Walker34

Found this on the web:

"All speed traps involve the use of police radar or laser, with the exception of the relatively few speed traps utilizing helicopters or airplanes. So, if you are alerted to the radar or laser from a speed trap, you can check your speed to ensure that you aren’t going too fast before you enter the speed trap.

Police radar is pretty easy to detect; the police radar radio signal is ‘noisy’ and can bounce off of the road, structures, other vehicles, etc. On the other hand, police laser is a very narrow beam of light and only needs to hit a vehicle for .02 seconds (2 hundredths of a second) to measure the vehicle’s speed. The narrow beam of light quickly disperses and does not bounce around noisily like police radar. Therefore, detecting police laser doesn’t work soon enough to allow you to check your speed. As soon as police laser is detected, your vehicle has already been targeted and your speed has been measured. If you were going too fast when police laser was detected, you might was well prepare to be pulled over to receive your speeding ticket. Your only option for protection against police laser is a laser jammer, which both jams the laser gun’s speed reading AND alerts you to the laser, allowing time to check your speed before turning the laser jammer off."

Victor

murphthesmurf wrote: »

MOD NOTE: Yes, it would be highly illegal to do this; don't do this.

Indeed.

However, it would also be quite fruitless as such cameras are typically multi-spectral, i.e. they can see visible light, near IR, near UV and IR.

loremolis

Dammit

I've wasted €39.95 and my whole afternoon

Anyone interested in used 12volt red LED's?

jimmycrackcorm

Irish Statuate Book

S.I. No. 50/1991:

ROAD TRAFFIC (SPEED METER DETECTORS) REGULATIONS, 1991.

ROAD TRAFFIC (SPEED METER DETECTORS) REGULATIONS, 1991.

The Minister for the Environment in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sections 5 and 11 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961 (No. 24 of 1961) and by section 9 of the Road Traffic Act, 1968 (No. 25 of 1968) hereby makes the following Regulations:—

1. These Regulations may be cited as the Road Traffic (Speed Meter Detectors) Regulations, 1991.

2. These Regulations shall come into operation on the 1st day of April, 1991.

3. In these Regulations, "speed meter detector" means any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of, or to frustrate the operation of, electronic or other apparatus being used to give indications from which the speed at which a person was driving can be inferred.

4. A person shall not use in a public place a mechanically propelled vehicle to which is fitted, or in or on which is carried, a speed meter detector whether or not such device is actually in use.

5. (1) The importation or supplying of, or offering to supply, a speed meter detector is hereby prohibited.

(2) The fitting of, or offering to fit, a speed meter detector to a mechanically propelled vehicle is hereby prohibited.

6. Article 5 of these Regulations shall be a penal Regulation.

I'd say that this means that an app such as Trapster would be illegal also although the definition of "Frustrate" could be up for argument.

Del2005

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Irish Statuate Book

3. In these Regulations, "speed meter detector" means any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of, or to frustrate the operation of, electronic or other apparatus being used to give indications from which the speed at which a person was driving can be inferred.

I'd say that this means that an app such as Trapster would be illegal also although the definition of "Frustrate" could be up for argument.

Using your logic the internet should be banned and the Gardaí prosecuted for frustrating the operation of speed cameras.

Radar and laser detectors/jammers are illegal. Even a map with the locations of the speed traps marked on it, taken from the Garda website, is also illegal. Guess which one you'll get done for.

Victor

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Irish Statuate Book


I'd say that this means that an app such as Trapster would be illegal also although the definition of "Frustrate" could be up for argument.

Closer examination of the text says "... frustrate the operation of ...".

Slowing down entering a zone might frustrate an attempt at detection, but does not frustrate the operation of the device itself, more importantly you are doing so by complying with the law.

Our man in Havana

Same as flashing your headlights.

MagicSean

Del2005 wrote: »

Using your logic the internet should be banned and the Gardaí prosecuted for frustrating the operation of speed cameras.

