Radar & Cop trouble

[Kickit]

g'day!
I just got pulled up by the police. got out the car. he asked for license. then said the reason he was pulling me up is because i had my radar on. he said he could yellow sticker my car for using it. Then said he just got called to a job so he can't.
Its the first I've heard of this? I told him I'll be looking into it..

Has anyone else had this problem with using radars? or has the law changed? please share your storys if you have any!

cheers!

[Niva]

He let you go, and you told him "I'll be looking in to this" ? expect to get a yellow next time


Yes they are banned

ninja edit, I think you are banned for having them on the dash

[Fukushima]

wut?

[bmgtz]

not banned in western Australia....but all eastern states have banned the "use" of them

[Kickit]

not banned in western Australia....but all eastern states have banned the "use" of them
Is that still the law? he said it wasn't.

[c.rusli]

this is a grey area because they are distracting your views which means is a yellow sticker, along with the gauges and gps unit.

But radar detector is self is still legal to be use in WA.

[bmgtz]

unless they have been banned in the last few weeks....which would have made the news.

this news article written 26/6/12 suggests they weren't banned when it was written......but reports the push to have them banned

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/14036504/push-to-ban-radar-detectors/


he is full of shit

[TJ]

Absolutely full of shit.

Blocks vision?

Tell police to remove their in car radars, taxis to remove their in car job systems, etc, etc, - EVERY GPS is bigger than a dectector.

Tell him to suck you off.

[Alt_F4]

Tell him to suck you off.
That will go down well.








LOL

[Kickit]

he had a bit of a wanker about it.
Afew years ago i got into a argument with a cop about them. he thought they were dangerous because they "distract drivers" i said you're more likely to crash using a gps. all radars do is beep. I don't touch it so how could it be dangerous.
Hopefully he has a pingpingpingping of a day haha

[protecon]

https://www.koalagps.com/catalog/images/FUR1942MKIIWO.jpg

I can see how that could obstruct your vision.

[Kickit]

https://www.koalagps.com/catalog/images/FUR1942MKIIWO.jpg

I can see how that could obstruct your vision.
i see what you did there...

[NoOg_sTaR]

I have received a 3 point & $150 fine for my radar detector before at the same time I was given a yellow sticker (for other reasons). Even though they are legal in WA they can "technically" give you a obstruction of view fine.

I managed to get the fine appealed due to the fact the cops that issued me the fine at the time wrote "Television not to be visible by driver".

[mr_rotary]

Funny how a yellow sticker does not obstruct your view though.

[Tocchi]

^ well generally it doesnt, unless you work for western power and you are inspecting powerlines at 50kmh

[Yakky Bear]

i like how their unmarked car light setup on the dashboard blocks vision more than what a radar detector does.

[Joe]

That will go down well.

"go down well" is subjective.. depends if they spit or swallow.

[crabman]

Usually they block the view of the top of your bonnet anyway. Although, if you hit a cyclist this may stop you from getting a glimpse of his/her face before they fly over the wind shield and you drive off not giving a fuck.

[GTB Liberty]

The Police officer seems to be inflicted with both little man, dick and brain syndrome at the same time.

I have GPS mounted low near A pillar, radar detector high mounted passenger side and a windscreen mounted gooseneck phone holder.

I have never been pulled over for the above; even when I have been pulled over I have not been fined for the above.

Learn the law and be able to quote the relevant act and clause.

Start here Australian Legal Information Institute (http://www.austlii.edu.au) and start with the Road Traffic Act (WA) 1974.

[lysdexia]

in terms of obstructing vision, there is a ruling that differentiates between 'driving aids' and other obstructions.

a GPS, or anything that a police officer/taxi driver/whoever has on their dash comes under a different ruling to a set of gauges or a radar detector or a set of fuzzy dice or whatever.

that said, anything that you can fix on the spot, they can't really yellow you for. there's nothing stopping you from taking it down.

[viet_boi]

More people die from drink driving than a blocked vision from a radar detector, shit is ludacris!

[Kerelm]

what this thread has taught me so far

1. you can and cannot have a radar detector.

2. Just tell them TJ said you can have it.

3. get your cock out.

[DISTRBD]

More people die from drink driving than a blocked vision from a radar detector, shit is ludacris!

Drunk drivers are crashing due to impaired vision from radar detectors , not from being drunk

[GTB Liberty]

what this thread has taught me so far

1. you can and cannot have a radar detector.

2. Just tell them TJ said you can have it.

3. get your cock out.

Radar detectors are NOT illegal in WA.

[fourseven]

The Police officer seems to be inflicted with both little man, dick and brain syndrome at the same time.

I have GPS mounted low near A pillar, radar detector high mounted passenger side and a windscreen mounted gooseneck phone holder.

I have never been pulled over for the above; even when I have been pulled over I have not been fined for the above.

Learn the law and be able to quote the relevant act and clause.

Start here Australian Legal Information Institute (http://www.austlii.edu.au) and start with the Road Traffic Act (WA) 1974.

The Road Traffic Act is irrelevant. What you want is the Road Traffic Code, and it clearly states:


263 . Drivers to have uninterrupted and undistracted views etc.

(1) A person shall not drive a vehicle, unless —

(a) he or she is in such a position behind the steering wheel that he or she has full control over the vehicle; and

(b) he or she can obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead and on each side of him or her; and

(c) he or she can obtain, in a rear‑vision mirror or mirrors attached to the vehicle, a clear reflected view of every overtaking vehicle.

