You have been pulled over. Your hands are sweating, and your heart is pounding. Lots of things are going on in your mind. All passing motorists give you a look. The policeman says you have been caught speeding by a hand-held radar and he issues a ticket.

What do you plead? Guilty or not guilty? DON?T JUST PAY UP! Remember, there is nothing unethical about pleading not guilty even if you really did it. It is merely exercising your right to question the prosecution?s evidence. You are innocent until proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That?s the prosecution?s job.

Unfortunately, nowadays you have to prove yourself innocent. If enough people fight it, this revenue-generating system will collapse. Yes, it is a revenue-generating system, as a recent incident involving a local radio station showed. The radio informed drivers of the locations of speed-traps. The police complained that drivers were made aware of ?Mr Brake? and slowed down, leaving policemen idle, with no culprits to catch! Ironically, the police should have rejoiced that the radio was raising awareness among motorists! But no, perhaps they were more concerned about losing revenue!

At least, if you fight your ticket, the policeman has to go to court and there is one less officer out there writing tickets. You are not wasting police time by getting them to court. It is already wasted by running silly speed traps on motorways. Imagine if your house is burgled or your car stolen or your child attacked, and all police officers are tied up running speed traps hidden behind bushes unable to assist you. By abolishing these ridiculous hidden speedtraps, many policemen can be freed for more useful tasks, such as... catching real criminals.

People are not against speed restriction. Those who violate the law and ignore traffic signs and speed rules should be punished. But what we are exasperated at is the indiscriminate way in which innocent motorists are harassed by a handful of unscrupulous policemen, abusing their authoritative power. However, it is possible for an honest policeman to wrongly catch a driver under the limit, by relying on his radar. It is possible for motorists traveling under the speed limit to be caught ?speeding?, as it happened to me! Why?

Well, let?s first explain how the radar works. Through some research, I have gathered the following: A radar unit is like a flashlight. Instead of emitting visible light, radar emits invisible electromagnetic waves. When you shine a light beam from a flashlight over an object, the light is reflected to your eyes so that you can see the object. The same applies to radar beams. The electromagnetic wave the radar emits is called a microwave, which will reflect off most metallic objects, concrete, trees, wood etc. It will however go through grass, bushes etc, just like light goes though glass and transparent objects.

The radar unit uses an antenna to ?read? the microwave that is reflected from an object (such as a car). If the microwave hits a moving target, the frequency changes. With the changed frequency and the frequency of the radar, the computer inside the radar unit will calculate the target speed. It?s that simple but there are shortcomings to traffic radar.

Firstly, radar is prone to interference. High voltage power lines, telephone lines, power stations, even neon lights, emit electromagnetic waves. There is no way to tell which wave the antenna is hearing. Secondly, radar cannot determine which target reflected off the waves. If two cars are travelling close, no one can tell which is responsible for the radar reading. Identifying the target is left to the radar operator, therefore it?s a human mind and eyes that determine the target and mistakes can occur. At a distance of 200m, the width of the radar beam can usually cover all four lanes of traffic in both directions. It is thus impossible for the policeman to know exactly which vehicle is responsible for the radar reading, even if he can see only one vehicle on the road. The reason is that radar has a typical range of some 400m, which is beyond the visual range of most human eyes. The radar might be clocking a speeder at a distance of 300m, but the policeman can only see an innocent driver coming at a distance of 100m.

As a result, an unjust ticket is issued. If there are more than two cars in his visual range, he might do some guesswork! From my conversations with anonymous policemen, I understand that some pick motorists at random and make use of value judgement!! One policeman agreed that there could be innocent drivers who are unjustly booked. I doubt if the radar saves the evidence in a format that can be presented to court should the accusation be challenged.

Furthermore, radar does not pick up the fastest moving object. The strongest return signal can be affected by different factors, such as the target?s size, its relative speed and distance from the radar unit. If a car is travelling at 80kph 50m from the radar, and a truck is speeding at 110kph at 200m, the radar may pick up the return signal from the truck and register a speed of 110kph. The police officer might think that the car is responsible for the violation and issue an undeserved ticket.

The authorities? objective is to enforce speed limits but the method used is not transparent enough since innocent motorists are sometimes targeted. This method has caused severe outcry in foreign democracies. Drivers should be vigilant and, when confronted with radar verdicts, should protest if they doubt the readings. We do not know the characteristics of the radar systems used by the police. It resides on the authorities to demonstrate, preferably in a televised report, how the system works, how readings are taken and how judgement is made. The public should be convinced that the system is foolproof. If there is any doubt, then it should be discarded.

<B>by KJHH</B>