# Radar detectors are illegal! **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 2, 2008, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612 "2008-04-02T01:14:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Napier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ce73a5/32.png) [@Napier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Napier)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/41 "2008-04-03T01:50:03Z")
JR may be delirious, but I’m not. That an ethical principle from the world of radio might become little more than fodder for online forums is no surprise to me. Hell, not only have I read The Prince, I actually created an online database for all the employees in my company where they can read it too. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/42 "2008-04-03T01:51:59Z")
[QUOTE=guizot] Well, I suppose that when you knock on someone’s door, and they ask, “Who is it?”, “technically” you “should” say, “It is I.” But _do_ you? I doubt it. Nobody does. [/QUOTE] I do. Not always, but I do. Well, I don’t knock on anyone’s doors, but let’s say that in other situations where most people would say, “it’s me,” I’m known to utter “it is I” instead. ---
**Author:** ![F.U.Shakespeare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@F.U.Shakespeare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/F.U.Shakespeare)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/43 "2008-04-03T02:10:29Z")
[QUOTE=CookingWithGas] Reminds me of the “anti-anti-anti-missile-missile-missile-missile.” 😃 Anyone remember Rocky & Bullwinkle? [/QUOTE] That was the _second_ thing I thought of, after the anti-anti-anti-anti spray devised against ping pong balls in the Captain Kangaroo-Bunny Rabbit conflict. Better living through TV. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/44 "2008-04-03T02:14:14Z")
[QUOTE=guizot] Especially “technically,” since with language usage, there is no “technically,” only convention. Well, I suppose that when you knock on someone’s door, and they ask, “Who is it?”, “technically” you “should” say, “It is I.” But _do_ you? I doubt it. Nobody does. [/QUOTE] I’ve tried that, but on the phone. It seems pretty natural after a few times. And when I ask “Who are you” (instead of “who is it”), the caller sometimes seems offended. ---
**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/45 "2008-04-03T17:49:12Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] It is not debatable that they were originally formed as acronyms. Whether they are still acronyms is what is debatable. There’s a pretty good argument to be made that they’re just normal words now and should be (not) capitalized as such. [/QUOTE] I think you may be correct that these are no longer considered acronyms. [This source](http://www.sti.nasa.gov/publish/sp7084.pdf) says: > [@](#): > > Acronyms are always formed with capital letters. A few words have crept into our language which were initially acronyms, for example, laser and radar. But generally acronyms remain in full caps. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/46 "2008-04-03T18:15:47Z")
I have at least three problems with that cite. The first is that it seems to display circular logic. The second is that it’s not really clear whether they consider “radar” to be an exception to the rule that acronyms should be capitalized or that they consider it not to be an acronym. The third is that it is a style rule and thus really only applicable to people who are working under that styleguide. > [@](#): > > Acronyms are always formed with capital letters. Maybe that’s the rule for NASA style, but it’s just a style rule. There’s no such universal rule. Acronyms are often written as regular words, sometimes as soon as they are created. To me it’s unnecessary to put things like these in all caps, even though they are acronyms: Unesco, Uncitral, Unicef, aids (the disease), Alcoa, USA Patriot Act, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/47 "2008-04-03T18:49:28Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] …aids (the disease)… [/QUOTE] Huh? I’ve only ever seen the disease capitalized; when it’s not capitalized, it’s an entirely different word altogether. ---
**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/48 "2008-04-03T19:02:59Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] Maybe that’s the rule for NASA style, but it’s just a style rule. There’s no such universal rule. [/QUOTE] You’re probably right that this is a “style rule”, but when I searched, every source I checked said the same thing. That’s pretty universal in my book. ---
**Author:** ![Leviosaurus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/439d5e/32.png) [@Leviosaurus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leviosaurus)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/49 "2008-04-03T19:04:33Z")
[QUOTE=Rick] > [@](#): > > # The Federal Communication Act of 1934 guarantees the right to receive radio transmissions of all types on all frequencies. Traffic radar is not privileged communication: in fact, it’s not communication of any sort because no information is conveyed to another party. It is surveillance by radio waves, and that is not protected by any laws. Oh BTW **Q.E.D.** the telecommunication act of 1996 did not supplant the 1934 law rather it amended parts and repealed other parts. [cite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Act_of_1934) [/QUOTE] I actually came in here to post the same thing, but Rick beat me to it. The difference between the language in the telecommunications act and the use of fuzzbusters is that driving a car on government owned roads is not a constitutional right. That’s why you need to get a license, pay for registration, and you agree to comply with a host of regulations when driving. That said, I used to ride with the cops in Michigan years ago as part of my job, and frankly, these anti-fuzzbuster laws should all be abolished. The police have so many ways around fuzzbuster technology now, that using a fuzzbuster is pretty much a guarenteed method for getting caught. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/50 "2008-04-03T19:06:04Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] To me it’s unnecessary to put things like these in all caps, even though they are acronyms: Unesco, Uncitral, Unicef, aids (the disease), Alcoa, USA Patriot Act, etc. [/QUOTE] I’ve never before seen any of the UN agencies uncapitalized, nor AIDS (the disease). Obviously not an authoritative argument, but I think it can count for a data point. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/51 "2008-04-03T19:51:30Z")
I wonder if those cops would object if you built a car body using stealth technology (easily done against any redar). It would be butt-ugly though, as are stealth aircraft. ---