Radar and laser detectors/jammers are illegal. Even a map with the locations of the speed traps marked on it, taken from the Garda website, is also illegal. Guess which one you'll get done for.

The internet isn't really a device. In any case the Garda website and sat navs do not detect speed traps, they merely indicate where they have been in the past, much like the roadside signs no posted in detection areas.

Reloc8

Victor wrote: »

Closer examination of the text says "... frustrate the operation of ...".

Slowing down entering a zone might frustrate an attempt at detection, but does not frustrate the operation of the device itself, more importantly you are doing so by complying with the law.

"...or indicate the existence of"

So technically anything which says where they are, if used in a public place.

Funny enough if you therefore used your smartphone outdoors in most places to look up that internet site set up by the gardai to tell people where they were planning on placing those vans, you'd be breaking the law whereas if you looked at it in your house before you left you wouldn't :rolleyes:

Its a silly enough provision in its literal terms.

MagicSean

Reloc8 wrote: »

"...or indicate the existence of"

So technically anything which says where they are, if used in a public place.

Funny enough if you therefore used your smartphone outdoors in most places to look up that internet site set up by the gardai to tell people where they were planning on placing those vans, you'd be breaking the law whereas if you looked at it in your house before you left you wouldn't :rolleyes:

Its a silly enough provision in its literal terms.

There is a difference between something which indicates the presence of a speed camera in real time and something which merely displays previous locations.

Reloc8

Yeah.

That clause however draws no such distinction.

What it should deal with is something which 'detects the presence of' which would distinguish between contemporaneous modes of detecting speed traps eh sorry cameras and simply accessing information or noting their presence somewhere.

But it doesn't.

MagicSean

It says it must be capable of indicating the existance of. If i bring you to a road and ask you to check your iphone and tell me if there is a speed camera up ahead it cannot perform that function.

Reloc8

k_mac wrote: »

It says it must be capable of indicating the existance of. If i bring you to a road and ask you to check your iphone and tell me if there is a speed camera up ahead it cannot perform that function.

Yeah.

And used in a public place. That's all.

If I use it in a public place to look up and find information on e.g. a bulletin board or any website that correctly says 'there's a speed camera on that road' the definition is met. That's just the way it is.

You can say that isn't so and we'll just agree to disagree.

It's a provision which made sense in 1991 (I think) when it was drafted. It no longer addresses correctly modern technology. I don't know why you want to argue that it does in circumstances where when it was drafted there was no way of knowing what would be available 20 years later.

MagicSean

i can see how fixed cameras would fit into it but not the mobile ones.

Reloc8

Dun't matter. If the device is capable of indicating the existence of them, used in a public place, its illegal. Why would it matter if the information accessed was 'there's a permanent camera at x' rather than reading someone who tweeted 'I just saw a camera van at y'.

And note...it doesn't even have to be in use at the time.

I can only presume that common sense attitudes towards enforcement have meant no prosecutions have been brought under this regulation against people who just happen to have an internet capable phone in the car. Which is of course a Good Thing.

Actually I just realised, my own sat nav is in fact illegal under this regulation.

murphthesmurf

Victor wrote: »

Indeed.

However, it would also be quite fruitless as such cameras are typically multi-spectral, i.e. they can see visible light, near IR, near UV and IR.

But that was the original idea, I wanted the camera to see the infared light, and I wanted it to be sufficiently bright so as to 'dazzle' the camera. Then when whoever it is looks through the photo's to send out tickets would be unable to read my number plate.
No idea if it would've worked or not, but that was the theory.
Loremolis - 'infared', not red :rolleyes:
Normal led's would be visible to the gardai when they see you driving along with a bright red number plate, infared is invisible to the human eye
That law quoted would be picked to peices by any half decent lawyer. My Tomtom warns me of camera sites, so my Tomtom is illegal to use on Irish roads :mad: thats me screwed then, how will I ever find my way home

Carlow52

murphthesmurf wrote: »

