Radar Detector as Tool for Awareness/Window Tint in Other States

[Ex-Soviet]

I'm not really sure how to post the title, so let me explain the situation.

I want to do a trip to the Dalton Highway in Alaska from Texas, all the way up to Deadhorse and as close to Prudhoe Bay as the oil companies will let us go. This would be 4,525 miles (one-way) of awesomeness with myself and 3 friends in a car equipped with snow tires and spare parts for everything. On the way, we would pass by several small towns, some of which may have speed limits that are inappropriate for the design of the road and conditions, that is, the speed limits are too low; set purposely for revenue generation.

If I carried a radar detector pre-loaded with software that warns of these small towns (the car won't have a navigation system) would that be cause to pull me over? Or would LEO let me on my merry Alaskan Way provided that I pay attention to the speed limits, no matter how inappropriate they may be? Some may say that having the radar detector would have been "proof of intent to speed". The truth would have been that it's "proof of intent to keep money in my pocket by being extra careful and not ignorant".

Another question I had is this: the vehicle I am driving has tint that I was under the impression was legal when I installed it in San Antonio, but it failed an inspection for "being too dark". Which makes no sense, because it doesn't block my ability to drive in day or night and makes the vehicle very comfortable in the atrocious Texas sun. However, I managed to drive to a car dealer and they gave me an inspection sticker. What if I pass through a state that has regulations on window tint that are more strict than Texas? Will I be pulled over solely on that basis, despite the fact that I am driving safely and prudently?

Thanks in advance for any responses, Officers. Hope y'all have a good day.

[OneAdam12]

If I carried a radar detector pre-loaded with software that warns of these small towns (the car won't have a navigation system) would that be cause to pull me over? Or would LEO let me on my merry Alaskan Way provided that I pay attention to the speed limits, no matter how inappropriate they may be? Some may say that having the radar detector would have been "proof of intent to speed". The truth would have been that it's "proof of intent to keep money in my pocket by being extra careful and not ignorant".

Really? Inappropriate speed limits? Do the freaking speed limit!

Really stupid question. Do the freaking speed limit! If you get stopped for speeding some cops will consider your detector your "verbal warning". Do the freaking speed limit! Having a radar detector is not proof of intent to speed. Do the freaking speed limit! What teenage forums have you been on to get that response? Do the freaking speed limit!

Reference to your tinting, it is possible you could be stopped for this. Oh, by the way, Do the freaking speed limit!

[Ex-Soviet]

Interesting response.

I'll reply with this: it is easier to follow the speed limit when it is logical and makes sense according to the condition and design of the road. I don't know where you're from, but say you're from Los Angeles. If the speed limit on the Santa Monica Freeway were 20 mph, would you really expect people to do that? It's an extreme case, of course, for the purpose of giving an example, but I hope you get my point.

If speed limits are appropriate and proper, there is no reason for people not to "do the freaking speed limit", as you put it. Many problems with normally law-abiding people arise when the speed limit's inappropriate, typically for the purposes of revenue generaiton.

Thank goodness that is not the case with every municipality, of course.

As for tint, it is possible I could be stopped for it. On what grounds? How is my tint endangering others when I simply want to go to Alaska and have some fun looking at this beautiful continent?

And if an LEO pulls me over, all 4 windows go down well before he/she's out of the car, obviously. No one likes nervous people.

[OneAdam12]

My point is who are you to decide what speed limit is appropriate? You drive through town and instantly decide this speed limit is not appropriate? Speed limits are set by governments with the approval of the state. They are studied by traffic engineers and adjusted accordingly. You must be one of those speed limit doesn't apply to me because I'm better than everyone else. Or I didn't need to stop at that stop sign, red light, because there was nobody around me.

I can't stand drivers like you who think they are entitled to break the law because you think it doesn't or shouldn't apply to you. I'll bet you weave in and out of traffic just to get ahead of the guy in front of you who is already speeding just to keep up. Then here comes an idiot who just has to get in front because there is an unused space between cars.

Obey the laws and you won't be a revenue generator.

[zhakkar]

We need to go back to the old school way and let them decide if they want to take the ticket or look the other way while i take their fancy radar detector and put it under their tire before they drive off...

