I don't think wishing for a politicians death is warranted, if fact it's disturbing. I wish for these boneheads to be tossed out of office, but wishing for their death lowers you to their level.

In our system, we elect a few mistakes, you just have to wait them out. It's what seperates us from the crazies.

I think it was a tounge and cheak comment. I highly doubt he is wishing for a demise of an individual.

I agree, except we only have to wait them out about another 6 months and the political landscape could be extremely different then what we see today.

one can hope....
 

From your mouth (err...fingers?) to God's ears (err...eyes?)....

Hey come on now... I didn't say it, just helping a friend out.. LOL :D:laugh::D

sorry, I just took Belmont a little too literally. I just flashed back to all the "Kill B#sh" signs.

sorry
 

I did not mean literally. Unfortunately the town of Belmont has a lot of shortcomings and he is one of them. Over the years I’ve learned that not many of the elected officials in the town Belmont have much backbone. Years ago we went thru a subdivision and found this out first hand. Also had problems with a neighbor and that’s where it really became clear.
I honestly thought they needed to consult someone else before wiping their #$%%.
To bad, we have a great piece of property but will probably elect to build our new home elsewhere in the area.

A Little Help With the Math, Please...
 

I don't understand this. :confused:

NH Legislators grabbed $700K from the MP budget, but had earlier approved a near-doubling of 2010 boat-registration fees: even if registration fees only produced $12 for each registered boat—as a very conservative example—there are over 90,000 boats that can be expected to register!

(So over $1 Million would have been collected—leaving a net gain in MP funding). :confused:

APS, I had read a statement detailing the MP budget. Let me see if my old mind can remember the gist of it.

Apparently, they had a fund that was growing a little bit for a rainy day. The annual budgets, combined with decreasing registrations, had slowly eroded the fund. In addition, costs have steadily risen. The MP has had cutbacks and a decline in personnel as a result. So while they have doubled the fees, they have effectively taken that amount out of the equation.

$3 million budget, less half funded by CG. $1.5 million is the balance, which has been subsidized by the fund balance, which was in decline. They take $700,000, roughly half. So nope, not an increase. The registration increase was supported because of the MP's statement that costs were outstripping their funds. The Legislature had increased their costs, so it was only fair.

In the end, the registration increase became a general fund tax that boater's pay. The MP loses, at least this year.

Ticket on 89
 

I was driving the ol' Jeep down 89 from Burlington VT Friday. It was fairly straight stretch in Andover, NH. With the cruise control set at 74 on my Garmin NUVI 225, the Jeep speedometer says 77,78 mph. Local Andover cruiser stopped me and clocked me at 82 mph! So the GPS was off 8 mph!

Garmin claims .1 mph accuracy. I was traveling in a straight line. I'm wondering if the radar could be inaccurate. It was an one of those dashboard mounted units and he was parked in the median.

I wonder how they check the accuracy of police radar as I am sceptical of an 8 mph difference. How would you know if the LEO is telling the truth?

Last Time I Traveled I-89...
 

The speed limit was 65 miles an hour, excluding off ramps of course. So admittedly, on my part, if they allowed say 70 MPH in some sections, I have found that if you keep it under 5 MPH over the speed limit, and weather and traffic conditions pemiting, they usually won't bother you. However, there IS a fine line there, and you don't want to take any chances! Especially in this economy! They are out there writing up what they can, for job security, as well...

Should you go to court to fight the ticket, don't tell the Judge what you just told us... Wise...
Good luck...

38 -48 foot cruisers.

Used late 1990's-mid 2000's models go for: $160,000 - $525,000.

I gotta say, that's way out of my league.

If your work schedule allows you the opportunity, contest it. You really stand no chance against a speeding ticket as a valid RADAR certificate for the officer training and his equipment means his word against yours. It's a civil offense so there's no reasonable doubt criteria. BUT, you can hope he doesn't show.

Buy a radar detector. It stops you from casually driving along and getting a needless ticket.

Radar, both dash mounted and handheld, are supposed to be calibrated by a TMDE company once per year. We have a company come out and do it officially. We are also supposed to check the calibration with tuning forks often. You strike the tuning fork and the vibration simulates pre-determined speeds (for us it is 35 mph and 65 mph, we have two forks) there should be a stamp or sticker on each radar and the dept should be able to provide proof of date and time of calibration. This may not be possible at the initial hearing but there may be an appeal process to a judge (this is the case in Mass). Its a shot in the dark but if plan a doesn't work (officer doesn't show up) maybe plan b will work (out of calibration). If both fail, throwing yourself at the mercy of the court will sometimes work if your driving record is otherwise flawless and you are respectful...and the stars line up...

