novus mini coyote on mat cooper now

tw0nk

help avoid speed detection...

http://www.novus-gps.co.uk/index.php

Points

- User presses button when passing speed check, notifies all other users
- uses gps + gprs
- Conor faulkner (spelling) thinks might be in "grey area" in terms of law
- launching in Ireland planned
- works across all of europe
- 199 - 239 euros
- Released in France

Anan1

What if you're the first Novus-equipped punter at the scene?

tw0nk

Anan1 wrote: »

What if you're the first Novus-equipped punter at the scene?

well then you press button notifying everyone else, and of course since you werent speeding nothing else happens

niceirishfella

tw0nk wrote: »

help avoid speed detection...

http://www.novus-gps.co.uk/index.php

Points

- User presses button when passing speed check, notifies all other users
- uses gps + gprs
- Conor faulkner (spelling) thinks might be in "grey area" in terms of law
- launching in Ireland planned
- works across all of europe
- 199 - 239 euros
- Released in France

hmmmmmmmmm whilst i think Conor Faulkner is about as useful as nikkers on a kipper:p - he may have a point on this. From their site it says that Mini Coyote is the world's first real-time GPS speed camera alert system - and speed camera detectors are illegal in this country.
I know, i was done for having one:rolleyes:

daveharnett

niceirishfella wrote: »

hmmmmmmmmm whilst i think Conor Faulkner is about as useful as nikkers on a kipper:p - he may have a point on this. From their site it says that Mini Coyote is the world's first real-time GPS speed camera alert system - and speed camera detectors are illegal in this country.
I know, i was done for having one:rolleyes:

From the sounds of it, this thing can't actually 'detect' anything. However, alerting others of the presence of a speed check is something the Gardai don't take kindly to. Obstruction of justice or somesuch.

maidhc

daveharnett wrote: »

From the sounds of it, this thing can't actually 'detect' anything. However, alerting others of the presence of a speed check is something the Gardai don't take kindly to. Obstruction of justice or somesuch.

But they say themselves the would rather people slow down...

... If the camera moved every 15 mins this could become very useless very quickly.

it would do the Gardais job for them

Notch000

what if some clem or copper buys one and goes round pressing the button all day long >>????Would make it pretty usless

daveharnett

daveharnett wrote: »

From the sounds of it, this thing can't actually 'detect' anything. However, alerting others of the presence of a speed check is something the Gardai don't take kindly to. Obstruction of justice or somesuch.

Surely they are preventing a offense being committed? I would have thought the gaurds would like that

Gregor Samsa

daveharnett wrote: »

From the sounds of it, this thing can't actually 'detect' anything.

Yes, but the problem is the law (S.I. No. 50/1991 — Road Traffic (Speed Meter Detectors) Regulations, 1991) defines a "speed meter detector" as "any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of" a speed check, not "detect the existence of".

daveharnett

phutyle wrote: »

Yes, but the problem is the law (S.I. No. 50/1991 — Road Traffic (Speed Meter Detectors) Regulations, 1991) defines a "speed meter detector" as "any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of" a speed check, not "detect the existence of".

So a sticker on the windscreen which reads "Caution : speed traps DO exist" is illegal? :eek:

Along with mobile phones, satnavs, the internet, the radio, any device which facilitates communication really.

Edit: Oh, and cars. They indicate the existence of speed traps all the time (flashing headlights).

Guy:Incognito

daveharnett wrote: »

So a sticker on the windscreen which reads "Caution : speed traps DO exist" is illegal? :eek:

Along with mobile phones, satnavs, the internet, the radio, any device which facilitates communication really.

Edit: Oh, and cars. They indicate the existence of speed traps all the time (flashing headlights).

Technically they may be able to do you for a varety of devices but no gard will.

People need to relax with the OMG'zzz the gardzz is arresting us for nothignzzz.

You will not get pulled up by a gard for having a phone , a laptop, satnav etc. They would however take offence to "insert name of radar detector/widely known device for alerting people of speed cameras".

Despite what a lot of people think, gards do use common sense.

daveharnett

Stekelly wrote: »

Despite what a lot of people think, gards do use common sense.

True that. Let's just make breathing illegal and allow the Guardai to decide when to enforce it.

I know guards use common sense, I just can't believe how loosely that law is worded (assuming it is being quoted correctly ofc).

Gregor Samsa

daveharnett wrote: »

I know guards use common sense, I just can't believe how loosely that law is worded (assuming it is being quoted correctly ofc).

It is indeed crazy that the law is so loosely worded, but just so there's no ambiguity about the accuracy of the quotation:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0050.html

3. In these Regulations, "speed meter detector" means any device which is capable of being used to indicate the existence of, or to frustrate the operation of, electronic or other apparatus being used to give indications from which the speed at which a person was driving can be inferred.

Guy:Incognito

daveharnett wrote: »

I just can't believe how loosely that law is worded (assuming it is being quoted correctly ofc).

The looser the better, stops people tweaking illegal devices to make them shade in under the laws or inventing new ones that circumvent specific wording, this way they cant do that.

maidhc

Stekelly wrote: »

The looser the better, stops people tweaking illegal devices to make them shade in under the laws or inventing new ones that circumvent specific wording, this way they cant do that.

No, that is utterly wrong:

To quote a Judge Henchy in 1980 (King v. DPP):

"The ingredients of the offence, and its mode of proof are arbitary, vague, and difficult to rebut. They are related to rumour or irrepute, or past conduct. Ambiguity vests broad and arbitory discrimination in the prosecutor and Judge, indescriminate in marking as criminal, the conduct commited by one person in certain circumstances, when the same conduct engaged in by another in similar curcumstances would be free of criminality.

Out of keeping with the basic concepts inherent in our legal system; that a man may walk abroad in the secure knowledge that he will not be singled out and punished as criminal unless it has been established beyond reasonable doubt that he has deviated from a clearly prescribed standard of conduct."