Using a radar detector in the UK

The following report highlights a few facts and figures relating to the use of radar detectors and the correlation between detector use, speeding, accidents or unsafe driving.

The use of radar detectors became legal in the UK on 29/1/98 when a Mr David Foot won an appeal when a High Court judge overturned a conviction for using a detector. The UK is now in line with most European states e.g. Germany, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Greece, Italy and Portugal allowing the free use of radar detectors.

In the US detectors have been legal to use in all but 2 states and we estimate over 15 million detectors are in use - approx. 1 in 10 people use a detector and units are sold through large chains e.g. Wallmart, Circuit City. In the UK this figure is estimated at just 100,000 devices - approx. 1 in 300 drivers and sales are predominantly through small dealers who sell "off the page" in specialist car magazines. However,we estimate the UK market will grow significantly over the next few years as a result of the following factors :-

1. New lower cost UK compatible units - up until now sales have been restricted to items costing over £300 and /or non compatible US imports which are prone to falsing

2. MORI research May 2001 which reported that UK radar users are involved in 24% less accidents as they are more aware of their speed than non users. As a result of this survey the UK motoring organisations e.g. RAC, Association of British Drivers are now supporting their use. The statistics resulting from the MORI poll support an earlier US survey by Yankelovich Clancy Schulman which disclosed a figure of 23% and drove almost 60,000 more miles between accidents.

3. The intention of HM Government to issue up to 10 million speeding tickets per annum as the number of speed cameras is expected to treble ( source - Daily Mail 11.6.01 )

4. Increase in speeding fines and a decision by HM Government to allow police forces to keep money raised from fines. Up until now many of the 4,300 speed cameras have been ineffective because the police cannot afford to stock or process the film. During December 2000 the DETR issued a consultation document which proposes the introduction of more severe road traffic penalties.

Many British police officers when questioned actually support the use of detectors. They argue detector users are regularly made aware of both their speed and police presence which in turn has a moderating or calming influence on other traffic. Detector users are more regularly confronted with their own speed, through the "false alarm" condition of a detector. Consequently, during a typical journey a detector user will check their speed more than a non detector user. The MORI survey supports this fact. Since purchasing a detector. " a clear majority of users agree that they "have become more conscious about keeping to the speed limit" ( 76% agree ), "have become a safer driver ( 59% agree), " are more aware of the speed limit in the areas they are driving " ( 78%) and " have become more speed aware generally" ( 81% )

When used sensibly, police radar and Gatso cameras can contribute to better speed management. An eye catching radar can deter irresponsible driving and the Gatso cameras can assist in the registration of speeds in situations where police surveillance is not practical. Unfortunately, radar and Gatso cameras are not always used in this manner. The police radar is often deployed at locations where driving conditions are safe and where the speed limit is felt to be unreasonably low by the majority of car drivers. At some locations therefore, almost every passing vehicle is a candidate for a fine. Many road users are subject to an increasing number of fines which could be argued as being a very thinly disguised form of tax.

A further benefit of using a detector, more so with high mileage drivers, is the luxury of driving in a relaxed state. Research has shown a detector user to be less stressed than a non detector user. In fact both speeding motorists and those that keep to the speed limit are regularly startled by the sudden awareness of radar equipment in the roadside undergrowth. The result is extreme braking, and everyone is aware of the subsequent risks. Sudden such actions are avoided because a detector will warn of the presence of radar many hundred metres in advance. If the radar equipment is situated at an accident black spot then the detector user is warned well in advance of a potential danger and slows in anticipation.

In summary, we promote the use of radar detectors and target responsible drivers as our potential customer. Our typical customer is not the "boy racer". We do not encourage or condone fast speeds and reckless driving. In fact car drivers, who are generally very law abiding anyway, now have the right and ability to be made aware of unsuspecting speed checks. It is not unusual to wish to know when your behaviour is being monitored and it is certainly not comparable to a desire to break the law. The fact the average family car is capable of travelling at speeds in excess of 100 mph doesn't necessarily mean the driver will exceed speed limits. Similarly, one shouldn't argue a radar detector users sole intent is to speed with impunity.

Hopefully, this brief report has answered some of the concerns you may have had regarding the ethics of radar detectors.