Good luck with the radar detector angle... I will put my radar skills against your detector any day of the week (playfully ofcourse). I have never given a break to a speeder that has a radar detector on the dash....
Secret- radar isnt sending out waves until I see you and push the button. Once that happens- BAM! your speeding and your caught (unless you can bleed 10+ mph in a milisecond or I blink,lol)

Good luck on the ticket
HCG

I heard the costs to get those tuning forks retrieved when they fell down the defroster slots was a big one :laugh:

Ever lose one?

If you paint any vehicle in front of me with lasar or radar you can't hide. My RD is one of, if not the best, on the market. Very sensitive. I sniff out the Maine State Police with ease and they go to great lengths to hide on bridge overpasses, on entrance ramps, etc.

As with any radar or lasar, if you are the only car on the road then you're vulnerable to getting a ticket if you're speeding. Also, if I was to get pulled over my detector would be out of site from your view and mine also has VG-2 immunity ;)

Some of us are serious tech geeks:D

Most of you are just speeders who tailgate and will someday end up in an accident. Don't know why people are in such a hurry to get places.

Very good points RailroadJoe!

Radar detectors are popular gadgets among speedsters who derive thrill from bending the rules and eluding the radar guns of the police.

Some people are not satisfied with moderate speed while driving. They want to be the fastest driver on the road as well as get to the places they're going in record time; they want to be always in the race.

IMHO anyone that has radar detection equipment in their vehicle and gets into an accident that can be attributed to high speed should be penalized the same as someone who Drives Under the Influence (DUI).

Here are some of the states that deem radar detectors illegal:

1. The usage of radar detectors are prohibited in the Commonwealth of Virginia. They have
laws banning the use of radar detectors. Not only are radar detectors illegal to use in Virginia,
they are also illegal to have in the vehicle.

2. Radar detectors and radar jammers are illegal in the District of Columbia. The passing of
their laws to ban the use of radar detectors was set in 1995.

3. In Illinois, radar detectors are only regulated in commercial vehicles of over 26,001 pounds.

4. On US military bases, they are legal to have but illegal to use.

5. Radar jammers are illegal in the states of Utah, California, Oklahoma, Colorado and
Nebraska.

6. Radar detectors are not specifically regulated, but things hanging from windshields are not
permitted in the state of Minnesota.

7. For motor vehicles over 18,000 pounds and any other commercial motor vehicles over
10,000 pounds in New York, radar detectors are illegal.

And you would be wrong. Sorry

I don't have to drive that much anymore but I have in the past been a long distance commuter. Trust me when I tell you that the odds of the day you drift up in speed to 75-80 MPH it's nice to have a radar detector bleep at you so you avoid the stray ticket. It's not some extreme desire to play race car driver. I can assure you some many of the lakes region long distance commuters who may read this will understand how easy it is to have a speed zone change and bam, ticket.

And the states LOVE speeding as they generate revenue out the fines they collect and the cops use it as a way to justify their expenses. Without speeding tickets your police departments would probably have less officers and less equipment. You should thank them;)

It seems there are a lot of cars being towed that have extensive front end damage. Tailgating ? Or just not paying attention.

That's funny reading that. Have you driven (err, sat) in rush hour traffic in DC and Northern VA, you can't speed if you wanted too:laugh:

Use of a radar detector to a DUI? Hint: Look at how many cars on the road have radar detectors.

The rules aren't bent. Speed and you can still get a ticket. You also don't elude radar. The detector simply tells you that radar (or lasar) is present. If you are the only car on the road, the detector may be a ticket indicator.....

And by the way, I haven't looked into radar jamming in detail but even if that act was not illegal, the jamming transmitter would in all likelihood be illegal via the FCC. Again, I haven't researched it but I'm betting that jamming is illegal because of something other than a state law.

You are so right RailroadJoe; tailgating is an epidemic on all highways.

