June1998

Overview
Federal Action
State Action
Evidence of Effectiveness
Conclusion
Table 1: Radar Detector Laws
Table 2: State Laws on Mobile Scanners
Table 3: State Policies for the Use of Traffic Camera Radar
Links To Reports and Other Information

Overview

The cat and mouse game between police and speeding motorists has entered the high-tech world from its humble beginnings 51 years ago. Today, microwave radar 3/4 as well as even more advanced laser and photo radar systems--have become sophisticated in the battle against the speeding motorist. Radar's switch in 1965 from an antiquated earth-station S-band to the portable X-band made it available for mobile police use. Shortly thereafter, the detector industry made its debut and over the years, has attempted to meet every advance in law enforcement technology.

According to a 1994 article in Car and Driver magazine, radar gun makers over the years have made many advances. Police became able to clock motorists while patrolling or parked, and from the rear of patrol cars as well as from the front. Newer photo radar and laser systems have given police additional technology, and detection equipment makers struggle to keep up. This report summarizes the status of the battle between advocates of law enforcement who seek to curb speeders and those who argue the scales have been tipped too much against the motorist. Legislative efforts in the federal and state governments are highlighted in four areas 3/4 radar detectors, scanners, laser detectors and photo radar detectors.

A radar detector is basically a radio able to receive the specific microwave transmissions from a police radar gun. The Federal Communications Commission allows police radar to transmit on only two frequencies (usually referred to as X-band and K-band), so radar detectors are designed to pick up those two frequencies. A radar detector prevents a speeder from getting caught by intercepting radar microwave beams sent from up to a mile away and setting off an alarm device that allows the driver to slow down in time to avoid getting caught. Police scanners are radios used to monitor law enforcement activities. They, like detectors, are listening devices. Radar jammers transmit a signal that blocks radar signals.

Over the past few years, law enforcement agencies have increasingly turned to laser beam technology to catch speeders and red-light violators. Radar detectors do not pick up laser light, so the laser technology offers a new tool that can supplement radar use in law enforcement.

Another technology being promoted and gaining in popularity is photo radar. Photo radar is probably the most controversial of all speed-detection systems today, since the speeding motorist typically never comes into contact with a police officer. Photo radar is operated by law enforcement officers or works automatically. The system combines a camera, radar and often a reader board that displays the speed of each passing vehicle. If a speeding car is detected, a picture is taken of the driver and of the license plate. A ticket is then mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. A related technology is red light cameras which photograph motorists running red lights.

Federal Action

The federal government and several state legislatures have approved laws regulating the use of radar detectors. The Federal Highway Administration has prohibited radar detector use in commercial vehicles involved in interstate commerce since January 1994.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety maintains that states and the federal government are on solid legal ground in restrictive laws on radar detectors. No court has held that the concept of radar detector bans, either by statute or regulation, is restricted by the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Court of Appeals in 1995 unanimously upheld the federal government ban on radar detector use in commercial vehicles that are involved in interstate commerce.

Policies vary in other countries. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, in a survey of 21 countries, recently found only the United States, Iceland, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and some Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan) allow radar detectors. In most of the other 14 countries, it is illegal to sell as well as use a detector. In France, for example, a vehicle may be seized if a radar detector is discovered.

The FCC regulates both radar detectors and jammers, but not newer photo radar and laser beam technologies. Confusion sometimes results for amateur radio operators because overly broad radar detector and scanner laws can appear to target them by barring any reception of police signals, according to the National Motorists Association. The FCC has attempted to clear this up through an administrative ruling that allows amateur radio operators to have a scanner with the ability to listen to these police radio signals. Jammers, however, are illegal. The FCC has ruled that manufacturing devices, such as jammers, that interfere with devices in other services are inappropriate. Most recently, in December, the FCC issued a cease and desist order to Rocky Mountain Radar of Colorado to stop making jammers.

State Action

Radar detectors are banned in all vehicles in Virginia and the District of Columbia and in big trucks in New York and Illinois. However, they are allowed in noncommercial vehicles in the other 49 states besides Virginia. State legislatures for the most part have been unwilling to ban detectors. According to the Radio Association Defending Airwave Rights (RADAR), more than 110 attempts to ban radar detectors in 33 states have been defeated in recent years.

States take a more restrictive view on the use of police radio scanners than they do on the use of radar detectors. (See accompanying chart.) Seven states--California, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont and Virginia-and the District of Columbia have statutes barring the use of scanners in committing a crime. Six other states impose other restrictions. In New York, for example, the state with the most restrictive scanner law, possession of a scanner is illegal without a permit. In South Dakota, the latest state to restrict scanners (1997), use of scanners in business establishments is legal only with prior written permission from the police. The law exempts amateur radio operators from coverage, and violators can have their radios confiscated. Other states placing restrictions on scanner usage include Florida, Indiana, Kentucky and Michigan.

State imposed restrictions on scanners many years ago because people were abusing the technology, said Tom Frank, the National Motorists Association's state coordinator in Rhode Island. However, these restrictions do not make sense today because criminals have more sophisticated methods than scanners to monitor police activities, Frank said. Also, it is difficult to differentiate between legitimate ham-radio operators who are allowed to have scanners and other users, Frank maintains.

