Crazy Theia question: indicate out of spec guns?

C7vs911

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Jun 12, 2020
Messages
8
Reaction score
11
I had a crazy thought. Since it seems Theia essentially reads the electronic signature of the components/power supply of radar guns, could it also tell if some aspect of the gun is out of manufactures spec? What I’m getting at is, could Something like this be used in court to show the gun in question was out of spec?

Also not sure of this was covered, but could you save the profile of the gun that hit you, so you’d know if it was the same one the next time? I’m not sure what real benefit it would have, but just one more data point.
 
Last edited:

alloy00

vMax
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
2,844
Reaction score
3,289
I had a crazy thought. Since it seems Theia essentially reads the electronic signature of the components/power supply of radar guns, could it also tell if some aspect of the gun is out of manufactures spec? What I’m getting at is, could Something like this be used in court to show the gun in question was out of spec?

Also not sure of this was covered, but could you save the profile of the gun that hit you, so you’d know the next time? I’m not sure what real benefit it would have, but just one more data point.

This is in one of Vortex/Radenso videos, but yes it should. Theia should be able to recognize the gun, and OBTW this is the frequency it is transmitting if you're curious.

Whether that will win your traffic court judge over is another matter :)
 

V1Jake

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
7,073
Reaction score
9,552
Location
34.7 Destroyer
It was discussed before. Frequency doesn't matter, only the signal of that specific radar gun type.
 

BagNDrag

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
760
Reaction score
2,519
Imagine if you’re in a state where RD’s are forbidden and then you whip out your Theia saying that he gun was out of spec 🤣
Or tell them they have an alternator that is going bad... I saw in one post that may be a possibility... :p
 

Penumbrian

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
118
Reaction score
183
The problem is, that you'd have to have the Theia accepted by the court system as a technology, then submit evidence that the Theia itself was properly calibrated etc.

Odds are the Theia is substantially more accurate than whatever craptastic radar unit has been thrashed about in a patrol car for the last 20 years, but for right or wrong the radar has a court history to support it, and the officer will testify that he pulled out the tuning forks and "calibrated" the radar both before and after writing a ticket, yada yada.

It's unlikely but if you had the funds for some high power legal representation it might be enough to get a subpoena for the particular radar unit which you could have tested by some lab somewhere. Expect the agency to just lie about which unit they are giving you if thats the case.

People have had frequency displays for years, doesn't make any difference when some agency uses radars tuned completely out of the band to try to avoid detectors.
 

Boozehound

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
3,608
Imagine if you’re in a state where RD’s are forbidden and then you whip out your Theia saying that he gun was out of spec 🤣

In prohibited states we refer to Theia as a signal analyzer. Just make sure it's in spectrum analyzer mode while you demonstrate it as defense exhibit A.
 

dougr

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
247
Reaction score
380
In prohibited states we refer to Theia as a signal analyzer. Just make sure it's in spectrum analyzer mode while you demonstrate it as defense exhibit A.
That's a great idea. With a variant of the OS making it operate as a non-alerting scanner in essence. As in, it reports what's out there in total rather than alerting to police radar specifically.

The text seems ambiguous to me, but the last line would seem to explicitly allow reception of all freqs.

VA text:

It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of the Commonwealth when such vehicle is equipped with any device or mechanism, passive or active, to detect or purposefully interfere with or diminish the measurement capabilities of any radar, laser, or other device or mechanism employed by law-enforcement personnel to measure the speed of motor vehicles on the highways of the Commonwealth for law-enforcement purposes. It shall be unlawful to use any such device or mechanism on any such motor vehicle on the highways. It shall be unlawful to sell any such device or mechanism in the Commonwealth. However, provisions of this section shall not apply to any receiver of radio waves utilized for lawful purposes to receive any signal from a frequency lawfully licensed by any state or federal agency.
 
Last edited:

dougr

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
247
Reaction score
380
^ Not sure why I can't edit my post.

"Detection" is illegal while "reception" is legal. Meaning exactly what in this context?
 
Last edited:

MikePA

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
1,572
"Detection" is illegal while "reception" is legal. Meaning exactly what in this context?
No offense intended, but the difference between 'Detection' and 'Reception' is an academic question, not a practical one.

  • Radar detectors, as the name implies, detect devices used to measure the speed of motor vehicles.
  • Laser jammers interfere with same.

Therefore, in VA, they are both illegal.
 

dougr

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
247
Reaction score
380
No offense intended, but the difference between 'Detection' and 'Reception' is an academic question, not a practical one

But since the law takes the time to differentiate between, it wouldn't seem the difference is academic. I think the illegality is "analyzing" a signal, in essence.

Though a scanner might be legal, the practicality would seem minimal. Theia not announcing a gun's presence when time is of the essence would seem unusable.
 
Last edited:

Boozehound

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
3,608
No offense intended, but the difference between 'Detection' and 'Reception' is an academic question, not a practical one.

  • Radar detectors, as the name implies, detect devices used to measure the speed of motor vehicles.
  • Laser jammers interfere with same.

Therefore, in VA, they are both illegal.