Here is a short video that shows how speed kills:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_z8Mnf22D30" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Rusty, last time I checked cars drive down the road with the front end pointed forward..... May be just a coincidence that cars in accidents typically have damage to the front end:rolleye2:

original topic
 

I find the technology part of the gps vs speedometer readings discussion interesting. I don't have a gps and never looked into how they work, cool stuff. I have compared one boat speedometer to another and have seen a difference. Whether you swap yours out for a new one or a friend clocks you, always a few mph off in my experience.

As far as getting ticketed in a boat, if the marine patrol handle it like they do on the roads, (not sure they do/will) the slightly different numbers may not matter. As my experience tells me that they tend not to pull you over for going 57 in a 55, although they could and maybe someone here will tell me they have, but I am not sure 60 in a 55 gets you a ticket most of the time either. Don't really know what the line is, but it seems there is some leeway there on the roads. I would think the same would apply for boats.

BH, not sure if you had other cars around but if you are doing 75-78 MPH that seems to be about the flow of traffic. Once you hit the 80+ MPH point is when you are basically passing most cars on the road. Kinda of a crude way to look at it.

As far as my Garmin GPS (Nuvi 2xx series), it seems to match quite well to my speedometer in all my vehicles. But I also run OEM tires.

Does your vehicle has the STOCK tire sizes and STOCK rear gears? Change either one of those and your speedometer (or speed sensor gear) will require changing. Changing from say a 255 to a 265 tires and or vice versa and you can get a different reading. There's converter tables out there to tell you the different speedometer readings.

Changing to a smaller tire is a cheating way to get more gearing in your rear-end (well, your vehicles anyway)......

Rusty, I changed my avatar just for you :laugh:

This one would be more appropriate for you:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

You're catching on. I like it!

So is this an admission that you're wrong?

in conclusion
 

Traffic was sparse at the time. I was not passing nor were there cars passing. The weather was sunny and cool. The road was dry. I was driving reasonable and prudent at the time.

I have stock tires and the drive train is stock. I was told stock speedometers can be off by a mph or two. Mine was off by at least 3 mph.

Talked to a buddy of mine who is a captain on the Nashua Police department. As far as contesting the ticket. I was already 9 mph over the speed limit. Since the radar says you are over the sl by 17 mph, it would be tough to contest. It will be a slim chance I could get out of it. If the officer doesn't show up or can not provide a certificate of qualification and or radar does not have a recent certificate. In small towns it is possible, as some small towns have a very small staff and will not contest minor violations in court. There are rare occasions when a small town do not have certified officers or radar. Very rare.
If I was going 64 in a 65 zone. An officer pulls me over going 72. I am going 7 mph over the sl, a sympathetic judge may let me off with a warning. If I keep the preceding business like and not get into arguments etc. Very rarely would an officer pull you over going less then 10 mph over the speed limit if it was reasonable and prudent at the time. It is tough to prove if one is speeding when he is over by less than 5 mph. Radar do not take into consideration traveling around corners and sometimes weather can interfere with the signal. As far as the difference between radar speed and GPS speed, you need all kinds of expert testimonies to contest it. If you do win, then it could be an example for future cases.

I don't have radar detector or jammer. I use to work for a defense electronic firm. The engineers says radar detectors are not quick enough to detect the hand held. The dash mounts are on continuously and can be detected. Some of the engineers created home made jammers that hitch to a radar detector send out a signal at the sign of detection. If the detector is smart enough to detect the frequency so does the jammer. Some LEO says jammers are illegal because FCC regulate transmitters. The jammers and radar detectors operate on a frequency not regulated by the FCC. It is a mute argument.

My argument is what do we need to use in a boat to make sure we are with the law. Boat speedometers known to be inaccurate. According to my experience, one can not rely on a GPS speedometer.

Here smokey, smokey: http://www.escortradar.com/store/passport-9500ci.html

Also, some models in years past were taken off the market due to the FCC so they defintely have a hand in it. I will tell you that my Escort Radar Detector is no joke. My wife was miffed when she saw the CC statement come in. Ever since I got that 73/65 ticket on the turnpike I said never again.......

I have friends with the Portsmouth and Greenland PDs and they would tell you first hand that my Escort works against their car based units. I honestly have not spent the time digging into vagaries of how it works but now I have renewed interest.

Let me add this, as reality-based, but not scientific testimony.

