Our Search Tags

Powered by Blinder M27 M47 Anti-laser Products

Who's Online

We have 27 guests and no members online

Speed Camera Locations

Australian Speed Camera Locations

Make Your Car Invisible to Laser Speed Guns





BLINDER HP-905 Compact - Tired of getting caught 4 km/h over the limit.

Hate Highway Robbery in the name of "Road Safety"? Don't put up with being a sheep to the slaughter - be a fox! - Get wise and buy a BLINDER Stealth System.




Smallest Sensors on the Market today



Articles View Hits

Victorian Police Trial Long Range Laser Gun & Video Camera System


Don't think that you will see the police operating this device at up to 700m away. You won't!!!  The only way you will know that your being targeted by this new laser speed detection system, is with a BLINDER HP-905 anti-laser system fitted to your vehicle. It's the only way to “Make YOUR Car Invisible" to laser speed guns systems like this little abomination. Available from It "invasion of privacy" device has been sold to the media as a "safety belt" detector  and an "anti-texting" device. Crap! It has a laser gun hanging off it and it designed to dishout speeding fines to drivers from beyond their immediate visual scanning zone plain and simple.

The best way to fight a speeding fine is not to get it in the first place. Unfortuantely, this is getting more and more difficult with fines handed out for 3 or 4 km/h over the speed limit.

Article from ABC News - 15th April 2014

Victoria Police are trialling a new long-range video camera incorporating a laser gun that can catch people who are not wearing seatbelts or who are texting whilst driving from 700 metres away. The Ranger video camera is set up on a tripod and allows officers to record up to eight seconds of video ( and also a speed reading using the attached laser gun) before stopping any driver who is found to be breaking the road rules.

Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Robert Hill says it is the first time the technology has been used in Australia."The new technology allows our police members to zoom in on drivers approaching a static location, [to see] whether they're concentrating behind the wheel, whether they're wearing their seat belt," he said."We'll test the equipment and we'll see whether this is an effective wayto influence driver behaviour, [to] encourage people to get off their mobile phones and wear their seatbelts."

Police are refusing to say how many of the cameras will be operational during the Easter and Anzac day holiday period in Melbourne and in country Victoria.
Don't allow this type of intrusion into your privacy. Arm yourself with BLINDER’s electronic laser defence shield. Available in Australia from


Add a comment

"The Most Important Advice You NEVER Receive"

This may be the most important piece of advice you ever read. If you don't have these two legal documents in place and you are married, have kids or you are over the age of 20, then you could be placing a terrible burden on your loved ones unnecessarily.

First mistake - Not having an up-to-date Will designed by a competent solicitor. (Yes there are useless solicitors out their who make poor Wills. You get what you pay for.)

Second and by far the worst mistake - Not having an "Enduring Power of Attorney" signed an stored in a safe place. You can even buy the document and get it signed and witnessed by your GP. It will cost you very little, but could save you a fortune in grief.

What is an Enduring Power of Attorney I hear you ask? It is the most powerful single peace of paper that most adults don't have. It is an authority that permits a highly trusted partner or family member to take over the running of your finances and or life decisions if you should become incapacitated through a stroke, head injury or sickness.


Without this valuable piece of paper, your wife or family can't operate your bank accounts, cant pay your bills, cant talk to CentreLInk on your behalf, can't collect your pension. They can't even re-direct your mail but watch helplessly while you lie in a hospital bed blowing bubbles through a tube.

Your family will be forced to make an application to the State Administration Tribunal for an Administration Order and/or Guardianship. This is a major process and fraught with difficulties. On top of this your family will be required to keep immaculate financial records and be audited and literally put through a terrible process of oversight and frustration by the Public Trustee. So on top of the burden of looking after you, through your ignorance, you will have placed your family into a paperwork and process heavy nightmare.

If you are one of the FEW clever organised individuals who have this little peace of paper ( an Enduring Power of Attorney") Congratulations- Well Bloody Done :-)   You have saved your family from a nightmare. The banks will welcome your advocate with open arms, happy to hand over the running of your accounts. Your medical and house bills will not pile up for 6 months. The electricity will not get cut off. The phone will not get cut off, and the debt collectors WILL NOT be banging on their front door. Your family will not be burdoned with court hearings and major paperwork problems and an accounting mess at a time of great distress.

My 80year old father was smart enough to have an Enduring Power of Attorney in place for 15 years  which nominate me to assist him when the time came. Five years later, he had a severe stroke and I took over his affairs with no problems what-so-ever. The doors fell open when I waved the Enduring Power of Attorney document.

