[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
> I was thinking about that VG-2 stuff and wondered if it's reliable and
> particularly if it can be used as a proof in court.
If you study the subject and find everything there is to know about
VG-2 there might be a chance. This may apply to a case where the
radar detector is legal to carry in the car but not in cases where it
is ilegal to own. And of course providing you have surrendered the
> Because the signal generated by the detector is weak,
> I guess the VG-2 has to be a very sensitive device, and therefore prone
> to give lot of false alarms. I wonder if VG-2 might be just an element
> of propaganda to make the drivers more afraid of using detectors.
The VG-2 works. Friend of mine has been cought twice by an
undercover cruiser i.e. no way to turn it off fast enough.
That was however with an older detectable unit.
I myself had a couple of cruisers slam the brakes on and pull a U
turn to follow me. That was with a detectable Uniden.
Lucky enough I was in the middle of other cars
i.e. no way for him to know which car it is unless he pulls all 6
cars over! With the Bel I have yet to see this though.
1982 Coupe TURBO (473,150 km)
1984 4000s quattro (soon to be a rally car)
1986 4000s quattro (317,000 km) with four Nokia 10's
1982 Coupe (154,000) parts car
CEO of exam lastminute allniter rollthedice inc.
- RE: VG-2?
- From: Sachelle Babbar <firstname.lastname@example.org>