He may have a point about the last line of the law in particular. When I point out in court that in the case of the frequencies in question here, federal law authorizes me not just to receive but even to transmit them. Of course I have the license in hand to back that up and equipment on hand to do just that. There's probably some case law on it and that would be an interesting read.

A spectrum analyzer is just another piece of test equipment.
 
Last edited:

MikePA

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
1,572
He may have a point about the last line of the law in particular.

Respectfully, no he doesn't. The first two sentences have already defined 'detecting' and 'interfering' as unlawful. Therefore, they are specifically excluded from the exception mentioned in the last sentence, which only applies to lawful purposes.

It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of the Commonwealth when such vehicle is equipped with any device or mechanism, passive or active, to detect or purposefully interfere with or diminish the measurement capabilities of any radar, laser, or other device or mechanism employed by law-enforcement personnel to measure the speed of motor vehicles on the highways of the Commonwealth for law-enforcement purposes. It shall be unlawful to use any such device or mechanism on any such motor vehicle on the highways. It shall be unlawful to sell any such device or mechanism in the Commonwealth. However, provisions of this section shall not apply to any receiver of radio waves utilized for lawful purposes to receive any signal from a frequency lawfully licensed by any state or federal agency.
 

SwankPeRFection

Corgi Lovers
Beginner User
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
1,383
Reaction score
1,386
I mean, by that stupid law, having a passenger in the car for the sole purpose of scoping out cops shooting radar and letting you know is also against it. 🙄
 

G37X Jockey

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
2,083
Reaction score
2,937
Location
Behind my Steering Wheel
Respectfully, no he doesn't. The first two sentences have already defined 'detecting' and 'interfering' as unlawful. Therefore, they are specifically excluded from the exception mentioned in the last sentence, which only applies to lawful purposes.

It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of the Commonwealth when such vehicle is equipped with any device or mechanism, passive or active, to detect or purposefully interfere with or diminish the measurement capabilities of any radar, laser, or other device or mechanism employed by law-enforcement personnel to measure the speed of motor vehicles on the highways of the Commonwealth for law-enforcement purposes. It shall be unlawful to use any such device or mechanism on any such motor vehicle on the highways. It shall be unlawful to sell any such device or mechanism in the Commonwealth. However, provisions of this section shall not apply to any receiver of radio waves utilized for lawful purposes to receive any signal from a frequency lawfully licensed by any state or federal agency.
The wording seems to be a circular argument. Police radar transmissions are lawful, so that test is met. A spectrum analyzer receiving those signals is lawful, so that test is met. If the motorist isn't breaking any law in the process of receiving said lawful signals, then the initial prohibitions of the statute would seem not to apply. You would need a proverbial "Philadelphia Lawyer" to parse the actual offence out of this law.
It's basically saying that sitting in the grass on the side of the road with Theia plugged into a battery receiving the full spectrum of lawful signals is lawful activity, but if the person and Theia move into a parked car with the engine running then it becomes an offence. This may be how Virginia courts view it, but it's really quite absurd.
 

MikePA

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
1,572
Like locusts, the VA law comes up on a recurring basis, with the original poster believing they've discovered something new. I am still waiting for one of these keyboard lawyers (no offense to keyboards :) ) to spend the money to challenge the law.
 

Boozehound

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
3,608
Like locusts, the VA law comes up on a recurring basis, with the original poster believing they've discovered something new. I am still waiting for one of these keyboard lawyers (no offense to keyboards :) ) to spend the money to challenge the law.

You might be right. I haven't even googled it. And I'm certainly not a lawyer. I'm also not illiterate. Does not that last sentence begin with "However?" Do you have an FCC license? Are you aware that there has been communications equipment available at 10.5, 24.15, and higher microwave frequencies for many years? Do you really think VA can preempt federal communications law and bar qualified licensees from operating mobile because such equipment can also receive police radar? My guess is that such a challenge has yet to be mounted.

Also, just because there is a law doesn't mean the courts will enforce it. Look at all the cases the Supreme Court has ignored where constitutionally guaranteed rights had clearly been infringed. How many decades of infringement occurred before Heller? How much has occurred since that has gone without remedy? The law is an ass...
 

G37X Jockey

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
2,083
Reaction score
2,937
Location
Behind my Steering Wheel
You might be right. I haven't even googled it. And I'm certainly not a lawyer. I'm also not illiterate. Does not that last sentence begin with "However?" Do you have an FCC license? Are you aware that there has been communications equipment available at 10.5, 24.15, and higher microwave frequencies for many years? Do you really think VA can preempt federal communications law and bar qualified licensees from operating mobile because such equipment can also receive police radar? My guess is that such a challenge has yet to be mounted.

Also, just because there is a law doesn't mean the courts will enforce it. Look at all the cases the Supreme Court has ignored where constitutionally guaranteed rights had clearly been infringed. How many decades of infringement occurred before Heller? How much has occurred since that has gone without remedy? The law is an ass...
Lower levels of government know that even though their statutes may be on shaky constitutional ground, the law will stand until someone with deep pockets successfully challenges it. Virginia's RD ban is a traffic ticket. A SCOTUS challenge will cost $100 K plus. I'm betting it'll never happen and Virginia's government knows it.
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
90,849
Messages
1,382,514
Members
22,854
Latest member
Itzik
Top