DRIVERS have been warned not to use camera-busting equipment to try to avoid a speed fine after a motorist was arrested for obstructing police.
A 29-year-old man from Rawtenstall was cautioned and had his jamming device confiscated and destroyed.
He told police he bought it for £400 on the internet - and now other drivers are being urged not to buy the technology.
The jammers emit a laser signal at the same frequency as mobile speed cameras, causing a five-second malfunction that enables drivers to sneak through undetected.
Radar Detectors.co.uk, an internet firm which sells similar devices for £324.99, advertises them as "the garage door opener that happens to jam laser guns". But its website also has a disclaimer which advises motorists not to use them in the UK.
Cheryl Brown, of the Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety, which is made up of police and councils, said: "For the sake of trying to avoid being caught not driving within speed limits, this man wasted £400 and now has a criminal record.
"Other motorists need to take heed and remember speed limits are there for one reason - to protect drivers and other road users."
Steven Hopkinson, director of Radar Detectors.co.uk, said: "The jammers aren't popular. Most people go for a radar which beeps to warn them of cameras, but someone who drives 30,000 miles a year and has nine points on their licence may get one because they fear they could lose their job if they lose their licence.
"We've found it depends which police area you are in as to whether you are prosecuted. It is a grey area as the technology is the same as that which runs cruise control systems on some new cars and automatic garage doors."
A motorist in South Wales was charged in 2003 with perverting the course of justice for having a jammer. But the case collapsed as police could not prove he was speeding.
Now officers across the country are advised to instead issue a caution for obstructing a police officer.
Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation, added: "There is a clear distinction between legal camera detection devices and camera jamming devices. These jammers should be banned."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article