A better driver wallet-rape prevention device.

[Toby Ponsenby]

There ya go, kiddies:-)

<http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/vf.asp>

This is a good done - finally......and it might just turn photo Radar
into a daylight no-flash enterprise,
unless I'm very much mistaken (TM Murray Walker)

Seem to be a development of the anti-papparazi briefcase return flash
gizmo, but uses downwash light. Nice.

The other one I've been hoping to see developed is a plate cover based
on welder flash protection - first - I'd hoped - because GovCo would
go ape-shit on licence plate covers and have to legislate agin that,
thus keeping them occupied for a while.




--
Toby.

The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws
Tacitus (A.D. 55-130)

[Fraser Johnston]

"Toby Ponsenby" <toby@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1onxwqb5vdx9h.8yin7xfk6rrq$.dlg@40tude.net...
> There ya go, kiddies:-)
>
> <http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/vf.asp>
>
> This is a good done - finally......and it might just turn photo Radar
> into a daylight no-flash enterprise,
> unless I'm very much mistaken (TM Murray Walker)
>
> Seem to be a development of the anti-papparazi briefcase return flash
> gizmo, but uses downwash light. Nice.
>
> The other one I've been hoping to see developed is a plate cover based
> on welder flash protection - first - I'd hoped - because GovCo would
> go ape-shit on licence plate covers and have to legislate agin that,
> thus keeping them occupied for a while.

I've been thinking of this one for a while but US $350 is a bit steep. It
would have to save me 3 fines before it started paying for itself. And it
only works on cameras.

Fraser

[John B]

Toby Ponsenby wrote:
> There ya go, kiddies:-)
>
> <http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/vf.asp>
>
> This is a good done - finally......and it might just turn photo Radar
> into a daylight no-flash enterprise,
> unless I'm very much mistaken (TM Murray Walker)
>
> Seem to be a development of the anti-papparazi briefcase return flash
> gizmo, but uses downwash light. Nice.
>
> The other one I've been hoping to see developed is a plate cover based
> on welder flash protection - first - I'd hoped - because GovCo would
> go ape-shit on licence plate covers and have to legislate agin that,
> thus keeping them occupied for a while.
>
>
>
>
Wouldnt want any false positives when say a copper was behind you :)

Personally I've never been done by a camera at night and not by a camera
full stop in the last 8 years so I only really want a radar/lidar
detector ;)
JB

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:39:44 +1000, John B wrote:

> Toby Ponsenby wrote:
>> There ya go, kiddies:-)
>>
>> <http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/vf.asp>
>>
>> This is a good done - finally......and it might just turn photo Radar
>> into a daylight no-flash enterprise,
>> unless I'm very much mistaken (TM Murray Walker)
>>
>> Seem to be a development of the anti-papparazi briefcase return flash
>> gizmo, but uses downwash light. Nice.
>>
>> The other one I've been hoping to see developed is a plate cover based
>> on welder flash protection - first - I'd hoped - because GovCo would
>> go ape-shit on licence plate covers and have to legislate agin that,
>> thus keeping them occupied for a while.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Wouldnt want any false positives when say a copper was behind you :)

Ahh, that's the clever bit.
The downwash flash is shielded in terms of it's light source being
limited to the result rather than the source being visible.
If you've ever seen a speed camera flash let rip, I very much doubt
anyone would notice the 'extra'.
But I've already figured a copper countermeasure - all they need would
be a little digital camera with flash and aim it at the suspect
vehicle. The result would be interesting.
But would they bother?

there's also the issue of whether the cameras would be set up in
daylight with effectively a high ASA rating, I guess - and no flash.
>
> Personally I've never been done by a camera at night and not by a camera
> full stop in the last 8 years so I only really want a radar/lidar
> detector ;)
> JB
I recommend the Bel. That remote system is streets ahead of the older
models now, but faark, the price is kinda set at what the market might
stand.....

--
Toby.
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur

[kevcat]

> I recommend the Bel. That remote system is streets ahead of the older
> models now, but faark, the price is kinda set at what the market might
> stand.....

and of course getting done for owning one in NSW now attracts a bit
lower fine, down from $1202 to $1175
but along with that drop comes 9 demerits points

so on top od paying all that money for one
getting fined for using it
and having it confiscated(only if you are a NSW resident)

wouldn't it be a shit load cheaper just to buy a crappy UHF CB and pay
whatever fines you may get

Kev

[Allan A]

"kevcat" <kevcat@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:42DD5859.8AB913BB@dodo.com.au...
>
>
> so on top od paying all that money for one
> getting fined for using it
> and having it confiscated(only if you are a NSW resident)
> Kev

Where does the bit about "confiscated only if you are a NSW resident" come
from?

Allan A

[kevcat]

Allan A wrote:
>
> "kevcat" <kevcat@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:42DD5859.8AB913BB@dodo.com.au...
> >
> >
> > so on top od paying all that money for one
> > getting fined for using it
> > and having it confiscated(only if you are a NSW resident)
> > Kev
>
> Where does the bit about "confiscated only if you are a NSW resident" come
> from?
>
> Allan A


the device gets confiscated, if you are a NSW resident you don't get it
back
if you are a QLD resident they can take it from you but must return it
to you(if you apply, but make sure you get a receipt when they take it),
I believe they will only return it to your home address but they have no
right to keep it as the law only applies to NSW residents

BTW in QLD using a rader detector is a $130 fine and you get to keep it

Kev

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:17:18 GMT, kevcat wrote:

> BTW in QLD using a rader detector is a $130 fine and you get to keep it

Is that using, or having one in a vehicle?
--
Toby.
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur

[kevcat]

Toby Ponsenby wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:17:18 GMT, kevcat wrote:
>
> > BTW in QLD using a rader detector is a $130 fine and you get to keep it
>
> Is that using, or having one in a vehicle?
> --
> Toby.
> quidquid latine dictum
> sit, altum viditur


I was of the understanding that the act of owning, using or selling one
was an offence in most states

Kev