GTR Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi guys,

Not sure if laser jammers are legal in the UK, last I heard I think it was a real grey area.

Well anyhow, I want to get one to compliment my valentine one and wondered if there's any preference for brand and model with you guys ??

There's a couple of brands available in the UK that aren't available here so I thought this would be a good place to ask if they're better, worse, or the same as the Blinder M20.

Another reason I ask about it suiting Skylines is because I don't want it to clutter up the look of the front of my car and want to try and make it blend in as much as possible.

Any advice ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
General concensus is that these are an OK jammer, but harder to fit and get good results from than others.

Seems the LRC100 and the Blinder M20 are the 2 most are recommending, just wondered if there was any real world experiences from users on here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Seems they are legal over there. They certainly are here in NZ.

Have a read of this from the Bel site in the UK. There's heaps of sites including the court sites in the UK to back up this too.

Legality.

As of January 1998 it became legal to use radar detectors in the U.K. It was ruled that the signal from a radar or laser gun is not a police message and therefore that detectors are not contravening the Wireless Telegraphy Act. So you can happily buy one and acquire an extra pair of eyes that in some circumstances can identify speed traps further down the road than you can.

Regina v Knightsbridge Crown Court, Ex parte Foot Before Lord Justice Simon Brown and Mr Justice Mance.

[Judgment January 29 1997]

Microwave radio emissions from police radar speed guns did not constitute a "message" for the purposes of section 5(b)(i) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949, even within the extended meaning of "message" given by section 19(6).

Accordingly, the use by a motorist of an electrical field meter to detect the presence of such emissions was not an offence under section 5(b)(i) since the device was not used "to obtain information as to the contents, sender or addressee of any message".

The Queen's Bench Divisional Court so held, granting David Adrian Foot's amended application for judicial review to quash the dismissal by Knightsbridge Crown Court on January 8, 1997, of his appeal against conviction by Marylebone Justices on July 23, 1996 of an offence contrary to section 5(b)(i).

Section 5 of the 1949 Act, as amended by section 3 of the Post Office Act 1969, provides: "Any person who - . . . (b) otherwise than under authority of the [Minister of Posts and Telecommunications] or in the course of his duty as a servant of the Crown, . . . (i) uses any wireless telegraphy apparatus with intent to obtain information as the contents, sender or addressee of any message . . . shall be guilty of an offence. . ."

Section 19 provides: "(6) Any reference in this Act to the sending or the conveying of messages includes a reference to the making of any signal or the sending or conveying of any warning or information, and any reference to the reception of messages shall be construed accordingly."

Mr Anthony Calloway for the applicant; Mr John McGuinness for the prosecution.

LORD JUSTICE SIMON BROWN said that the applicant was using an electrical field meter to detect radio transmissions from radar speed guns. The device was not able to decode the transmissions. Mr Calloway submitted that the police radar gun did not send or receive messages, even within the extended meaning of that term given in section 19(6).

In *Invicta Plastics Ltd v Clare* ([1976] RTR 251), the Divisional Court had held that those advertising such devices as the applicant's were guilty of incitement to motorists to contravene section 1(1), which required a licence for the use of such devices. However, those devices were now exempted from the need for such a licence by the Wireless Telegraphy Apparatus (Receivers) (Exemption) Regulations (SI 1989 No 123).

Mr McGuinness submitted that a radar beam emitted towards a vehicle was equivalent to making a signal within the meaning of section 19(6).

His Lordship disagreed. No doubt it was a signal or sign which conveyed something of meaning to another person, but Mr McGuinness did not say that it amounted to sending or conveying a "warning or information" within that subsection. His Lordship also rejected the submission that the operator was the addressee of a message, that is of information, sent back by the passing motor vehicle.

A police officer beaming emissions to and receiving information from an inanimate moving object was not exchanging messages with the motor car. There could be no reception of a message save between two human operators.

Tempting though it was to outlaw the anti-social use of such devices, now that they were no longer banned under section 1(1) of the Act, to do so would be to stretch the language of section 5(b)(i) to breaking point.

If, as was probable, the 1989 Regulations had been brought into force without recognising the present lacuna, the matter had to be put right by a further such instrument.

