Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / General Car Topics / December 2004
Is this Phantom Plate spray for license plates legal?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
support@internettrafficschool.com - 09 Oct 2004 00:49 GMT I would like to think it is.
It sounds pretty good but I've also heard about a plastic cover that goes over your license plate too.
Some customers have called us about them.
It might not be good for us though because according to our company records, red light tickets account for nearly 20 percent of all our online internet traffic school customers.
;'>
- karen
Internet Traffic School http://www.internettrafficschool.com Online Driving School http://www.onlinedrivingschool.com
------------------------------------
Smile: You're on Photo Radar Camera
Unsuspecting drivers are getting surprise traffic tickets in the mail, and many believe they are an innocent victim of a faulty automated machine. Those drivers do not question the concept of a hidden camera, just whether the camera can be considered accurate.
Washington (PRWEB) October 8, 2004 -- Unsuspecting victims of the "Candid Camera" television show smile when they are caught, but these victims of hidden traffic cameras have nothing to smile about.
Motorists sent tickets by mail for traffic violations along with a photo of their vehicle say it is more like "big brother is watching" than "Candid Camera." Critics say the need for added revenue has motivated municipalities all around the world to purchase automated photo radar units that take pictures of speeding cars without the need for a police officer to operate the unit.
More and more drivers are claiming that they are getting "Photo Cop" tickets unfairly because they were not actually speeding, or going through a red light. They claim the camera is not functioning correctly.
Despite faulty cameras that have cost municipalities millions in damages, most police departments are undaunted by the complaints, and they continue to put more of the units into use. Although they claim they are motivated by safety and not revenue, it is hard for disaffected motorists to see it that way.
PhotoBlocker (tm) spray, available at local auto supply stores and on-line at www.PhantomPlate.com, provides motorists a simple form of defense against faulty cameras.
PhotoBlocker (tm) is easily sprayed on a license plate. It works on plates from any state or any country. The spray appears clear to the naked eye, so the registration plate can be seen clearly by police officers. However, when a photo radar camera takes a flash picture of the plate the spray causes a bright reflection making the registration number too difficult to read.
"When they can't see your plate they can't send you a ticket in the mail," explains Joe Scott, marketing director for PhantomPlate, Inc., the firm that makes PhotoBlocker (tm).
The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are unfairly ticketed to have a way to prevent those unjustified tickets.
"A police officer has the ability to use his human judgment and evaluate whether a ticket is justified for someone who may be showing up on radar just a small amount over the limit. The officer knows that a speedometer may be slightly off, the radar unit may be slightly off, and so he targets the speeders who are excessively over the limit and a genuine danger to us all," said Scott.
A computerized traffic camera just takes pictures and sends out tickets. It not only lacks human good sense, it can easily malfunction.
Numerous tests by news organizations and police themselves shows PhotoBlocker to be effective in preventing a Photo Radar image from being legible. At the present time there are no specific laws against the spray.
PhotoBlocker has been featured in news stories by the Washington Post, NBC, CBS, ABC News, Tech TV, Norwegian TV, Dutch TV, Washington Times, UK's Daily Mail, NewsMax.com and many, many more. To date conclusive tests have been conducted by the Denver Police Dept., Dutch Police, Fox News, Swedish TV, Australian TV, and British TV.
The company offers a money-back guaranty, but to date less than one half of one percent of all customers have requested a refund, according to Scott.
Testimonials from happy customers abound on the company's website at www.PhantomPlate.com.
Contact: Joe Scott PhantomPlate Inc. P.O. Box 1247 Washington, DC 20013 (703) 624 9318 (888) 207 7040
________________________
Internet Traffic School
http://www.internettrafficschool.com
Online Driving School
http://www.onlinedrivingschool.com
-------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles, CA -- October 12, 2004 -- In just a few short years, the internet traffic school phenomeon has transformed the driving course-traffic school industry. What began in 1996, as a small experiment, in response to consumer interest for alternative methods to fulfill court requirements regarding removal of traffic-related violations, internet-based traffic violator programs like Internet Traffic School and Driving School Online have flourished.
