Range of detectors for newbie
I have a question about radar detectors. If this is the wrong place to ask I apologize and ask who else would be good to ask it of.
It takes 1-1/2 hours one way for me to get to work every day. It's damn hard to resist the temptation not to speed. Sooner or later I'm going to get caught (already have actually but the guy let me go with a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. Nice cop). The roads I drive on are north/south or east/west with like a 1/8th mile dirt road connecting the opposite directions. You can't stop or u-turn in those drives of course. These dirt roads are covered on both sides by thick foresty trees. The cop just sits in the drive pointing directly at the road with loads of thick trees on either side of him. How much do the trees block his radar until I'm on top of it? I need to know he's in the crossroad ahead of me soon enough to slow down. If the detector doesn't beep until I pass the crossroad he's already got me. The radar detector didn't help in the least. Are there radar detectors that will do this? If they can't they're worthless to me. Any help appreciated.
Well, the terrain and the trees are going to block the police car's radar until you get relatively close to the police car. The big question is whether the officer is using constant-on radar or whether he decides to use instant-on radar. Constant-on radar is no problem since any decent Beltronics, Escort, Whistler or Valentine radar detector will detect constant-on radar will in advance. On the other hand, the officer may decide to trigger his radar gun only when he either hears or sees your approaching car. In this case, no radar detector is going to save you -- unless by chance there is another vehicle located not too far ahead of you (considering the trees, less than 1/4 to 1/2 of a mile away, or maybe even less) which gets targeted by the officer first.
It's exactly like MEM-TEK said, Andy.
Unfortunately, there's only so much that our detectors can do, and the situation that you've painted above, as MEM-TEK confirmed, does indeed sound like instant-on usage.
There truly is no defense against instant-on usage, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF GOOD TACTICAL DRIVING PRACTICE/TECHNIQUES.
^ You've *gotta* have a rabbit.
If you're trailblazing by yourself, you either have to alter your speed per the situation (i.e. in your case, when you perceive that you're close enough to the cut-outs/turn-arounds that serve as potential traps, but other things, such as on-ramps, service/emergency pull-offs, blind embankments or overpasses/underpasses, etc. - they ALL demand interactive driver response), or you have to cowboy-up and expect that you may have to pony-up the cost of a ticket, when you've come out on the other side.
Our tools can only do so much. When the technical limits of the instruments are reached, what you're left with is how you've played the game.
There's only so many ways that enforcement can be achieved, as long as you're willing to tactfully engage such situations, you *should* have the advantage.
And if that means slowing down for a little every mile or so, through a particularly risky stretch, then you've either got to be willing to suffer that - or you've gotta be willing to suffer the consequences.
Let's look at it this way:
You see those painted VASCAR strips on the ground, yet you *choose* to speed through the sectors. Are you guilty? Certainly, for you've engaged in a known-risk activity.
In knowing that our detector's capabilities are very limited, versus instant-on RADAR without the presence of a suitable "rabbit/bird-dog" vehicle preceding, that's a known risk that you're engaging in, in your scenario above, too.
Please forgive me, but I must respectfully disagree with your assertion that everyone has to have or should have a "rabbit."
To draw an analogy from business ethics--as it relates to sales and marketing (on the Internet and elsewhere)--by any given company whose sole intent is on maximizing its sales revenues, profits, and a return to its shareholders above all else will often send shills to do their dirty work as they remain insulated from the ensuing (or collateral) damage that results (to other competitors or any entity that is perceived as a threat).
Allen, I think you can I could both agree that we've seen this already play out and continue play out on other online forums and communities such as rd.net (which is the reason I chose to create this forum, something you already know).
When agenda-driven shills (ie; hired guns) are sent to do their marketing (often destructive) on the behalf of whom they represent, chaos often ensues and little if any productive knowledge is much harder to find or ferret-out. Which is often their goal, as the most calculating and unethically-run companies [which] have a long-term plan (ie; 'TC's sales & marketing' grand strategy) and enough resources to sell through it.
In other words, they prefer more "heat" (ie; controversy) than light (ie; illumination) and in that [with] chaos truth is often the first casualty.
This is why I created Speed Trap Hunter, to help in providing that illumination (without the [planned] controversy) in plain view.
Do you see what I am driving at, here?
Any company that employs a TC marketing strategy that resorts to ruthless tactics is obviously incapable of playing on a level playing field so they send their shills (ie; their "rabbits") to do their dirty work, all the while staying in the background and remaining insulated and prepared to sacrifice any and all such "rabbits" and endure potential collateral damage (unintended consequences) when the times come (in the interest of self-preservation), and it always eventually does come.
I look at this as cowardice behavior. Just like the black vehicle that I videoed, who wouldn't get out of the left-lane so that I could safely pass and then only after being forced to pass on his right, sped-up, tailgated, and tried pushing me, all the while he staying back in the perceived comfort of being "deep" in the background.
As my video demonstrates, I caught on to the behavior, realized that I had a bogey on my six and made a conscience decision to no longer let myself be his rabbit, because at the end of the day, I really can't stand cowards or bullies (who are often cowards themselves).
Keeping a level head while you are driving is important, it prevents you from making mistakes and subjecting yourself to the risk of having an accident or receiving a potential speeding ticket.
Being situationally aware is also important knowing where the true threats are. You don't need a rabbit to do that. Just an innate skill, courage, and fortitude.
When our government needs the military to [defend and protect our Constitution] get the job done quickly and effectively, they send in the U.S. Marines. There is a crystal clear reason for that.