But that was the original idea, I wanted the camera to see the infared light, and I wanted it to be sufficiently bright so as to 'dazzle' the camera. Then when whoever it is looks through the photo's to send out tickets would be unable to read my number plate.
No idea if it would've worked or not, but that was the theory.
Loremolis - 'infared', not red :rolleyes:
Normal led's would be visible to the gardai when they see you driving along with a bright red number plate, infared is invisible to the human eye
That law quoted would be picked to peices by any half decent lawyer. My Tomtom warns me of camera sites, so my Tomtom is illegal to use on Irish roads :mad: thats me screwed then, how will I ever find my way home

can someone please throw some visible light on what infared bulbs are as referred to above.

Went into harfords today and asked, the reply was are u an AJH?

murphthesmurf

Carlow52 wrote: »

can someone please throw some visible light on what infared bulbs are as referred to above.

Went into harfords today and asked, the reply was are u an AJH?

Lol

You wont find them in Halfords mate. They're whats in your tv remote. Hold your tv remote in front of your camera/phone and press a button. You'll see the light come on, but you can't see it with your eyes as its not visible to humans.
I can see me ending up in the dock over this.

Victor

murphthesmurf wrote: »

But that was the original idea, I wanted the camera to see the infared light, and I wanted it to be sufficiently bright so as to 'dazzle' the camera. Then when whoever it is looks through the photo's to send out tickets would be unable to read my number plate

But they can change the frequency to look at your number plate with say visible light or adjust the contrast, brightness, etc.

Its a fools game to try to cheat it.

murphthesmurf

Not sure if its the same here, but in the UK they are not allowed to tamper with an image in anyway. Doing so is tampering with the evidence. The picture has to be left as it is, not edited or altered in any way. If they did alter contrast/brightness etc, they'd know it was you, but it would then be inadmissible as evidence against you.

I wouldn't recommend anyone trying out my idea though, as its a long shot and prob wont work. The only way to find out would be to go zooming past a speed camera, then if it doesn't work your gonna get a fine and points on your licence.
Also if you get caught doing this, it'll be a big fine and even more points.
People used to spray something on their number plates to make them reflective, then when the speed camera takes a photo, the cameras flash would reflect back making the number plate unreadable. It does work, but not always. The bad side to doing this was, when the Gardai are behing you, their headlights would also reflect off your number plate, giving your game away.

Our man in Havana

Not sure if its the same here, but in the UK they are not allowed to tamper with an image in anyway. Doing so is tampering with the evidence. The picture has to be left as it is, not edited or altered in any way. If they did alter contrast/brightness etc, they'd know it was you, but it would then be inadmissible as evidence against you.

That wouldn't stop them here and DJs would just meekly allow it to happen.

ironclaw

murphthesmurf wrote: »

Lol

You wont find them in Halfords mate. They're whats in your tv remote. Hold your tv remote in front of your camera/phone and press a button. You'll see the light come on, but you can't see it with your eyes as its not visible to humans.
I can see me ending up in the dock over this.

There are a few things wrong with this.

If your trying to frustrate a laser gun, you in the entirely wrong frequency. They operate at a much higher frequency than your TV remote (850 - 890nm) as opposed to almost 905nm for the laser gun. It makes a huge difference. Even if you got 905nm LED's (VERY expensive), it won't jam a gun. In fact, it will make the gun signal a jam code.

Secondly, your not even remotely putting out enough power. The leds you bought are outputting mW of power. You'd want Watts of power to even get close to a blinding effect.

BrianD

loremolis wrote: »

I was in Maplin this afternoon and bought a set of 12volt red LED's.

I've just fitted them around my numberplate and I'm heading out on the road tomorrow to find out if they work.

First stop is the Electronic Toll on the M50. From there I'm going to head out to some well known camera speed traps on the Navan Road and maybe I'll finish of by heading into the Port Tunnell to see if their CCTV picks me up when I stop to have a slash.

By this time tomorrow I'll either be locked up o on Dragons Den showing them my new invention.

