Spain Cracks Down on Radar Detectors, Laser Jammers and . . . Sat Nav

by The Newspaper

Published: June 16th, 2009

spain cracks down on radar detectors laser jammers and sat nav

Spain’s Congress of Deputies last Wednesday gave approval to a measure that makes it a crime to use a GPS (a.k.a. satellite navigation) device while behind the wheel. The provision appeared as part of a broader legislation designed to update the traffic code with measures that encourage motorists to pay fines without challenge. Radar detectors are already illegal in Spain. But because satellite navigation devices come as factory options on most modern vehicles, officials could not easily outlaw their ownership. Instead, government ministers proposed to restrict GPS use since the devices are increasingly being loaded with maps that warn motorists of locations where speed cameras are in use.

“Driving using helmets, headsets or other devices that reduce the emphasis on driving or manually using mobile phones, navigation devices or any other communication system,” earns three points and a €200 (US$275) fine, according to the legislation.

On the table of offenses, using a GPS is now more serious than driving 30 MPH over the speed limit which merits just two points. To encourage prompt payment of speeding tickets, the legislation also removes points altogether for driving less than 19 MPH over the limit on a freeway. The €100 (US$140) fine is discounted by half as long as it is paid immediately.

The most serious punishment of all goes to anyone convicted of attempting to thwart a speed camera with a laser or radar jamming device or a radar detector. This represents more points than is awarded for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) and is equal to the number of points for an aggravated DUI.

“Driving vehicles with mechanical equipment or systems installed that are designed to evade traffic monitoring, or with devices that have the same intention, as well as use of radar detection systems,” earns six points according to the legislation.

The Ministry of the Interior will be responsible for developing regulations to implement the legislation within six months of becoming law.

The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 15 comments

AG on Jun 16, 2009

Dangit, stingray, now I'm hungry for paella.

Like Reply
ExtraO on Jun 16, 2009

Just as I suspected...la cámara de diputados Española no tiene madre.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

SCE to AUX Some pretty big strikes:[list][*]Drivetrain - how can a straight-6 be thrashy? Shame on you, Mazda.[/*][*]Poor fuel economy.[/*][*]Tire noise.[/*][*]Poor user interface.[/*][*]That colored dash is a bit garish for me.[/*][*]High price.[/*][*]Indistinct look in the Mazda lineup. Their SUVs are Russian nesting dolls.[/*][*]Nothing compelling to lure a buyer away from the bigger brands.[/*][/list]I don't see this moving the needle for Mazda in the US market.
Ash78 Dear unions, thank you for your service and for expressing interest in our automotive factories. Due to your many decades of pressuring employers to do better, the more adept companies have gotten your message and have implemented most of your demands preemptively in order to maintain a better employer-employee relationship than the manufacturing industry as a whole.We truly appreciate your feedback and interest, and all it has done to improve employer relations since the industrial revolution. We take your concerns seriously and will be glad to reach back out if our situation changes.We will keep your resume on file for three years, per company policy.Sincerely,Everyone
Theflyersfan I'm having a tough time figuring out Mazda's recent lineup decisions. I've mentioned before how having the CX-5 and CX-50 makes no sense as it seems like they would steal each other's sales instead of conquest sales from other brands. And now here comes the CX-70 vs 90 decision. If Mazda wanted to position the 70 above the 90 with pricing, I think they should have gone the Audi Q7 vs Q8 route. The Q8 costs more, has one fewer row, and is smaller on the inside, but has the more aggressive styling and tries to position itself as the sportier alternative large CUV in their lineup. With Mazda, the 70 and 90 seem to be in the position, like the 5 vs 50, to steal each other's sales. There isn't anything compelling me to get a 70 if I get more for my money with a 90, except 100,000 miles down the road, I won't have a folded up third row seat rattling around loosely. Mazda should have brought over the CX-60 and position that where they wanted the 70. I understand it's a touch larger than the X3, Q5, and GLC CUVs, which is a sweet spot in that market. Make the CX-70 a sportier alternative 2-row instead of such a blatant cynical move of just ripping a seat out of the 90, calling it an all new model and price it in the same ballpark. I want Mazda to succeed and continue to be independent, but decisions like these make me wonder what their future plans are.
Daniel J This thing is just too big and not packaged great being RWD. I'd prefer a FWD/AWD pre 2024 Santa Fe sized vehicle. A true CX-70.
Ash78 Now that we're on the topic, I think Apple owes us all a ton of money for bringing out new phones every 1-2 years and devaluing the one I have! /sDepreciation has always been a part of car ownership, far more so now if you're getting into EVs. I think it's just the discrete nature of these depreciation events (ie, price cuts) that have everyone wringing their hands.I'm too price sensitive -- not necessarily to BUY an EV -- but for the fear of what a truly disruptive battery tech might do to them. Split the differene with a hybrid or PHEV and you've reduced your car's reliance on battery tech as the primary determinant of value.