T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
157.1 | Regulated by Province | MUDHWK::LAWLER | Kaixo! | Wed Mar 15 1989 07:33 | 14 |
|
It is regulated on a province by province basis. I have the
list at home, but from memory, I believe detectors are illegal
in Quebec, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland to name a few.
Crossing the canadian border from the U.S. there are usually
signs indicating whether detectors are allowed or not.
My experience with driving in canada indicates that it is so
sparsely patrolled, and people drive so fast in the country
that you can drive at any comfortable speed, and *still* be
the slow one on the highway... (Right, Scooter? :^)
-al
|
157.2 | Alta and Sask | TRCA01::OBRIEN | Glenn O'Brien @TRC 18/6 | Wed Mar 15 1989 09:46 | 4 |
| They are also illegal in Ontario and Manitoba. And back a couple
of years ago, it was legal in Saskatchewan and Alberta.
Glenn
|
157.3 | Illegal everywhere except..... | KAOM25::RICHARDSON | He who laughs best | Wed Mar 15 1989 10:23 | 11 |
| re. all
I believe Radar Detectors are only LEGAL in New Brunswick and
British Columbia.
A while back there was a scam in Quebec where they were selling
Radar Detectors for the purpose of measuring the leakage of a Microwave
Oven. This was an apparent loophole in the law which was quickly
re-written of course....
Glenn
|
157.4 | Are you sure? | TRCO01::OBRIEN | Glenn O'Brien @TRC 18/6 | Thu Mar 16 1989 15:33 | 5 |
| re: .3
When did Alberta and Saskatewan ban them?
Glenn
|
157.5 | They now you have one! | OTOFS::LALONDE | Work! Work! Work! Work! Work! | Mon Mar 20 1989 18:31 | 6 |
| They even have detectors who can detect radar detectors.
An employee recently was stopped and had he radar detector confiscated
and then fined.
DL
|
157.6 | Techically Illegal but ... | CGOO01::LMILLER | Now try it once more ...... | Mon May 29 1989 13:33 | 7 |
| In Alberta detectors are technically illegal, but everyone has one.
I believe that that someone won a case, and the government hasn't
bothered or believes it can't win, so those with detetctors are
not bothered. Officially, they ARE illegal.
We are going through the same thing with seatbelts at the moment,
but the government is chasing after this one, but not very fast.
|
157.7 | Detector detector | DNEAST::DEE_ERIC | | Thu Jul 20 1989 10:52 | 8 |
|
RE .5
How can a detector identify another detector? The receiving detector
does not transmit a signal, it only receives a signal. Interesting, if
it is the case.
Eric
|
157.9 | It's been done before with TV detectors. | OTOU01::BUCKLAND | mus ogre otigoc | Thu Jul 20 1989 12:32 | 18 |
| RE .7
� How can a detector identify another detector? The receiving detector
� does not transmit a signal, it only receives a signal. Interesting, if
� it is the case.
Back in Britain many years ago (and probably still) they used to
have detector vans that would roam the streets looking for people
with TV sets. If they found one that was not on their records as
having bought a licence to drive this dangerous device the perpetrators
of this ghastly crime againt humanity would be ticketed.
The detector would pick up stray emmisions from the TV's receiver
coils (if I remember rightly). The same, or a similar technique
could apply with radar detectors 'cos you must have an oscillator
of some kind to pick up the radar signal.
Bob
|
157.10 | | CLOSUS::HOE | Just keeping up with Sammy is a chore. | Thu Jul 20 1989 13:38 | 10 |
| RE .7
A receiver has a local oscillator that matches the transmitted
signal. When the received signal matches the local oscillator, a
signal gate is opened to trigger a warning device to let you know
of the radar unit. A sensitive frequency checker can detect the
presence of the signal-leaky radar detector. That is why some of
the cheaper radar detector can trigger a detector in your car.
cal
|
157.12 | radar detector? je ne compris | CLOSUS::HOE | Just keeping up with Sammy is a chore. | Thu Jul 20 1989 16:43 | 25 |
| Arpad
I have two pre-85 or 86 Passports. They are the most reliable
when used with caution. I always use them on trips to Ottawa
where my folks now live. Used to take them to Vancouver when they
(folks) were there.
