NCJ Number
80787
Date Published
1981
Length
126 pages
Annotation
This assessment of moving radar and its role in traffic law enforcement examines judicial acceptance of moving radar, operating characteristics affecting readings, police agencies' use, its cost and the comparative cost of enforcing the speed limit by other means. This report also makes recommendations for the use of moving radar.
Abstract
Although moving radar (mobile doppler radar) has been criticized by a few courts and persons opposed to any police use of this equipment, police use of moving radar to enforce speed limits is increasing. With the exception of a Dade County, Fla., case and another in Wisconsin, the courts have readily accepted testimony based on the use of moving radar. Two elements concerning doppler radar stand out: (1) the equipment is reliable (doppler radar measures the change in frequency of a signal returning from a vehicle and converts that measurement into a reading which indicates the speed of the vehicle) and (2) a properly trained equipment operator will obtain an accurate reading of a vehicle's speed. The report describes operating characteristics that can affect readings including radio and electrical interference and geographic effects. State law enforcement agency administrators and State police officers who operate the equipment were asked about perceived reliability, ease of use, acceptance by the courts, and adequacy of training. Results showed that, in most respects, moving radar is superior to other methods of enforcing speed limits. However, it is not practical for use on multilane roads during periods of heavy traffic, on roads divided by median barriers, and in heavily rolling terrain. The most difficult task facing police administrators is operator training because there is no universally accepted training program. The assessment shows that moving radar is no more costly to operate than hand-held radar. It is less costly for patrolling coverage because the police officer is not tied to single location traffic monitoring. Thus, moving radar appears to be the most cost-effective method of enforcing the speed limit. A common training program and some improvements in the equipment may be needed. Tables, graphs, figures, technical data, the survey form, notes, and a bibliography of about 40 citations are supplied. (Author summary modified)