<center><object width="660" height="525">
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/850M_AsRel4&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b 8ab6&hd=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="660" height="525"></object>
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. </center>
I haven't yet met or known a Marine who hadn't had the moral-character, the code (of ethics), the loyalty (to the overall mission), the honor (to distinguish between right and wrong and choose right) such that they would be prepared to send some other(s) into the vanguard of the battle to do their work for them. Semper Fidelis.
In our society where people or companies seem increasingly unwilling or unable to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions (ie; requiring taxpayer bailouts), I prefer taking a different tack, setting a different example not only for my own sense of moral clarity but to others on how they themselves should act.
If and when the time comes, that I personally wish to "speed," I assume the risk, I am confident of my own driving skills, and I do not rely on others to act as human-shields while serving my interests.
For me, it comes down to character, I believe either you have it or you don't. That is something that I see in black and white.
Thanks for allowing me to rant a little bit on this subject (even if we don't see eye to eye on the subject), but this particular subject is a particularly sore one [for me] at this moment, in time. It's not personal.
Please drive how you feel comfortable.
Note: TC => Total Control
^ No problem, I do see your point.
But in terms of pure tactical application, how would you hope to defeat instant-on RADAR, non-marked (no visible strips in the roadway) VASCAR, and the like?
One of the cardinal rules of the game is to never speed alone - or if so, then to use an even more heightened set of response/tactical standards (i.e. routinely adjusting speed, as I've detailed prior, which is I assume what you mean, when you cited driver skill and knowledge) - and the use of a "rabbit/bird-dog" is accepted practice, and is not, in any way, a sign of cowardice, but rather is skilled anticipation of a tactical advantage that presents itself serendipitously.
My response to your "Rabbit" thread, which should time-stamp prior to my response to this thread, shows my own feelings about things like this - that we must ALL be willing to trailblaze, to be the rabbit/bird-dog, at one point or another.
I do not view using a rabbit/bird-dog as putting a sacrificial lamb up for the roast.
I'm not marching an innocent to their proverbial death - rather, that it this practice, when undertaken in the real-world, specifically takes advantage of those who are, themselves, knowingly exceeding the boundaries of the law.
To me, that's the where I draw the moral/ethical line.
These rabbits/bird-dogs are themselves choosing to break the law.
I am not taking an innocent, and allowing them to bear what would not be a proper burden.
I once had, on my commute home (yes, I decided to speed, that day), a Z4 driver (with detector, but he must not have picked up the signal that I cued-in on, and yes, he also had a top-flight detector onboard), who used tremendous discretion in using me as a "rabbit." He stayed at a courteous and safe following distance, and furthermore, did not undertake any drastic/unsafe maneuvers in order to stay with me, his chosen rabbit.
My detector had burped a single chirp of Ka, and in knowing the layout of the land and the potential trap that laid just ahead, I slowed.
As I slowed, I saw him change lanes to pass me.
I immediately stuck my hand out the window, and signaled for him to slow as well.
To me, he was not a coward - he skillfully recognized me as a speeder whom he could use to extend the bounds of his tactical awareness.
Yes, he used me as a rabbit, but he did so in a way which was courteous enough that I did not feel put upon. I was breaking the law, I was culpable, and just because I knew the lay of the terrain and the threats, I wasn't about to sacrifice him for a laugh, when he'd done nothing wrong, by the common "rules of speeding."
At the next light, he thanked me for having saved him from the I/O trap which he did not know about, as he'd just moved into the area.
I think that there must be some moral compass used here, to judge what is innocent, and what is guilty behavior.
The battlefield analogy, in this case, I do not feel is appropriate, particularly in its application to "human shields." No non-combatant or prisoners-of-war should be utilized in such a manner, and at the same time, I do not view such "rabbit/bird-dog" drivers as "non-combatants," who are either without culpability or having been absolved of such.
If my enemy - a combatant the same as I - should make a tactically unsound move? should I have the courtesy to first inform him of his mistake, or should I take advantage of it? - in this respect, I've always been taught to not hesitate, but rather, offer a word of thanks to the powers that be, afterwards.
To me, "bird-dogs/rabbits" are not innocents.
This is how I see "rabbits/bird-dogs," and this is how I utilize them, when I utilize them.
Perhaps you and I just see things differently, in this respect.
Overall, however, I honestly find it difficult to "keep" rabbits - they either end up going too fast for my comfort, or too slow for my needs. I usually just end up cruising where I'm comfortable, which, in and of itself, is usually in that gray-zone where most State Troopers will let one "pass," as long as one's driving steadily and courteously.
Of-course, that's with the exception of wolf-packs, which I delight in participating in, as you've read from the other thread. ;)
[ Note, in re-reading my post above [response #3 of this thread], I think either I misrepresented my point, with the use of your "Rabbit" thread, or perhaps it can be read as such. What I meant to do in citing your post was to illustrate to agrey how *NOT* to utilize a rabbit/bird-dog, which is what I hope he would have gathered, after reading my reply to your OP, there. ]
Also, I am not sure exactly how this ties into any type of corporate/vested-interest "shilling" - which, yes, anyone who has been in this community for more than a year will, sadly, see....and which we both have a deep-set and common distaste for.
Yes, I can see where honor and integrity comes into play in both scenarios, but I do not see these shills as bird-dogs/rabbits. I think that the bird-dog/rabbit has a level of culpability that is much, much more morally and ethically benign than that of those individuals who either are such shills or who use such marketing ploys.
I think that as both of us have made abundantly clear in just about every community we participate in, we have little tolerance for those who lie or in any way misrepresent the truth - either by outright deception or even by simple, but knowing, omission.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:48.|