craig@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM (craig) (02/11/88)
I've got a quick question about this mess. What if someone else borrows your car and gets caught by this thing and then you get the ticket for it? So it's your car, you weren't driving it! Craig -- -Craig Williamson Craig.W@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM
john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) (02/12/88)
In article <1020@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> craig@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM (craig) writes: >I've got a quick question about this mess. What if someone else >borrows your car and gets caught by this thing and then you get >the ticket for it? So it's your car, you weren't driving it! The picture is of high enough resolution to identify the driver. Theory is that if you own the car you are responsible. They send you the ticket. If you rat on whoever was driving, then they throw the ticket at them. I'm not sure what the legalisms are here. I suppose that since a "crime" was committed, and you have knowledge, you can be considered a witness and forced to answer questions. The easiest way to do this, of course, it to send YOU a ticket. This is what the officials here have been saying. I have my doubts. An honest-to-goodness lawyers (pardon the oxymoron) out there who can tell us if they can get away with this sort of thing? -- John Moore (NJ7E) hao!noao!mcdsun!nud!anasaz!john (602) 870-3330 (day or evening) The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be someone else's.
ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) (02/13/88)
I was wondering when someone was going to bring up the question of "it's not me driving." I have no idea how Arizona deals with it, but a friend who was stationed in Germany told he how it is dealt with there. If the driver in the picture is not positively identifiable as you, they will let you off on the provision that you log whereever you drive. Hence, if you get your picture taken again, you will have a before the fact record of if you were there. Not keeping your log truthfully is a serious offense. -Ron
strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) (02/14/88)
In article <1020@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> craig@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM (craig) writes: >I've got a quick question about this mess. What if someone else >borrows your car and gets caught by this thing and then you get >the ticket for it? So it's your car, you weren't driving it! Most countries in the world hold the owner responsible for speeding, regardless of who's driving. This isn't possible in the US because we have a constitution that prohibits it. -- Norm (strong@tc.fluke.com)
sampson@killer.UUCP (Steve Sampson) (02/14/88)
> what if your friend is driving your car?
The picture quality is excellent, you can see who the driver is on these
photo radars. They usually operate in daylight. That's why truckers drive
at night :-|todd@uop.edu (Dr. Nethack) (02/17/88)
In article <3303@killer.UUCP>, sampson@killer.UUCP (Steve Sampson) writes: > The picture quality is excellent, you can see who the driver is on these > photo radars. They usually operate in daylight. That's why truckers drive > at night :-| While driving back from New Mexico last November, I overheard a truck driver discussing the road one night.. "...I was drivin' along and I hear on the radio..'Move it on over there big truck'... and I look, and there is no one there.. I hear it again, so I moved over, and this big, all black rig passes me doing about 85 with no lights on, musta had one of them night vision glasses or something..." Or something! ----------------------------------------------------------------------- + uop!todd@uunet.uu.net + + cogent!uop!todd@lll-winken.arpa + + {backbone}!ucbvax!ucdavis!uop!todd + -----------------------------------------------------------------------
commgrp@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (BACS Data Communications Group) (02/19/88)
"Robocop" in the movie was a good guy; electronic license-readers are
more reminiscent of "The Terminator." What next, bar-code tattoos?
Federally-specified machine-readable plates?
A previous poster believes that laser safety standards will prohibit
police LIDAR. Laser bar-code scanners are ubiquitous in grocery
stores; the beam is safe as long as it moves fast.
Doppler radar can, of course, get you coming or going. Indiana,
Kentucky and a few other states have no front license plates. In
Indiana you may put anything on the front, including expired plates
from IN or other states (being careful, of course, to stay out of said
other states). ALL states require valid plates on the rear.
As the Vietnam war demonstrated, low-tech can defeat high-tech. A
little strategically-placed dirt or dirt/paint mixture on the license
plate, that could have been put there by your kids playing in mud,
should fool the "Robocop" easily.
Rather than a James Bond rotary license plate, how about a frame with
transparent LCD which subtly makes 7's look like 1's, etc.
Another possible countermeasure: An IR license-plate illuminator
(quartz-halogen lamp with IR filter) could overexpose the Robocop's
film with no visible indication, if strong enough to exceed the range
of the RC's automatic exposure control.
If a real escalation of Civilian Electronic Warfare (I love that term)
becomes necessary, the physics of radar ECM tend to favor the jammer.
Technical competence is real power, a fact seldom appreciated by
political technogeeks. The beauty of EW is that the mark may not
realize he's been deliberately zapped!
Paranoia: Of course, the originator of all this Robocop discussion
might be an employee of the manufacturer, a vile gofer of Big Brother
assigned to collect information on possible countermeasures.
As usual, our electronic news network is ahead of the magazines. My
subscription copy of POPULAR COMMUNICATIONS (March 1988) arrived
Monday. The monthly column on police radar discusses the new
photographic units, and includes a few points which haven't been made
here. It should hit the newsstands soon.
Remember that you computer programmers, more
than anyone else, make Big Brother possible.
--
Frank W9MKV @ WA8YVR
reid@gold.bacs.indiana.edu
reid@iubacs.bitnettodd@uop.edu (Dr. Nethack) (02/21/88)
With all the yack about bar code reading, I remember in an old edition of Elementary Electronics *several* years ago, that the reason California was testing the reflective license plates out, was that there was a device being tested to read them from a distance... (read: your local sherrif or john law) on the fly.. Of course, we could always do something funny like put a plastic cover on the plate, that filters out IR.. would'nt that stop the IR trace?? Plus a little mud, for the opto scanners... :-) mix the mud as follows.. a couple parts dirt, and a couple of epoxy! :-) :-)