In contrast, my father-in-law had a stroke 12 months ago and he DID NOT have an Enduring Power of Attorney. I've been struggling with his finaces - the State Administration Tribunal Hearings and the Public Trustee ever since. I am required to submit mounds of paperwork inches thick. I've had to run from one end of town to the other for months to try and fix the legal issues caused by not having this legal document in place

The burden that you leave your family is enormous and something that you would not wish upon your worst enemy, let alone a loved family member. At a time when they are burdened and stressed  trying to look after you and visiting you in hospital, the last thing they should be doing is straightening out your financial mess and fighting for you rights.

If you have read this article and understood it, then RUN - DON'T WALK to get one signed   If your parents are over 50 years of age and don't have an Enduring Power of Attorney, they are leaving you open to a world of hurt and frustration if you need to take over their affairs and care.

Get a Will done at the same time as the Enduring Power of Attorney and Guardianship documents.  Your loved ones will thank you for it. :-) 

Add a comment

PoliscanSpeed Camera "Check Box" Height & Software Approval

PoliscanSpeed by Vitronic - Police Ignoring the "white checkbox" rules and issueing illegal fines?


This is a translation of the German Evidence used in the Poliscanspeed test case.  Download file.

Download this file (Poliscanspeed Court Evidence 2011 Germany Traffic Test Case.pdf)Poliscanspeed Court Evidence 2011 Germany Traffic Test Case  Poliscanspeed Court Evidence

Except "... It must be noted that the height of the perspective evaluation template according to the manufacturer's instructions should always be exactly 1 m - no tolerance , not roughly , not " there-abouts " - but exactly 1 m. This perspective is, however, not amount calibrated size and therefore to be regarded not necessarily as safe..." Google Translation.

The PoliscanSpeed Camera has been tested in the European courts for some years now but is still a relative new comer to the Australia legal system. The PoliscanSpeed Camera (manufactured by Vitronic) has been tested in the European courts for some years now but is still a relative new comer to the Australia legal system.

For any speed detection equipment to by legally used in states like Western Australia, it must first be authorised by the the Police Minister and appear in the State Government Gazette. (See the listing for the PoliscanSpeed as issued in the Govt Gazette No. 105. 22-Jun-2012 below). Without this approval the speed camera CANNOT be used by police in our legal system. Basically, anyone contesting an infringement in court could have the speeding fine turfed out on the basis that the apparatus wasn't properly approved for use.

Notice in the above Gazette excerpt how the named apparatus must be legally correct. It appears that the speed apparatus in uppercase "VITRONIC PoliScan Speed" is correct and the wrong lowercase label was Gazetted back in 2010 which has been replaced. I wonder how many speeding cases were thrown out because of this anomaly?

What I didn't know until recently is that the PoliscanSpeed has different software versions (see court case in Germany 2011 below) that can affect the "white check box" among other things. The software is the main processor  responsible for the 3D scanning and recording of a vehicle co-ordinates during the 30m scanning run that results in an average speed reading.

My point is that the software is as important, if not MORE IMPORTANT than the physical speed reading equipment itself. If the apparatus model number and name are so important that it necessitates the the Police Minister to re-Gazette the apparatus, then surely changing the software in any speed reading apparatus would require re-testing and re-approval.

This is an extract of from a test case in Germany from 2011. The basis for the test case is that the "white check box" must be of a maximum height of 1metre at the front of the vehicle. If the check box is higher than 98cm for software version 1.xx or higher than 103cm for software version 3.xx then the photo should be scrapped and no fine issued.

( Image left.) This is a classic case of the "white check box" being in the wrong position. It should encompass one of the wheels and at least part of the number plate. Obviously it does not. This shamefully inaccurate photo was passed as "valid" and sent out as evidence for a speeding violation in Western Australia. 

The box doesn't include one of the wheels or part of the number plate.  Just as important, is the height of the white check box which was not mentioned in our previous article. As you can read below, the height shouldn't be more that 1metre with slight variations depending on the software version used.

In the photo on the left, the check box is about 1.5m high.  I was shown another Poliscanspeed camera photo recently  in which the white check box appeared to be in the right location and encompassed one wheel and part of the number plate, however the height of the box is more like 1.7m in height. What I didn't realise until recently is that the height of the check box is also a very important double check for accuracy of the photo and the speed reading.