Terry Haggin, CEO of Internet Traffic School, one of the nation's largest online traffic schools stated, "The interest has been staggering. Well beyond what I ever though it would be when we started way back in 1997. But the business model behind internet schools like ours is unique. Our market consists of motivated consumers because they do not want to sit in an 8 hour course away from home when they have an alternative to do it at home or work or whereever. The vast majority are happy to call us or find us on the web."
Motivated is right because on one hand you have a future of 8 hours plus of boring, dull traffic-related information spent in a cold, unfriendly environment and on the other hand a future of higher insurance payments, driving record penalties and the potential of having licence suspensions or in fact losing your right to drive.
"Another unique aspect of this is that we actually have the police officers and the courts working with us. The officers see violations, write tickets and then the court steers our students directly to us. The officers and the courts like people to go internet schools because people learn more. In every internet school, they have to take tests to pass while in a classroom all you have to do is endure the time until it is over."
So who loses in this? Apparently, the in-class schools do.
Their market share has plumented over the last 6 years, enrollment is down drastically and as a result many traditional schools have simply closed their doors.
Also the losers are the insurance companies. When a student opts to attend an internet-based school, the points are removed from their driving record before the state agency can assess the penalty. If no penalty is assessed, the insurance company never finds out and the rates are not raised.
It is estimated that the increased number of students attending traffic school due to the availability of home study courses, 40% overall is the estimated increase, have put more than $10,000,000 dollars into the state's budget and on the negative side, cost insurance companies more than $50,000,000.
According to Mr. Haggin, "That is what I like the most, taking money away from the insurance companies and putting it back into the pockets of people just like me. I get up every morning happy because I am helping someone save money and reduce a little of the stress on their life."
Currently, internet traffic schools are only authorized in a few states, California, Texas and Florida being three but with the runaway success of these programs, it won't be long until every state is on the online driving school bandwagon.
Mike Romain - 09 Oct 2004 16:07 GMT You sure are one sick individual aren't you?
You say you run a driving school and you want folks to be comfortable blowing red lights and killing people!!!!
What a freaking low life a.shole.
I guess, there has to be scum of the earth companies like you folks, but to admit it publicly, well....
Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> I would like to think it is. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > ------------------------------------ Z - 09 Oct 2004 18:17 GMT > The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and > break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are > unfairly ticketed to have a way to prevent those unjustified tickets. Bullshit.
Skip - 10 Oct 2004 06:39 GMT >> The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and >> break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are >> unfairly ticketed to have a way to prevent those unjustified tickets. > >Bullshit. Hmmmm. They must have had spray left over from the spray that would deflect but not reflect radar. And to think people actually buy this junk.
_News Server_ - 10 Oct 2004 16:55 GMT >>> The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and >>> break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > deflect but not reflect radar. And to think people actually buy this > junk. ~50% of the U$$A is stupid enough to think G "I knew that" Bu$h is a good president.
Magnets for the Fuel Line that "break up clustered fuel molecules" and give your better MPG?
 Signature "I don't see any way of winning" [in Vietnam] -- President Lyndon Johnson privately to Defense Secretary McNamara 1965
"America wins the wars that she undertakes. Make no mistake about it!" -- President Lyndon Johnson public speech 1965 re: Vietnam War
Z - 10 Oct 2004 18:25 GMT >>>The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and >>>break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are >>>unfairly ticketed to have a way to prevent those unjustified tickets.
>>Bullshit.
> Hmmmm. They must have had spray left over from the spray that would > deflect but not reflect radar. And to think people actually buy this > junk. My Bullshit comment was re: the stated intended purpose.
I don't know if the spray works or not, but it's clearly not for people wrongly ticketed. That's what court is for.