There are no such thing as a detect proof radar detector; they
ALL emit some sort of Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) as do
our terminals or workstations. (Just try to tune a broadcast
radio near the computer.) The way (and I don't know how OPP
plans to detect their detector trap) that the RFI is picked up is
with a frequency measurement device tuned to the frequency of the
radar detector local oscillator. By getting a blip in the
measurement, they can surmise that you have a detector. I believe
that they have to physically see the device before they can seize
it.
I believe that Fuzz-buster has a rechargeable radar detector that
can fit in a shirt pocket; ie sans wire to the car. It can be
buried inside a kleenex box and if they cannot see it they can
not take it away. The Fuzzbuster runs 4 hours on a charge from
the car cagar lighter.
cal hoe
|
157.13 | passport was the best | FSCORE::RODERMOND | | Thu Jul 20 1989 17:06 | 11 |
| I read somewhere in the news that Passport was one of the best in that they
(the cops) had to be closest to it in order to detect the thing. Good
shielding maybe?
This same artikle said that the detecter manufacturers were waiting to get
there hands on the police device so that they could start designing
countermeasures. This is all leading to cars shaped like batmobiles (stealth
bomber lookalikes) featuring electronics-bays stuffed with military-like
fuzz-busting hardware.
F
|
157.14 | I an angered. | KAOM25::TOMKINS | This MIND left blank INTENTIONALLY | Thu Jul 20 1989 17:09 | 21 |
| For those Americans who come up north to visit, do not for one
second think that American Law is Canadian Law. Our laws are very
different than American laws in almost every application.
If a police officer has probable cause, he can search your vehicle
and your person. Probable cause can be shown in many ways, for example,
your license plates are from the State of Maine (radar stuff legal
there) and you are speeding and then suddenly you slow down to a
speed near the legal speed limit. The fact that you are from the
a state in the US where a radar detector is legal and the fact that
you slowed down so suddenly gives probable cause, for stopping and
searching you. An automobile is not regarded in Canada as being
an extension of your residence, and is therefore not subject to
the same laws of search and zeizure as a residance.
When visiting us, slow down, drive professionaly, we don't want
drunken tourists killing our children on the roads. People driving
fast on roads that they are unfamiliar with are a danger to themselves
as well as everyone else.
Leave your radar detectors, rifles and handguns at home.
You'd be nicked mate.
|
157.16 | Another low tech way | MQOFS::DESROSIERS | Lets procrastinate....tomorrow | Fri Jul 21 1989 11:46 | 8 |
| Another way of finding detectors, is for an unmarked patrol car
to follow a bunch of cars, then turn on their radar gun, the cars
that show their brake lights are then pulled over and searched.
Jean
PS This is done in Qu�bec too.
|
157.17 | Radar Detectors Obsolete By 1990 | KAOM25::RICHARDSON | He who laughs best | Fri Jul 21 1989 15:58 | 11 |
|
With the completion of the Grand Canal, there will no longer
be a need for Radar Detectors. The majority of Canadian traffic
will be on our waterways by 1990 once the Grand Canal Project is
completed.
My advice is to save your money or buy a depthfinder instead
unless they come out with depthfinder detectors, however I do not
forsee that they will become illegal as they will assist you in
navigating the Grand Canal.
Glenn
|
157.18 | SPEED KILLS. | KAOM25::TOMKINS | This MIND left blank INTENTIONALLY | Fri Jul 21 1989 16:05 | 43 |
| Lets say you drive 100 miles at 100 miles per hour. It takes you
1 hour to travel 100 miles.
Lets say your buddy drives 100 miles at 60 miles per hour. It takes
your buddy 1 hour and 40 minutes to travel 100 miles.
So speeding excessively at 40 miles per hour over the speed limit
will save you 40 minutes.
Folks who drive at 70 miles per hour in a 60 miles per hour zone
will only be saving a few minutes over everyone else traveling at
60 miles per hour. The probability of an accident caused by excessive
speed and lack of concentration by a speeding driver (how many of
you out there have to look at your passengers while talking to them
while driving, c'mon, I've seen you) goes up rather dramatically
for every 10 miles per hour over the speed limit.
