🚀 go-pugleaf

E. Faubion wrote in message <359c18cf.26542564@news.okc.oklahoma.net>...
>hartman@NOSPAM.tconl.com (P.J. Hartman) wrote:
>
>>And that's why some of us use available, legal technology to help
>>identify when an officer is in the vicinity.
>
>Which is why I leave my radar on only when I haven't the time to stop
>anyone.  There's no telling how many times I've slowed down a detector
>equipped speeder when he was in no danger of getting stopped.  They do
>have their uses.

I think a great use of radar is leaving it on at an accident scene where
oncoming traffic is likely to come on it without much visual warning.  A few
times I've come over a blind hill or around a blind corner and had my
detector go crazy and slowed down (also slowing many of the speeders behind
me) only to find an accident scene and some very slow traffic on the other
side.  It really got things quieted down quickly.

>
>>Of course, scanners and detectors aren't panaceas, nor will I make
>>such a claim.  But, in many cases, they do help.
>
>Yep, you got that right.   Thirty percent of all speeders that I stop
>for speeding on the interstate system have detectors including some
>with the infamous V1.   Heaven forbid we ever outlaw the gadgets.
>Then working radar wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

My detector has paid for itself several times, especially when they have
those multi-cruiser harvesting operations going.  Of course, I know I can
get nailed anyway, but my odds are better with it than without and the state
can use a little money once in a while.

>
>
>efaubion@oklahoma.net
>http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/6123/

Mark Folsom