TexasCHLforum.com

Kevin has it correct. Radar is an electronic device that can make a determination of something that is not plainly discernible to the human eye, i.e. your exact speed. In using it, it is considered a search of the vehicle. Any search must be based on probable cause. Probable cause is established by visual estimation of the speed, which can be just they appeared to be moving over the limit but should be more precise.

In every radar operator's class, the officers are taught to always say they estimated the speed before checking it with radar. Most never understand or refuse to believe it really is a search. The officers must also demonstrate proficiency in visual estimation of speed by estimating cars for the instructor who checks with a radar gun.

This is all based on very old rulings. The latest SCOTUS ruling on matters like this was if an infra-red detector was a search or just an aid to sight like binoculars are. SCOTUS says if the officer could see the object from a different vantage point and is just using something to alter his viewpoint (binoculars or mirror periscope type device), then the rules of plain view apply. If it takes the device, it is a search.

And one of the best ways to fight a radar ticket is if the officer clocked you just as you crested a hill or came around a turn (where so many like to hide). When he says he saw you and estimated your speed first, you then ask him how far from the vision point he was. Then you ask how long he took to estimate your speed. Then you bring in estimates of reaction time and decision loop time from experts. Simple math shows how far your traveled during the estimate reaction time, and you ask him how far from the him he clocked you. Mth shows it cannot happen as they testify 90% of the time.

But, I have noticed that DPS tends to not hide this way. Most of them are just blacked out off the side of the road on a long straight. Radar works fairly far off and he has the time, so be careful of where they clock you at when you use this argument.

EDIT: And to keep this on the original discussion, I also think putting the guns on the dash was wrong. Either I trust you to keep the guns or I should remove them altogether. Based on his age, I would say he was taught by someone to disarm people but really doesn't care to do so and came up with a reasonable alternative. He might have picked it up from an older officer who trained him without explaining if the department had a policy to always disarm and the older officer felt that way (which may be more likely).