Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pegasus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!pegasus!mzal
From: mzal@pegasus.UUCP (Mike Zaleski)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: (A Sermon on) Radar Surveillance
Message-ID: <2493@pegasus.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-Aug-85 12:29:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: pegasus.2493
Posted: Wed Aug  7 12:29:19 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 03:40:32 EDT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft NJ
Lines: 84

[ xxxx ]

> = mtuxo!houxm!homxa!gritz
>> = allegra!jay

>  Radar guns should be unconstiutional ... [because they represent
>  random electronic surveilance].

>>  Give me a break!  I am not a big fan of radar guns myself, but I'm
>>  ready to admit that's because I'm afraid of getting speeding tickets.
>>  I don't believe that anyone who really obeyed the speed laws would
>>  agree that radar guns are unconstitutional or feel his privacy
>>  invaded.

I'm also not a big fan of getting speeding tickets.  However, the
idea that radar guns represents random electronic surveilance is
not necessarily unreasonable.  For example, the model K-55 radar
gun has an auto speed alarm which will go off whenever it detects
something in its field which is moving faster than a preset speed.
This requires no intervention on the part of the patrol officer.
Now, how is looking for "interesting speeds" different from the
government's (past/present?) policy of scanning international calls
for "interesting words"?  Certainly you'll agree that in both cases
people are being spied upon without probable cause.

>>  These laws exist for a purpose, and their enforcement helps
>>  keep our roads somewhat safe.  I feel threatened when someone whizzes
>>  by at 80 MPH and cuts in front of me...

NJ, and I'm sure most other states, has laws regarding reckless
driving and/or driving too fast for conditions.  The police do not
need a radar gun to catch someone whizzing around at 80 MPH.

>>  If we disallow radar guns...

I think what originally got this started was a discussion of
some legislation proposed by some legislator, possibly named
Schwartz, in NJ which would ban radar detectors.

Two arguments FOR radar detectors:

1. They alert you to radar traps ahead, where traffic will slow
   down unexpectedly.  They alert you to situations where a
   police car - and potentially a hazard - is ahead.  In short,
   they encourage you to be prepared for potential hazards.

2. The claimed purpose of radar detectors (claimed by the manufacturers,
   that is) is to remind you to check your speed at times when it
   is particularly important.  Unless you drive a burned out Datsun
   B210, you might find that either (a) it is easy to creep past the
   speed limit without necessarily intending to do so, or (b) you
   have to spend a lot of driving time looking at your speedometer
   (instead of the road) if you want to obey the law.

Three questions:

1. How does this proposed legislation deal with the issue of federal
   jurisdiction over radio receivers?

2. Why is this legislation being proposed?  Are the police having
   trouble catching people speeding?  If the police aren't having
   trouble catching speeders, why are we cluttering up the 50 or so
   volumes of New Jersey Statutes Annotated with more junk?  To me,
   any unneeded law or legislative resolution or rule is bad.
   Government should be minimized, not maximized.  To me, this law
   represents another example of how the government simply does not
   care about the people.  I don't think the electorate was
   clamoring for a law banning these detectors.....

3. If they get away with passing this law, will CB radios (which
   can also be used - in some ways more effecticely - to watch
   out for police) be next?  And if they get away with that, then
   we better really start worrying....

What I intend to do is find out more details about this legislation
and then call my state representitve and tell him that if s/he
does not vote against this issue, I will vote against him/her in
the next election.  I would encourage you to do the same.
If you live in NJ and have spent 100 to 400 dollars for a radar
detector, it seems you should spend a few minutes and another dollar
to protect your right to use it.

-- "The Model Citizen" Mike^Z
   Zaleski@Rutgers     [ allegra!, ihnp4! ] pegasus!mzal