I have a Garmin 440 plus a Tom Tom for the car. I've used the Tom Tom in the car, and it was always within 1 mph or dead even with the car's speedometer. In the boat, the Tom Tom was almost always dead even with the Garmin, as well as my Navionics App display on my iPhone. They were all pretty much dead even, within 1 mph max variation.

I'd have to say with your variation, either your car's speedo is off, or your GPS is somewhat screwed up. My boat speedo is pretty much dead on accurate up until 40 -45 mph. In the early stages, up to 25 or so, the GPS reads higher than my boat speedo. At 55 mph GPS, my boat speedo is bouncing around 57 or so, up t 60. After that? Well there is no after that, that's the max :eek:

GPS vs Radar
 

I like to believe my GPS is giving me the accurate speed. I get the impression that either the police radar is off or the LEO is having a bad day. :(

Radar/LIDAR misunderstandings
 

Just so no one is confused I need to correct a few statements made here.

As with most handheld units, virtually all dash mounted cruiser radar units have the same "instant on" capability. This "instant on" cpability has been available for years and is used whether the officer is stationary or in moving radar mode (operating the radar while travelling).

Additionally all radar jamming devices that emit RF are regulated and prohibited by FCC regualtions. How? In order to emit the necessary RF energy to jam a police radar, the jammer would need to have what is known as FCC type acceptance. To operate without this acceptance is a federal offense. To date no such device has ever been submitted or approved for Type Acceptance, for obvious reasons. That said it is virtually impossible for a local officer to enforce federal FCC regulations. However, local communities or States are allowed to pass supplemental regulations that prohibit operation or possession of such devices, and that is why a number of State's have those regulations which are easily enforcable by local, county or state officials.

In addition everyone needs to remember that there are two very distinct types of handheld devices. The oldest is the RF emitting type that has been available for several decades. The newer devices are LIDAR units, commonly called "laser" units. These do not emit RF energy, but for a layman explanation use light energy. There are a number of vendors that claim they manufacture a "light based" jammer for LIDAR units. Since these jammers are mostly passive devices or emit no RF energy they are not regulated by the FCC. However, local and state authorities could prohibit these devices by local ordinance if they so desire.

As a State of NH certified traffic radar operator I had many years experience with all of these devices, and have repeatedly came across much of these misunderstandings, especially in Court.

Hope this helps clarify some of the misunderstandings in the post quoted. :)

Skip

Just a reminder...my professional estimation of your speed is more than enough to hold you to a ticket. If I point my radar/lidar at you and nothing shows up, and I "estimate" that you were traveling in excess of a posted speed limit, that is good enough to ticket you. Tried and true, this is established precedent in Ohio and has been adopted by many other states including Massachusetts (not sure about NH but they are usually ahead of us when it comes to pro-police law)

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index....l_estimat.html

With this in mind...I don't hate speeders enough to need this. Just an interesting factoid.

Good luck, btw, the good guys always win...eventually!
HCG

Probably be another very long thread as to which one of us is wearing the white hat...lol

Laser jamming devices are quite legal (except in California and Minnesota) as they emit light which is not regulated. I have one and they work quite well!! ;) Combine this with a top of the line radar detector and I have never received a speeding ticket for accidentally or unknowingly exceeding the maximum speed which is quite easy to do when you are on the road daily.

Dan

I think this is where people get the misconception that owning a radar detector means a desire to be a speed freak. For those of us that do/have put a lot of time on the road, they save you from that inadvertant creep up in speed at the same time a cop just happens to be clocking cars in the median.

What's really fun is when I pull over to the middle lane and then watch someone pass me and there's the police car waiting. Sometimes I point to people and they slow down others give me a strange look. The figure it out quickly.

My Escort 9500 does jam lasar. There are even independant studies that show that is has masked the cars speed from point blank range.

And as far as speed estimation, unless a car is going much faster than all others around it then you better have a good way to explain that. Some of us even have dash cameras too albeit mines a cheapy and the audio sucks. Like I said, some of us are tech junkies.

hancoveguy, I have to ask if you don't think that's a tad frightening? I can see an officer pulling over a car going excessively fast like 50-60 MPH in a 25 MPH zone or 90-100 MPH. And I would call that reckless driving or some other applicable offense. If you want to tell me that on a highway you can visually estimate my vehicle to be going 76 vs 65 MPH or something like that with repeatable accuracy then I will call you out on that. The whole point of the radar/lasar equipment is to provide an objective measurement. In my case, unless I am the only car on the road and you are using radar/lasar, I've detected you from several thousand feet out and have already slowed.

