[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: Valentine/WSP (low Audi content)
There was a pretty good article in Crap & Drivel about precedent-setting
court cases, particularly regarding laser. The arguments put forth by
the defense were pretty interesting, take a peek, get a lawyer.
From: Igor Kessel [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 1997 6:41 PM
To: Fringe Ryder
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: Valentine/WSP (low Audi content)
Fringe Ryder wrote:
> 4) The V1 rear laser detection does work, but this isn't going
to do you one
> whit (whatever a whit is) of good. You're sunk if it goes
That's precisely why I elected to buy my V1 without the laser
I remember posting this a year ago, but the vast majority of the
listers did not
agree at that time. Fringe's post is a sad proof of my words.
The coherent laser
beam is precise, accurate, has a very narrow volumetric angle of
does not scatter. That's what makes it deadly. Sure, you can
sense it by a
photodiod, but the moment you've senced it you are history.
Sorry to hear your story , Fringe. Get a good laweyer and fight
I remember reading on the list that laser-based citations do not
hold up in court
too well. Perhaps the legal crowd on the list can shed some
light on this issue.
'89 200TQ - 18psi (TAP)
'97 A4TQ - on the dealer's lot