Mr Justice Mance delivered a concurring judgment. Solicitors: Moss Beachley & Mullem; Crown Prosecution Service, Victoria.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,630 Posts
Radar detector`s are legal.
Radar defusser`s are illegal to use as you will be preventing a police officer from carrying out there duty,
if i remember correctly someone was prosecuted in Wales last year. I can`t remember if the driver went to prison or not but i do remember that the courts didn`t take kindly to the drivers actions
 

·
Real men use a H-Pattern.
Joined
·
12,026 Posts
If you use a jammer and it prevents a Police Officer with, eg, a speed gun taking an accurate measurment of your speed. You can be prosecuted for perverting the course of justice - regardless of whether you were speeding or not.

Canman, the judgement quoted is very out of date. The law has been amended. Bad news I know, but there you go :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
blinder

i brought a blinder kit from a guy of this forum, cheap too, as for perverting the course of justice, well there has to have been the commision of a crime ie an offence, but the proof of the offence lies with evidence, the ocifers will not be able gain the evidence because of the way the blinder works, what you may have is a case of obstruction, but all the gadgets use by plod are hideously innaccurate, the association of chief police officers state that all devices such as lidar 'guns ' should be used on tripods, you will see plod leaning out of cars resting the gun on thier door mirrors, even minor tremors will give hugely variable results, dont forget a laser detector will only do just that, once locked on you are toast, the blinder scrambles the laser signal and alerts you that you are being targeted, you turn off the unit and slow down, plod then has another go and you are all ok, because these guns give out such cr*p results they wont even look twice, none of you can belive how we all 'roll over' when we get pulled, i bet 90% of the guys on thi forum would not have bounus points if they knew how each and every police officer is meant to conduct each and every motoring check they carry out, they work on ignorance of the law, you will be told ignorance is no excuse for a defence, but it allows them to get away with £000's in fines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
RichW said:
The driver in wales was deliberatly driving up and down past the officers though wasnt he? Heres a link to my site, and the tests conducted on my Evo ....

http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~richw426/radarjam/radarjammer.htm
Thanks for that. It was a great read.

So, from what your site says about the SLD920 being the same as the Blinder M10, can I assume the SLD100 is now the new model and the same as the blinder M20 ??

How long have you had the unit ?? I assume no trouble with it. Had any real world experiences with it yet, with real cops ??

Sorry for all the questions, just want to be sure before parting with 250 or 300 quid and a friend is also going to purchase at the same time so...........

Thanks for the info so far.
 

·
Real men use a H-Pattern.
Joined
·
12,026 Posts
If you use it, you are commiting an offence. Simple as that.

If you can react quickly enough, turn it off, and are then lucky enough that they don't pull you over because the signal was scrambled then good on you. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Yeah thanks for that. Have read that site and a few others, but that site pretty much recommends the 2 laser products I'm trying to choose between.

Suppose that says it all, but just wanted some true independant proof to make sure they're just not saying they're all good cos they're selling them !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Had it fitted around two years now. Only had one 'real world' test. I was driving along a dual carriage way (30mph zone), and crested the brow of a hill and a copper was sat sideways on in his car pointing the gun directly at me. What surprised me at this point is that both me and my passenger could both actually see the red light of the lasar out the end if the gun!

Unsurprisingly the jammer went off, i checked my speed (30mph as it was the local 'cruise' night and so was expecting alot of police to be around). I immediately turned the jammer off, looked at my speed again, by which point we were almost upto the police car, and this was the funny bit - the copper had the gun back inside the car, had it tilted on its side looking at it in a rather puzzled manor lol!

At the time i was half shitting it incase he came after us, but he didnt and so the outcome was a)relief that the jammer had worked again and b) the funny look on the coppers face as he was looking at the gun. :D

I spoke to another lad who had a similar experience with his LRC100. I must say if i was buying one now, then i would probably go for this unit due to its size. I'm not upto date on the new Blinder units.


Heres a little food for though, i'm pretty well protected against speed entrapment, i have aGPS device for the fixed cameras and the Blinder for the lasars to the front of the car. Last month i received a NIP - lasared from the rear on the motorway. You know where the coppers were? Sat on a bridge, barely in view, above the hard shoulder facing traffic coming towards them on the other side of the motorway. Had i had a jammer fitted to the rear of the car i still doubt it would have protected me, with the greater angles thet the new lasar guns can be operated at, all you are doing is buying time, at some point if you speed everywhere, you wil get caught - and if your on the motorway, make sure its below 95mph, if its anymore then its direct to court like i will soon be doing! :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Hi Rich,

Thanks for the reply, sorry to hear you got pinged ! :(

I don't really want one as a licence to speed, just to cover my **** in case I'm not paying as much attention as I should and creep over the speed limit really.

I think as you said, it's only a matter of time if you speed everywhere.

Thanks again.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top