I'll of course give recognition to murphthesmurf.

Our good friends at 'Myth Busters' tested a whole range of "anti-speed camera" tricks. All were busted. Don't recall the red LEDS but can't see how they would work - many cars are already using LEDs in the rear light assemblies so red LEDs are close to the number plates.

It is illegal to use any speed gun detection/evasion equipment whether active or passive. It's not illegal to use maps or sat-nav that has speed trap zones marked - the Gardai encourage this by making maps with the Safety Zones available online.

ironclaw

BrianD wrote: »

Our good friends at 'Myth Busters' tested a whole range of "anti-speed camera" tricks. All were busted.

Take that with a grain of salt. An international program is not going to assert if a method to blind a laser / radar gun works or not. Plus the laser gun they used was not a good example (Stalker) There are a few examples of stuff being declared "Busted" when its not in Mythbusters.

One prime example is the speed of a car versus a speed camera. The camera is basically at the level of the license plate looking straight down the track. No matter what the speed, it would read the plate. It wasn't even a proper Gatso. Be careful with TV.

Del2005

BrianD wrote: »

It's not illegal to use maps or sat-nav that has speed trap zones marked - the Gardai encourage this by making maps with the Safety Zones available online.

The wording of the law means they are illegal, on a phone so can't post link but it's been posted before.

You can look at home but not in the car. Technically even a map with a speed trap location is illegal.

Zambia

If its a fixed camera location its not exactly a secret.

ironclaw

I'm pretty sure (In a Morning Ireland interview if I recall) the Garda Commissioner said that GPS based / map based were ok. They are not giving a real time indication of if a camera is there or not. Would be akin to a local telling you "The Gardai are always there etc" They may or may not be there at the time you go by.

A detector as such would be a device which provided real time indication i.e. Detection of the radar / laser signal.

Del2005

ironclaw wrote: »

I'm pretty sure (In a Morning Ireland interview if I recall) the Garda Commissioner said that GPS based / map based were ok. They are not giving a real time indication of if a camera is there or not. Would be akin to a local telling you "The Gardai are always there etc" They may or may not be there at the time you go by.

A detector as such would be a device which provided real time indication i.e. Detection of the radar / laser signal.

While the Gardaí may condone GPS/maps the law doesn't

3. In these Regulations, "speed meter detector" means any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of, or to frustrate the operation of, electronic or other apparatus being used to give indications from which the speed at which a person was driving can be inferred.

Any item which makes you slow down before a speed trap is against the law.

ironclaw

By that definition, it pretty much makes every GPS and smart phone in this country illegal. GPS and Map based (not live or real time) are allowed and its a fruitless exercise to insist they arn't.

There is a huge difference between locations marked or stored on a map versus a device capable of actually indicating the presence of a speed trap.

murphthesmurf

ironclaw wrote: »

There are a few things wrong with this.

If your trying to frustrate a laser gun, you in the entirely wrong frequency. They operate at a much higher frequency than your TV remote (850 - 890nm) as opposed to almost 905nm for the laser gun. It makes a huge difference. Even if you got 905nm LED's (VERY expensive), it won't jam a gun. In fact, it will make the gun signal a jam code.

Secondly, your not even remotely putting out enough power. The leds you bought are outputting mW of power. You'd want Watts of power to even get close to a blinding effect.

The idea is not to try to blind a laser gun, as this wont work. The idea was for the gatso type cameras. Using a bright infa red light to 'dazzle' the camera so making it difficult or hopefully impossible to read your number plate. The kind of effect I was thinking of is like if you stand infront of a mirror and take a photo of yourself using the flash on your camera. When you look at the photo a good area around the flash will not be visible due to the flash.
Infa Red led's, not red led's as others have posted. Any visible light would be spotted a mile away by any Garda.
But like I said before, this would be highly illegal, and if caught you'd be in it knee deep. Its merely hyperthetical

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Del2005 wrote: »

The wording of the law means they are illegal, on a phone so can't post link but it's been posted before.