I am shocked that the court did not just toss the case if the guy was not certified using radar. I also believe this is an overzealous enforcement and the state makes sure they don't lose these cases or they risk losing all that revenue. And, that decision was not unamimous. I'd like to see a US supreme court ruling on this case.

If you think this is good for society for judges to give carte blanc discretion to an officer to guess a vehicle speed to issue a speeding ticket then I give you no credibility. Luckily this is probably rare and if an officer used this more than once I think it would raise flags about why he's not using the state supplied equipment. There are checks and balances.

Just goes to show the speed limits are not about safety but revenue. Makes me smile even more knowing the stuff I have in my truck. Gives power back to the people:D

What gets me is that the police officer estimated by eye that the SUV was going 73 mph and that radar gun read 82 or 83. Wouldn’t that tell the Supreme court as well as the lower courts that there is a discrepancy about how close the officer can estimate speed? Granted he wasn’t certified to use radar but it should have been enough IMHO to throw the case out. If he can’t estimate within 10 mph then this case went way too far in the courts.

The case alludes to this being valid only if the officer is trained and certified in estimation. This is a substantial instructional block in every academy that I know of in Mass. This estimation principle, if you will, is mostly used in an unforseeable scenerio. You will not find officers setting up on a stationary traffic enforcement assignement armed only with their estimation skills. The prime example of how this is used-

You are on patrol in your cruiser. You are stopped, waiting to pull out from a sidestreet or strip mall or something like that. Your dashmounted radar is facing straight forward and straight back (perpendicular to the traffic flow) so it is useless on short (immediate) notice. You have no handheld with you. Now, you have travelled this road hourly for most of your adult life and you know and are comfortable with what the traffic flow looks like at any given hour. Just then, from around a distant corner, you see a smaller car headed towards you. Based on all your experience and training (nevermind as a police officer, just as an alert motorist) you know beyond all reasonable doubt in your mind that this vehicle is travelling well in excess of the posted speed limit of X. This vehicle is travelling so fast that you believe it could eventually become a hazard to other motorists but not so fast that it is out of control.

What do you do?
A. Nothing, because you didnt get it on radar or laser and you clearly do not have enough to stop the vehicle on any foolish reckless driving violaions (which there is no such thing btw)
B. Unlawfully stop the vehicle and only verbally chastise the operator
C. "estimate" the vehicle's speed based on your inherent knowledge of the road and the traffic flow and cite the individual accordingly, knowing that even though you don't have 100% assurance of your estimation's accuracy but in the name of the public good, you are bound to "act" in some way.
D. shoot the person and go get coffee and donuts

This is truly not meant to provoke an argument but rather to illustrate the necessity of the law/policy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but this is reasonable in mine.

Disclaimer- As many of you know from my previous posts, I am not a big speed enforcement guy (or state revenue agent as it were) as this practice would make me a hypocrite, but there are some times when you just need to trust the system.
BTW- Lawn psycho, you are off track if you think the liberal courts in Mass give two flying hoots about revenue when it comes to tickets, appeals, or anything else within their judicial scope. I have seen sooooo many fines just eliminated for no good reason. They truly do not factor governmental revenue into justice. They are far more likely to find on behalf of the violator just to spite the police.

I would get him for the following which is in Ohio’s Chapter 4511,Trafficlaws-Operation of Motor Vehicles, Subsection 4511.20:

"4511.20 Operation in willful or wanton disregard of the safety of persons or property.
(A) No person shall operate a vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar on any street or highway in willful or wanton disregard of the safety of persons or property.
(B) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree.
Effective Date: 01-01-2004"

Thats excellent but what is your basis for "willful or wanton disregard" if you can't "estimate" that what they are doing is willfully and wontonly disregarding public safety etc....Is there an objective "brightline" standard for willful and wanton? And if so, without estimating that they are speeding, how do you satisfy the criteria?

Also, you cited a criminal statute not a traffic infraction. Just so I understand this... its not okay to issue a speeding ticket (non criminal infraction) based on estimation only but you can summons someone into court or arrest, (both will give someone a criminal record) based on an estimation?

I am clearly not following your logic, make me understand plz.

HCG