At the state level, nine states and the District of Columbia have laws in the area of photo radar. These states either place restrictions or conditions on the use of photo radar, or authorizes municipalities of a certain population to use photo radar systems. State legislative activity is likely to grow as more municipalities turn to photo radar as a tool to slow down traffic and reduce fatalities. Most of the attention in 1998 has been on red-light camera systems, Adam Tuton of American Traffic Systems said.

Despite growth in usage, however, photo radar remains controversial. In Arizona earlier this year, the Legislature rejected a photo radar referendum bill after some legislators complained that referendums should not be devoted to such narrow issues. In New Mexico, the Motor Vehicle Division ruled using photo radar systems is illegal. Legislation also is being considered this year in California, Florida and New York. New Jersey and Wisconsin already specifically prohibit the use of photo radar.

Evidence of Effectiveness

Opposition to use of radar detectors comes from three sources - police officers who contend that detectors hamper law enforcement efforts, municipalities that rely on revenue from speed traps and the insurance industry. RADAR, a Florida organization that lobbies against laws banning radar detector usage, maintains myths exist concerning radar reliability.

RADAR argues that lack of generally accepted standards for equipment performance, training requirements and enforcement policies contribute to the misuses and abuses of radar. Many local jurisdictions or individual officers operate speed trips for purposes more related to raising money than safety, RADAR maintains. A survey by the research firm of Yankelovich Clancy Shulman showed detector users had 23 percent fewer accidents per mile traveled than nonowners, and drove almost 60,000 miles farther between accidents. The survey concluded that radar detector owners are at least as safe drivers as nonowners.

The National Institute for Highway Safety in Virginia, however, sees a strong need for banning detectors. The institute maintains that radar detectors are bought and sold for the sole purpose of avoiding speeding tickets. They also encourage speeding. "The only, only, only reason [to have a radar detector] is to help you break the law," says Julie Rochman, the institute's communications director. Institute research has shown that interstate highway drivers with radar detectors reduced their speeds by at least five miles per hour or activated their brake lights when exposed to police radar. Before this exposure, vehicles with detectors were traveling significantly faster than other drivers.

Radar detector usage rates are relatively high. An institute study of speeds and radar detector use in trucks conducted in 17 states in 1990 found that more than half of all trucks and half of trucks carrying hazardous materials were using radar detectors. Usage rates ranged from 39 percent in California to 69 percent in Oklahoma. An earlier study in Virginia and Maryland showed that trucks with radar detectors were more likely than those without radar detectors to be travelling at illegal speeds.

In contrast with detectors, which just receive the police radio signals, jammers generate signals themselves to cause interference. Jammers are generally more expensive than detectors. Detectors can cost as little as $50 (although the most expensive models can run as high as $400), and are made by about a dozen companies in the United States. Jammers, on the other hand, cost around $500 and are made by only a couple of manufacturers.

An advantage of lasers to police is that they can isolate individual vehicles. The biggest disadvantage for law enforcement is that laser units must be stationary. Police officers also cannot hide behind bushes when using laser guns, since the laser register records an error message whenever the beam is broken.

Industry has developed laser detectors, but picking up laser beams in time to slow down is not easy. Because a laser beam does not reflect much, laser detectors typically do not sound warning buzzes until the gun already has been aimed at the vehicle. This gives the driver little time to react. Manufacturers, however, have developed detectors that pick up the laser as well as photo radar signals.

Two other disadvantages of laser equipment are higher cost and weight, which makes them harder to maneuver, Frank said. Laser units typically run around $4,500, three times the cost of a radar unit.

Photo radar is a growth industry that has proved popular in other countries long before interest in them in the United States. Traffic cameras have significantly improved traffic safety worldwide for more than 25 years, according to American Traffic Systems, an Arizona company that is a leading manufacturer of photo radar systems. (See chart for a summary of key points of state legislation.) A total of 74 countries other than the United States use traffic cameras to control speed and red-light running.

Conclusion

Law enforcement in the last decade has moved increasingly to newer technologies such as photo radar and lasers to catch speeding motorists and improve highway safety. These newer technologies are likely to supplement rather than replace traditional radar enforcement. In response to advancing technology, opponents have charged violations of civil liberties in the increased surveillance. The battle involves politics as much as technology, as both sides attempt to win over public opinion as well as win over and keep support in state legislatures, the courts and Congress. The states and federal government promise to be a battleground in the years ahead as both sides attempt to get the upper hand.

Table 1: Radar Detector Laws

Table 2: State Laws on Mobile Scanners

Table 3: State Policies for the Use of Traffic Camera Radar

Links To Reports and Other Information

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, (703) 247-1500, or e-mail jrochman@iihs.org

National Motorists Association, (608) 849-6000, or e-mail nma@motorists.org

Radio Association Defending Airwave Rights (RADAR), (937) 667-5472, or e-mail jrichards@ewol.com

Chris Burnett

Visitor counts for this page.