You can look at home but not in the car. Technically even a map with a speed trap location is illegal.

The GPS Maps only show the parts of raods already indicated by the Camera Warning sign at the roadside. They do no enply any detection technology. The same maps are available on the Garda Website as well. Big difference between detection and advice of possible locations.

Del2005

ironclaw wrote: »

By that definition, it pretty much makes every GPS and smart phone in this country illegal. GPS and Map based (not live or real time) are allowed and its a fruitless exercise to insist they arn't.

Where in the legislation does it say they are allowed?

ironclaw wrote: »

There is a huge difference between locations marked or stored on a map versus a device capable of actually indicating the presence of a speed trap.

Zaria Important Zealot wrote: »

The GPS Maps only show the parts of raods already indicated by the Camera Warning sign at the roadside. They do no enply any detection technology. The same maps are available on the Garda Website as well. Big difference between detection and advice of possible locations.

Not the way the law is worded. You can look at a map/internet at home and memorise the locations. If you mark them and bring it in you're car it's illegal.

ironclaw

Del2005 wrote: »

Where in the legislation does it say they are allowed?

Granted it doesn't but I don't think its even on any Garda's mind to try confiscate nearly every TomTom, Garmin, iPhone and Nokia in the country. If I sent a text message to someone saying "Garda at XYZ" would the receivers phone be a device capable of indicating the presence of a speed measuring device? I suppose it would by that legislation.

And as stated, many roadsides have the new signs in place as well. I'll again draw a sharp contrast between a GPS / Map device and detector. They are entirely different.

By the letter of the law, yes they are all illegal, but please educate yourself in the difference between locations marked on a map / GPS and a detector.

Del2005

ironclaw wrote: »

Granted it doesn't but I don't think its even on any Garda's mind to try confiscate nearly every TomTom, Garmin, iPhone and Nokia in the country.

The thing is that a Garda could do you under the current legislation and confiscate your phone. All you need is to meet one on a bad day or power trip.

ironclaw wrote: »

If I sent a text message to someone saying "Garda at XYZ" would the receivers phone be a device capable of indicating the presence of a speed measuring device? I suppose it would by that legislation.

Yes it is "frustrate the operation" of the speed trap. Similar to getting done for flashing oncoming motorists.

ironclaw wrote: »

And as stated, many roadsides have the new signs in place as well. I'll again draw a sharp contrast between a GPS / Map device and detector. They are entirely different.

To take the legislation at face value yes the government is breaking it's own laws. But it's being doing that for years and no one has worried about it.

ironclaw wrote: »

By the letter of the law, yes they are all illegal, but please educate yourself in the difference between locations marked on a map / GPS and a detector.

I know the difference between them. The problem is that our legislation doesn't and legislation is what gets you prosecuted.

Our man in Havana

For what reason were these devices made illegal? One can only speculate about that.

MagicSean

Sat navs are not illegal. They are unable to show the locations of speed cameras in real time nor are they able to tell an active one from an inactive one. They have no ability to detect the presence of a speed trap. This has been argued to death here before with no agreement reached in the end.

Detectors are illegal as their only purpose is to assist someone in breaking of the law.

Break all ties

Detectors are illegal as their only purpose is to assist someone in breaking of the law.

Disagree. The real reason is revenue protection.

If your statement was true they would be banned worldwide. They are clearly not illegal in many EU countries. You would think the EU would move to stop them but they don't.

MagicSean

Break all ties wrote: »

Disagree. The real reason is revenue protection.

If your statement was true they would be banned worldwide. They are clearly not illegal in many EU countries. You would think the EU would move to stop them but they don't.

Are you for real? Revenue protection. And i suppose the purpose of wearing a mask when robbing a bank is to protect your right to privacy.

The reason cannabis is banned in this country is because of its chemical effect on the brain. However, it is not banned worldwide. Does this change the reason it is banned here?