Quote Originally Posted by awj223 View Post
Sounds like the guy had a really sucky lawyer. Car seized from HIS OWN DRIVEWAY?!? Cops were TRESPASSING? And on top of that it should just be a fix-it ticket for equipment violation. And it also sounds like he got in trouble for lying, not for the jammers per se. He should just exercise his right to remain silent when asked, or say stuff like "they're parking sensors" (which is true). Don't say stuff like "they're not capable of jamming LIDAR guns" or anything like that.


It's called Privacy Mode. Even if you KNOW about Privacy Mode, you still can't put it into jam mode unless you have a drive with the key on it.
Here in the UK the law is ambiguous about the use of jammers. The perverting the course of justice law covers a whole host of sins and to me is not intended for this instance, however it was used to secure a prosecution. Others have simply been fined about £1000 and had the equipment confiscated. He'd been convicted previously so should have taken more care.

The police turned up with a search warrant based on the video evidence from the speed camera van showing them unable to get a speed. This does mean there is now legal precedent which can and will be sued in courts again hence my desire to see a more robust safety margin on the ALP firmware options.\

I'm not aware of a PRIVACY mode. Do you mean the security feature of using a USB key? If so I wasn't aware that removing the USB would leave it in PDC mode, I thought it would render the system inoperable completely?