Points: 1 Modified penalty: 2 PU

(2) For the purposes of subregulation (1), a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead and on each side of him or her if the vehicle has —

(a) a mascot, toy or similar article attached to the windshield, or to the rear or other window of the vehicle; or

(b) a mascot, toy or similar article attached to the interior of the vehicle in such a position as to obstruct or be likely to obstruct the vision, or to distract or to be likely to distract the attention, of a person while driving the vehicle.

(3) A driver shall not drive a motor vehicle if a person or an animal is in the driver’s lap.

Points: 1 Modified penalty: 2 PU

Just because you haven't been fined for your setup, doesn't make it legal.

I suspect that what the officer was getting at when he pulled over OP was that it was illegal to have his radar detector on the windshield, not it being turned on.

[GTB Liberty]

I did say "start" With Road Taffic Act ... Well aware of Road Traffic Code.

All accesories attached allow a full and uninterruptible view of road. Having been fined in my first year driving for a fragrance tree the car repairer put up I had the matter clarified by a lawyer so as to never have it occur again.

For OP reference http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/wa/consol_reg/rtc2000113/

Thanks to admin for clarifying.

[Fukushima]

I think this was more about the young guy driving a skyline than the actual legal status of affixing crap to windshield.

4slide put mine on and the other 3 police encounters i've had since then gave no fucks

[Kickit]

I think this was more about the young guy driving a skyline than the actual legal status of affixing crap to windshield.

4slide put mine on and the other 3 police encounters i've had since then gave no fucks
Funny how i wasn't driving the skyline...
He was asian. hardly knew what the fuck he was talking about. stuttering while he was talking.

Also he said to have the radar on is illegal and to remove it, not to use it at all.

Thanks everyone for some info on this topic!

[Macca]

Got attitude for radar? wtf did you do? fuck his wife/grandma/daughter/son all at the same time?

[Kickit]

Got attitude for radar? wtf did you do? fuck his wife/grandma/daughter/son all at the same time?
LOL i did nothing. he was a pingpingpingping.

[d1mitch]

its funny how they are picking on that and saying it would be obstruction of view yet nearly every single retard on the road has a GPS proudly mounted in the middle of their fucking windscreen.

[Baron]

The Road Traffic Act is irrelevant. What you want is the Road Traffic Code, and it clearly states:



Just because you haven't been fined for your setup, doesn't make it legal.

I suspect that what the officer was getting at when he pulled over OP was that it was illegal to have his radar detector on the windshield, not it being turned on.

Based on the extract you quoted a low-mounted detector that only obtstructs the view of the bonnet from your driving position would be A-ok. Worth fighting if anyone gets done and has the time I guess.

[fourseven]

How so? It clearly states:

(2) For the purposes of subregulation (1), a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead and on each side of him or her if the vehicle has —

(a) a mascot, toy or similar article attached to the windshield, or to the rear or other window of the vehicle; or

To you and me, having it mounted low (which would then render it pretty much useless) probably means an uninterrupted view. But the law says that anything attached to your windscreen means a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view regardless of where it is on your windscreen.

I know you're a law student. If you were defending someone, how would you approach it?

[dnl777]

What if you were to have it on left side of Dash in bottom corner? would this still be an obstruction of the drivers view?

Would it still work the same?

[GTB Liberty]

LOS - Line of sight.

Very subjective.

[protecon]

I have mine tucked up behind the factory windscreen tint and in front of the rearview mirror.
Thought it would affect performance, but still works well and virtually impossible to spot from the exterior (rear detection has probably suffered). Chuck in some neat wire routing and the V1 stealth remote and nobody notices it.

Why don't they just make radar detectors that look like navigators? Or one that does both?

[Baron]

How so? It clearly states:

(2) For the purposes of subregulation (1), a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead and on each side of him or her if the vehicle has —

(a) a mascot, toy or similar article attached to the windshield, or to the rear or other window of the vehicle; or

To you and me, having it mounted low (which would then render it pretty much useless) probably means an uninterrupted view. But the law says that anything attached to your windscreen means a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view regardless of where it is on your windscreen.

I know you're a law student. If you were defending someone, how would you approach it?

When legislation refers to a list of items in a non-exhaustive fashion, the class of item identified is important. "Cars, vans, trucks and other vehicles" would not include motorbikes. Clearly "mascot, toy or similar article" was not something intended to encompass something like a radar detector, which falls outside the definition. This doesn't mean that you're not violating the provision if the detector does interrupt your view of the road, but if it was low-mounted then it wouldn't be caught by the presumption, in my opinion.

I take your point that a toy mounted low on the windscreen would seem to be a violation, though if you could disprove the presumption (i.e. show that the item didn't interfere with your view of the road or traffic at all) then you might be ok. Depends on whether the Judge is willing to hold that it is a rebuttable presumption.

[fourseven]

Thanks for that, you need to post more often :)

[TJ]

I would argue that at my height anything low mounted does not obstruct me in the slightest.

Someone a foot shorter might have issues though.

[mr_mike]

How so? It clearly states:

(2) For the purposes of subregulation (1), a driver is not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead and on each side of him or her if the vehicle has —

(a) a mascot, toy or similar article attached to the windshield, or to the rear or other window of the vehicle; or



so what if ur radar detector was positioned near the top of the windscreen but was actually attached or mounted on a bracket of the rear vision mirror?

[Baron]

so what if ur radar detector was positioned near the top of the windscreen but was actually attached or mounted on a bracket of the rear vision mirror?Subsection 2 only raises a presumption that the drivers view is not full and uninterrupted. On that distinction, if you attached a toy to the mirror you might avoid raising the presumption. A radar detector cannot raise the presumption as it is not a 'mascot, toy or similar article'. It would still be open for them to show that you were 'not able to obtain a full and uninterrupted view of the road and any traffic ahead', wherever you place the detector.