[Ex-Soviet]

My point is who are you to decide what speed limit is appropriate? You drive through town and instantly decide this speed limit is not appropriate? Speed limits are set by governments with the approval of the state. They are studied by traffic engineers and adjusted accordingly. You must be one of those speed limit doesn't apply to me because I'm better than everyone else. Or I didn't need to stop at that stop sign, red light, because there was nobody around me.

I can't stand drivers like you who think they are entitled to break the law because you think it doesn't or shouldn't apply to you. I'll bet you weave in and out of traffic just to get ahead of the guy in front of you who is already speeding just to keep up. Then here comes an idiot who just has to get in front because there is an unused space between cars.

Obey the laws and you won't be a revenue generator.

I see your point, but the fact of the matter is that I (as well as most people) will always follow the speed limits provided that it is appropriate. If it is inappropriate, then that means I am in a new place and paying attention to the road, not the speed limit sign (which is what responsible drivers do) and driving according to the design and conditions. It does not excuse me from missing the speed limit sign, but the municipality is not excused from having an inappropriate speed limit. Such places will become known and they will be derided in public forums.

I'm not entitled to break the law, and I find it rather disgusting that you are making such a judgement. Granted, most of that may be my fault due to not informing you enough about my rationale/beliefs/etc. but it does not mean that you can say that about me so freely. I will ALWAYS follow the law because it is there for my safety and the safety of others. But the thing about that is: the law should be right and appopriate. Otherwise people won't follow it. (cough cough marijuana and prostitution laws)

In most places, on most roads that I have encountered, the law is proper and right. In many places, it isn't. It is these places that are labeled "revenue generators". Very simple. I am not trying to be inflammatory. I am merely telling the truth. If these places didn't exist, I wouldn't have cause for this conversation, would I, now?

[zhakkar]

Good luck with that excuse in a court of law. What you think about it doesn't matter. You will deal with the consequences of your actions just like everyone else does.

Sounds like if you have such a problem with "revenue generators" and right and appropriate laws you need to take that up with your legislator, whether at the state or federal level. What makes you think that a bunch of random cops on the internet care what you think? Even if we agreed with you we are in no position to do anything about it either.

[PhilipCal]

What I see in the OP is the usual arrogance and condescending attitude which seems to be prevalent this week. To the average law enforcement officer, the mere presence of a radar detector is evidence of intent to violate the law. "Inappropriate" speed limits, or any speed limits,are NOT set by law enforcement agencies, but by state/provincial transportation departments or governing bodies. One of the best ways to avoid being stopped and cited, even for violation of "inappropriate" speed limits is to simply observe them. You should also keep in mind, Mr. Prospective Traveler , that radar detectors are illegal in many states. You would be wise to do some research and find out which states they are. Don't forget your Canadian provinces either. Should you, in your blinding arrogance, or through simple inattention, fail to note and observe a posted speed limit, be prepared for the possibility that you'll be stopped by some cop. A cop no doubt inferior to you in demeanor and intellectual firepower, but with the distinct power to really spoil you day. Quite often, out of state drivers are required to post cash bond prior to being to being allowed to proceed on their travels. Have a nice trip.

[zhakkar]

Quite often, out of state drivers are required to post cash bond prior to being to being allowed to proceed on their travels.

And there's nothing quite as fun as when they don't have the money to post said bond...

[VA Dutch]

A huge problem, aside from you not knowing "radar detector laws" from state to province, is that the 'revenue generators' use methods other than radar to measure the speed of vehicles traveling through their jurisdictions.

Your detector will be useless if the officer/deputy/constable is using VASCAR or some other type of device that does not transmit a radio signal for your detector to receive. Even if they do use radar, a "Stalker" or other type of instant-on unit will cause your detector to alert you that you're about to be stopped & issued a ticket for speeding.

You are correct that there are indeed counties, townships, villages, boroughs and cities that do post speed limits far below the maximum produent velocity - and many times it does have a lot to do with revenue enhancement; but keep in mind that the police departments do not set those limits......they are merely charged with enforcing them. Aside from that, most lawmen are not going to look favorably on you for possessing a radar detector; despite your noble intentions.

Leave the detector at home, plan to "slow down" in areas with lower posted limits and consider investing in a good CB radio - which will help with far more than just speed traps using radar. Good luck on your journey!