AZGuy - 10 Oct 2004 21:31 GMT >>>>The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and >>>>break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I don't know if the spray works or not, but it's clearly not for >people wrongly ticketed. That's what court is for. You must be joking! Traffic court provides no avenue for a fair and impartial hearing. That's exactly why I have zero problem with people using this kind of spray or anything else the keeps photo-anything from working. -- Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:
"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789
Z - 11 Oct 2004 02:14 GMT >>I don't know if the spray works or not, but it's clearly not for >>people wrongly ticketed. That's what court is for.
> You must be joking! Traffic court provides no avenue for a fair and > impartial hearing. That's exactly why I have zero problem with people > using this kind of spray or anything else the keeps photo-anything > from working. You're talking to some one who walked away from 7 out of a total of 13 tickets, a couple of which I probably should have been found guilty.
Court works just fine, TYVM.
> Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House > of Representatives, August 17, 1789 Obsess much, Militia Boy?
AZGuy - 11 Oct 2004 06:44 GMT >>>I don't know if the spray works or not, but it's clearly not for >>>people wrongly ticketed. That's what court is for. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Court works just fine, TYVM. How many were because the cop didn't show up versus because you convinced them with your evidence? In my experience they don't even bother looking at evidence if you bring it and the only way you can get off is the cop not showing up, or the cop is honest in his testimony and admits he didn't have a good view or something like that. The chances of getting an honest cop are about as good as the chances of getting an impartial judge.
>> Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Obsess much, Militia Boy? -- Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:
"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789
mike J - 11 Oct 2004 02:46 GMT >>>>>The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and >>>>>break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >using this kind of spray or anything else the keeps photo-anything >from working. I couldnt agree more.
BTW those clear plastic plate covers are illegal in many states and will give a traffic cop a PC to pull you over and search your vehicle.
Not a good idea.
This plate spray is invisible so I am sure its still legal, or at least close enough :)
helen - 16 Dec 2004 14:48 GMT > >>>>>The spray is not intended to enable people to run traffic lights and > >>>>>break speed limits. It does enable law abiding drivers who are [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > This plate spray is invisible so I am sure its still legal, or at > least close enough :) Hey, if the Plate Spray is invisible then who is going to pull you over? Or are you saying that your license plate is suppose to be photogenic. To my knowledge, there is no such law. And guess what I just went to their website and they are having a good deal for Christmas. I would take the advantage and buy some. It would be a great gift idea. Check them out at www.photoblocker.com anyways.
Christopher Green - 09 Oct 2004 23:42 GMT >I would like to think it is. > >It sounds pretty good but I've also heard about a plastic cover that >goes over your license plate too. If it worked, it'd be illegal.
If it doesn't work, promoting it would be fraud.
Dirty spammer.
 Signature Chris Green
_News Server_ - 10 Oct 2004 16:57 GMT >> I would like to think it is. >> >> It sounds pretty good but I've also heard about a plastic cover that >> goes over your license plate too. > > If it worked, it'd be illegal. Cite?
> If it doesn't work, promoting it would be fraud. Stupid people deserve to be defrauded. It's economic Darwinism.
> Dirty spammer.
 Signature "I don't see any way of winning" [in Vietnam] -- President Lyndon Johnson privately to Defense Secretary McNamara 1965
"America wins the wars that she undertakes. Make no mistake about it!" -- President Lyndon Johnson public speech 1965 re: Vietnam War
Christopher Green - 11 Oct 2004 04:42 GMT >>> I would like to think it is. >>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Cite? In California, CVC 5201(f) and (g). For other states, look it up yourself.
 Signature Chris Green
Alex Rodriguez - 12 Oct 2004 20:10 GMT >I would like to think it is. Probably isn't, but it might be hard to detect.
>It sounds pretty good but I've also heard about a plastic cover that >goes over your license plate too. In NY state it is illegal to use any type of cover, clear or otherwise, over your plate. --------------- Alex
ephedralover@hotmail.com - 16 Dec 2004 17:09 GMT That crap doesn't work dude. Just mail me your money next time.
SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim? - 31 Dec 2004 19:46 GMT ah yeah, and that's coming from a traffic cop or a traffic judge, one of those that depends on you paying your ticket.
> That crap doesn't work dude. Just mail me your money next time.
|
|
|