Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwaves
... While it sounds like only minimal training would be needed...training would still be needed especially if the MPO wanted to use the findings in court. ...
|
I whole-heartedly agree with you that speed enforcement requires much more than "minimal training." My response to NoBozo was meant to express that a ranging device, alone, is more suitable for the 150' rule enforcement than speed control.
"Distance to target" is only part of the calculation to determine speed. Without fixed reference points to compare against a boat's passage, it would take a lot of experience to estimate speed. At night (imo) it would approach impossible for a visual observer to be accurate enough to get a conviction.
It's possible the MP will, or has calculated speed tables for various channels. By "parking" in the same spot and timing the line of sight transit past two distant landmarks, they can get a reasonably accurate estimate that way too. For that they would need the boat's ranges at the start and finish of the equation. The trigonometry techniques to do this have been available for millenia. Again though, at night the reliability of this method would decrease.
From what we have heard from member "Winnipesaukee" the officer in question didn't even claim to use techniques like this but theoretically could have.
I'd expect that lack of radar would not guarantee aquittal for speeding if the officer can demonstrate reasonable skill with mathematical calculations. Doppler radar is arguably the best technology for this purpose but with only 4 sets the MP may have to opt for technique Vs. toys in many locales. At minimum it will probably be sufficient probable cause for a stop.
That's all I think I know about that...