P.S. Dark window tint CAN AND WILL get you stopped in VA; as our law applies to any vehicle operated on a public highway in the commonwealth - regardless of where it might be registered.

[Dingo990]

I'm assuming the vast majority of that trip will be highway, since I've driven from Missouri to Anchorage. In most (if not all states), local towns usually don't have the authority to change the speed limit on highway

[BenjaminsDad]

Interesting response.

I'll reply with this: it is easier to follow the speed limit when it is logical and makes sense according to the condition and design of the road.

That may be true. And I won't argue with you that some speed limits are purposely set low in some places (The ridiculously inappropriate 50mph on a stretch of I-95 in Connecticut comes to mind,) but that really doesn't matter. The law is the law, whether or not you agree with it. You can and will get pulled over for speeding if you exceed the speed limit, and your argument that the speed limit is not "appropriate and proper" will likely get laughed out of court by a judge who does nothing but listen to lame excuses all day long.

Many problems with normally law-abiding people arise when the speed limit's inappropriate, typically for the purposes of revenue generaiton.

Well, that is certainly an argument you are free to make in court. Good luck with that.

As for tint, it is possible I could be stopped for it. On what grounds?

On the grounds that it is illegal. You are obviously an intelligent person. It should be easy for you to wrap your head around this. If dark tint is prohibited by statute, then I have PC to pull you over. Those are the grounds. It's very simple. We're not doing nuclear physics here.

How is my tint endangering others when I simply want to go to Alaska and have some fun looking at this beautiful continent?

That is a debate that should take place in the legislature when these bills are being passed. The fact is, legislators passed the law, the governor signed it, and now we enforce it. We officers, as mindless, order-taking tools of the state, simply enforce it. We are just not smart enough to grapple with these tough philosophical questions. In the academy, they only taught us to write tickets. We aren't capable of thinking on a deeper level than this, sorry.

(Hey, maybe YOU should run for office. Then you could legalize prostitution, abolish inappropriate speed limits, and generally make everything AWESOME. I would totally vote for you for president.)

And if an LEO pulls me over, all 4 windows go down well before he/she's out of the car, obviously. No one likes nervous people.

No one likes a roadside lawyer, either. Just sayin'. Besides, rolling your windows down does nothing to help you. If I see windows that are tinted too darkly, I can pull you over. If you roll down the windows, that's fine. I'm still writing you the ticket.

I will ALWAYS follow the law because it is there for my safety and the safety of others. But the thing about that is: the law should be right and appopriate. Otherwise people won't follow it. (cough cough marijuana and prostitution laws)

Right and appropriate according to whom? You? In other words, you will ALWAYS follow the law, as long as you agree with it. Got it. Good luck with that attitude in court. By that logic, I should be able to not pay income taxes because I don't agree with certain provisions of the tax code.

Listen buddy. Get the f*** over yourself. You're not above the law. If you get pulled over for a violation, smile, cooperate, be polite, and maybe the officer will cut you a break and use his/her discretion to issue you a warning instead of a ticket. You start pulling that roadside lawyer song and dance on the side of the road, and you can bet that you're going to walk away with a fine.

[Iowa #1603]

Lets preserve our new friends posts to date for posterity.

I'm not really sure how to post the title, so let me explain the situation.

I want to do a trip to the Dalton Highway in Alaska from Texas, all the way up to Deadhorse and as close to Prudhoe Bay as the oil companies will let us go. This would be 4,525 miles (one-way) of awesomeness with myself and 3 friends in a car equipped with snow tires and spare parts for everything. On the way, we would pass by several small towns, some of which may have speed limits that are inappropriate for the design of the road and conditions, that is, the speed limits are too low; set purposely for revenue generation.

If I carried a radar detector pre-loaded with software that warns of these small towns (the car won't have a navigation system) would that be cause to pull me over? Or would LEO let me on my merry Alaskan Way provided that I pay attention to the speed limits, no matter how inappropriate they may be? Some may say that having the radar detector would have been "proof of intent to speed". The truth would have been that it's "proof of intent to keep money in my pocket by being extra careful and not ignorant".