I can assure you, that by racing past me, wagging your offensive
finger in my face and silently swearing at me, you will beat me
to the RED LIGHT every time. In fact, I have no doubt that many
of you will beat me to that BIG RED LIGHT IN THE SKY.
SLOW DOWN, SPEED KILLS. Hardly any of you are professional drivers.
There isn't a professional driver in his right mind that would want
to race at even moderate speeds with any of you on the same track.
By speeding down the highway, you endanger my life, my wife's life,
my daughter's life, your wife's life, your children's life, and
you obviously don't care about your life.
Racing between Ottawa and Toronto, you may save 20 minutes by
speeding. Hell, if 20 minutes is such a big deal you should learn
to leave 30 minutes early each time. Unless you are driving from
one side of North America to the other side, who cares if it takes
an extra day to get there. If you kill or cause the death of other
people on the way, was it worth it. Who gave you the right to take
the life of someone else, arbitrarily.
I just hope, that when you come screaming through the neighbourhood
in your car at night to rush inside and grab that cold beer, it's
your child that you kill and not mine.
What's that you say, I don't race in my neighbourhood, Oh No, then
why do you race in my neighbourhood?
|
157.19 | car search vs personal search | TRCA03::OBRIEN | Glenn O'Brien @TRC 18/6 | Fri Jul 21 1989 16:44 | 8 |
| While the police can search the car for a detector, they can't search
you or your personal belongings. Slip it into your purse or gym
bag.
And beware the Ottawa drivers who do the speed limit in the left
lane. They're more dangerous than the guys do 20 or 30 over the limit.
Glenn
|
157.20 | Party-pooper! | KAOM25::RUSHTON | Render the day oblivious. | Fri Jul 21 1989 16:59 | 16 |
| Richard does have a valid point - I've seen it. Actually, today he's
got a knot in his face because someone flushed his soother down the
toilet.
But, seriously fellow cretins ( as Richard has indignantly called everyone
who do not agree with him ), let us give thanks for being graced with the
presence of our self-appointed guardian angel.
I don't own a gun or rifle, I don't speed (my car has a governor on it that
locks up the carburetor at 40 klicks) and I don't have a radar detector.
But Richard has imposed on my sensibilities, so now I'm gonna buy a gun,
rent a fast car with a radar detector, and drive through Richard's living-
room and fire shots into his wimpy Tempo.
RICHARD, TAKE A VALIUM !!
Pat
|
157.22 | | CLOSUS::HOE | Just keeping up with Sammy is a chore. | Mon Jul 24 1989 12:09 | 10 |
| < Note 157.18 by KAOM25::TOMKINS "This MIND left blank INTENTIONALLY" >
-< SPEED KILLS. >-
Tomkins,
Are you serious? When I was in Ottawa in early May, I drove an
average of 100 KPH. I had folks pass me on the shoulder. When I
drove to Toronto, I kept with the pack; averaging 120KPH.
cal hoe
|
157.23 | Do you need an extra brain to look behind ? | MQOFS::DESROSIERS | Lets procrastinate....tomorrow | Wed Jul 26 1989 11:37 | 17 |
| One study reported that Germany had the lowest death rate on the
authobans, and NO speed limits, meaning you go as fast as you can.
A freind went for a 400Km "drive" in a porshe 928, as a pasenger,
at speeds approaching 300Km/h, and when he asked what would happen
if someone was to pull out suddenly to pass another car, the reply
was that other drivers don't do that.
I have seen that done so often, you come up in the left lane at
20-30 Km/h over what the others are doing, and suddenly, some jerk
on cruise just pulls out, without checking, and signaling only at
the instant that he steers left. I'm sure he THINKS he his a good
driver, he did signal and he did NOT speed, but he failed to look
behind at what may be coming, like a previous reply said it so well,
INATENTION, it's worse than speeding.
Jean
|
157.24 | Remember the golden rule | MURP::HINXMAN | Figments of a deranged imagination | Wed Jul 26 1989 12:19 | 5 |
| Rule 1 of safe driving
Remember the other driver is also an idiot.
Tony
|