**Author:** ![Leviosaurus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/439d5e/32.png) [@Leviosaurus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leviosaurus)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/52 "2008-04-03T21:24:56Z")
[QUOTE=mangeorge] I wonder if those cops would object if you built a car body using stealth technology (easily done against any redar). It would be butt-ugly though, as are stealth aircraft. [/QUOTE] If you look at the ground near a typical freeway speedtrap, you will see small markings, usually a one or two foot line drawn perpendicular to traffic flow. They’re almost always on the shoulder connected to the line delineating the outside of the right lane, but I have also seen them in the middle of the lane. When you see one line, you’ll see another about a hundred feet down the road. Cops sit in view of these marking and start a timer when you pass the first marking, then stop it when you hit the second. The timer shows your speed. No radar necessary, and the courst accept the timer output as proof. No fuzzbuster in the world can alert you if a cop is timing you this way, and your stealth car isn’t going to evade it either, unless it’s invisible. This is just one of the fuzzbuster proof tools the cops I worked with used, and this was over ten years ago - I’m sure they have more tricks now. For example, laser based speed detection systems were too expensive to be practical back then, but laser technology has gotten a lot cheaper. Fuzzbuster laws are as antiquated as fuzzbuster technology - they shouldn’t bother keeping these laws on the books. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/53 "2008-04-03T21:37:15Z")
[QUOTE=mangeorge] I wonder if those cops would object if you built a car body using stealth technology (easily done against any redar). It would be butt-ugly though, as are stealth aircraft. [/QUOTE] Wouldn’t work. Stealth technology doesn’t eliminate a vehicle’s radar return, it merely reduces the size of its radar cross section. Traffic radar can easily read something as small as a bicyclist, albeit at a much shorter range than for a car. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/54 "2008-04-03T21:43:38Z")
[QUOTE=Leviosaurus] If you look at the ground near a typical freeway speedtrap, you will see small markings, usually a one or two foot line drawn perpendicular to traffic flow. They’re almost always on the shoulder connected to the line delineating the outside of the right lane, but I have also seen them in the middle of the lane. When you see one line, you’ll see another about a hundred feet down the road. Cops sit in view of these marking and start a timer when you pass the first marking, then stop it when you hit the second. The timer shows your speed. No radar necessary, and the courst accept the timer output as proof. No fuzzbuster in the world can alert you if a cop is timing you this way, and your stealth car isn’t going to evade it either, unless it’s invisible. This is just one of the fuzzbuster proof tools the cops I worked with used, and this was over ten years ago - I’m sure they have more tricks now. For example, laser based speed detection systems were too expensive to be practical back then, but laser technology has gotten a lot cheaper. [/QUOTE] Ah, VASCAR. The traditional tool of municipalities all over Pennsylvania, since they’re not allowed to have radar. It’s even more sinister when they take your time from known landmarks, so you don’t even have the lines to warn you to slow down. The revenooers will get their money, one way or another. Of that you can be certain. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/55 "2008-04-03T21:49:26Z")
[QUOTE=mangeorge] I don’t understand how it can be legal to criminalize radar detectors. [/QUOTE] How can it be legal to criminalize possession of burglary tools? They even have legitimate purposes. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/56 "2008-04-03T21:57:57Z")
I hate the term “whoosh”, but nobody really thought I was suggesting that one should actually _build_ such a car. Right? But, jokingly speaking, properly building that car _would_ significantly reduce it’d RCS. Maybe close to invisibility. I’ve been away from that stuff too long to be up on the latest technology. Those line in one form or the other have ben in use since before I was a little kid. They’re also used for “The Eye in the Sky” patrols. BTW; I don’t own a radar detector. I do speed. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/57 "2008-04-03T22:04:44Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] How can it be legal to criminalize possession of burglary tools? They even have legitimate purposes. [/QUOTE] Way different. Crowbars are used to break the law. Active. RDs are used to _tell_ you you’re breaking the law. Passive. I’ll bet a case could be made for detectors saving lives. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/58 "2008-04-03T22:05:39Z")
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF] Ah, VASCAR. The traditional tool of municipalities all over Pennsylvania, since they’re not allowed to have radar. [/QUOTE] I think Pennsylvania is the only state where only the state police are allowed radar. What a pain in the nuts for the locals! Using VASCAR on the highway isn’t very hard. You can pace someone with it or sit up on a bridge or an entrance ramp. But on city streets? It totally limits where you can hide your squad as you need to have a good visual on a vehicle. Much more than you need with radar. What about laser? Can they have laser? ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/59 "2008-04-03T22:07:37Z")
[QUOTE=pkbites] What a pain in the nuts for the locals! Using VASCAR on the highway isn’t very hard. You can pace someone with it or sit up on a bridge or an entrance ramp. But on city streets? It totally limits where you can hide your squad as you need to have a good visual on a vehicle. Much more than you need with radar. [/quote] Good. The harder the better. Make them earn their petty, arbitrary fine money. > [@](#): > > What about laser? Can they have laser? As far as I know, no. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2008, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612/60 "2008-04-03T22:13:47Z")
[QUOTE=mangeorge] I’ll bet a case could be made for detectors saving lives. [/QUOTE] AIUI, there are jurisdictions that use unmanned radar emitters to trip radar detectors - acting as a false positive, inducing those people using radar detectors to reduce their speed to the posted limit. Even if the emitter is at a known location, simply putting the occasional live cop there, with a real radar gun is probably enough to keep the threat ‘viable’ in the minds of commuters, and so the emitter may have a positive effect on speed in that area. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/radar-detectors-are-illegal/443612.md?page=4)