Another question I had is this: the vehicle I am driving has tint that I was under the impression was legal when I installed it in San Antonio, but it failed an inspection for "being too dark". Which makes no sense, because it doesn't block my ability to drive in day or night and makes the vehicle very comfortable in the atrocious Texas sun. However, I managed to drive to a car dealer and they gave me an inspection sticker. What if I pass through a state that has regulations on window tint that are more strict than Texas? Will I be pulled over solely on that basis, despite the fact that I am driving safely and prudently?

Thanks in advance for any responses, Officers. Hope y'all have a good day.

Interesting response.

I'll reply with this: it is easier to follow the speed limit when it is logical and makes sense according to the condition and design of the road. I don't know where you're from, but say you're from Los Angeles. If the speed limit on the Santa Monica Freeway were 20 mph, would you really expect people to do that? It's an extreme case, of course, for the purpose of giving an example, but I hope you get my point.

If speed limits are appropriate and proper, there is no reason for people not to "do the freaking speed limit", as you put it. Many problems with normally law-abiding people arise when the speed limit's inappropriate, typically for the purposes of revenue generaiton.

Thank goodness that is not the case with every municipality, of course.

As for tint, it is possible I could be stopped for it. On what grounds? How is my tint endangering others when I simply want to go to Alaska and have some fun looking at this beautiful continent?

And if an LEO pulls me over, all 4 windows go down well before he/she's out of the car, obviously. No one likes nervous people.

I see your point, but the fact of the matter is that I (as well as most people) will always follow the speed limits provided that it is appropriate. If it is inappropriate, then that means I am in a new place and paying attention to the road, not the speed limit sign (which is what responsible drivers do) and driving according to the design and conditions. It does not excuse me from missing the speed limit sign, but the municipality is not excused from having an inappropriate speed limit. Such places will become known and they will be derided in public forums.

I'm not entitled to break the law, and I find it rather disgusting that you are making such a judgement. Granted, most of that may be my fault due to not informing you enough about my rationale/beliefs/etc. but it does not mean that you can say that about me so freely. I will ALWAYS follow the law because it is there for my safety and the safety of others. But the thing about that is: the law should be right and appopriate. Otherwise people won't follow it. (cough cough marijuana and prostitution laws)

In most places, on most roads that I have encountered, the law is proper and right. In many places, it isn't. It is these places that are labeled "revenue generators". Very simple. I am not trying to be inflammatory. I am merely telling the truth. If these places didn't exist, I wouldn't have cause for this conversation, would I, now?

This has been an extremely interesting forum for me: learning about the mentalities of LEOs and the reasons for their actions/ideas. Very interesting.

I was perusing the cigarette butt littering thread and OP mentioned that the vehicle was "shady" with "way-out-of-state" plates and 3 young men in it. That resonated with me because on my road trip to Alaska, I'd be driving a car with "way-out-of-state" plates with 4 young men in it, haha. Did I mention the window tint would be rather high, being a Texas car?

How do you Officers approach pulling over out-of-state vehicles? Are you going to scrutinize them more than a car with in-state plates, even if they are doing the EXACT same thing? Just curious.

Hope y'all have a great night/day! Stay safe!

S&WGUY!, as a member of the public, all I have to say is that sometimes you guys are just a little too blunt, that's all. Perhaps give your opinions with a bit more tact.

Or not. It is, after all, YOUR forum. But don't expect people to take too kindly to your attitudes sometimes. Courtesy and respect go both ways.

[PeteBroccolo]

1/ Obey ALL traffic laws;
2/ No one EVER needs a radar detector unless they:
2/ a/ ROUTINELY violate 1/;
2/ b/ commit criminal acts
YOUR opinion and / or ignorance of the laws not withstanding, nor pertinent.

[Nikk]

I see your point, but the fact of the matter is that I (as well as most people) will always follow the speed limits provided that it is appropriate. If it is inappropriate, then that means I am in a new place and paying attention to the road, not the speed limit sign (which is what responsible drivers do) and driving according to the design and conditions.

Responsible drivers pay attention to the road (design and conditions) AND the posted speed limit signs. If the conditions are bad (such as ice), you drive below the posted limit!

If it is difficult for you to follow posted limits, your best bet is to use your cruise control!

As far as laws being "appropriate", you lobby to change them if you feel they aren't. Many public advocates have gotten laws changed at various levels. But until they change, you follow them.