I have seen a number of PoliscanSpeed photos recently and all appear to have check box out of scale with the required 1m maximum height.  Is minimum / maximum "height of the Check box" being deliberately ignored by the WA Police when assessing the validity of Poliscanspeed photos?

In summary, these are the points that I wish to raise with our readers.

1) When the software in a laser gun or speed camera is changed, shouldn't the speed apparatus be re-tested and re-approved by the Police Minister and requiring a new appearance in the Govt Gazette? 

2) Are the police in Australia (especially WA) setting up in accurate speed camera traps and ignoring the correct "white box" double checks 1) corrct postion, 2) correct size and 3) correct height in order to maximise revenue?

In my opinion the Poliscanspeed should be re-gazetted as follows: (a) apparatuses that bear the name VITRONIC PoliScan Speed M1 using firmware version x.xx ; and (b) apparatuses that bear the name VITRONIC PoliScan Speed M1 HP using firmware version x.xx

The Police may call the Poliscanspeed apparatus by the same name and model number, but if the software is changed so that it functions in a different way or gives different results, then in my opinion the apparatus is fundamentally changed and requires re-approval by the Police Minister.

German Test Case 12.07.2011 Case No. 7 OWi 450 Js 14650/11 - Bladt illuminated speed the decision of the AG Karlsruhe from 12.07.2011 to measure speed with PoliScan Short message to "evaluation criteria to PoliScan speed" by Dipl.-Ing. Roland Bladt, original published in: 2011 DAR volume 13, 754 - 757  The AG Karlsruhe has in its judgment of 12.07.2011, Case No. 7 OWi 450 Js 14650/11 acquitted, DAR 2011, 650, after notification of the author those affected by the accusation of speeding factual reasons because the measuring device PoliScan speed of Fa Vitronic was 11 cm above the manufacturer prescribed limits maximum height of 95 cm. The author agrees with this view, at least in the specific case. According to his calculations may in software versions 1.xx the frame height not less than 77 cm and not more than 98 cm, with software versions the frame height 3.xx not less than 97 cm and not more than 103 cm in length, if the measurement result from his view nor should be utilizable.


WA Government Gazette       ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1974

Road Traffic (Speed Measuring Equipment) Notice 2012 Department of Transport Reference: RTA-2012- 00800 Made by the Minister for Transport under subsection 98A(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1974. 1. Citation - This notice may be cited as the Road Traffic (Speed Measuring Equipment) Notice 2012. 2. Previous Approval Revoked. I revoke the previous approval gazetted on page 6295 of the Government Gazette dated 10 December 2010 in relation to apparatuses bearing the name Vitronic PoliScan Speed M1. 3. Approval of laser apparatus for ascertaining speed.

I approve as types of laser apparatus for ascertaining the speed at which a vehicle is moving—

(a) apparatuses that bear the name VITRONIC PoliScan Speed M1; and

(b) apparatuses that bear the name VITRONIC PoliScan Speed M1 HP.

Without this approval the speed camera can NOT be used by police in our legal system. Basically, anyone contesting infringements in court could have the speeding fine turfed out on the basis that the apparatus wasn't approved for use. Notice in the above Gazette excerpt how the named apparatus must be legally correct. It appears that the speed apparatus must be labelled in uppercase "VITRONIC PoliScan Speed" and the wrong label was Gazetted back in 2010. I would suggest that some smart solicitor had a case thrown out of court on the basis that the apparatus was not authorised correctly because of the lower case labeling in the Gazette.

Add a comment

Speeding fines in Victoria - Get the Data

The latest data on speed camera fines in Victoria was released last week, which shows that while the number of fines has hit a four year low, the total revenue generated by speed cameras has hit a four year high.

Revenue from speeding fines totaled $293 million in 2012-13. Much of the increases over the past four years have come from fixed speed and red light cameras rather than mobile cameras.

In 2009-10, 43.5% of all speed camera revenue came from mobile cameras but in 2012-13 this had dropped to 35.4%. In real terms, the mobile cameras generate about $102 million a year.

By contrast, Fixed speed and red light intersection cameras generated $109.5 million in 2012-13 (37.4% of total revenue), up from $73.5 million (31.1%) in 2009-10.

However, the number of infringements issued to motorists has reached a four-year low. A total of 1,292,991 fines were issues to Victorians in the past financial year, down 6.3 per cent on 2011-12.

Click Read More....

Add a comment


Queensland drivers speeding in school zones could face tougher penalties as 100 a day caught

THE State Government is putting leadfoots on notice of tougher penalties such as double demerit points as more than 100 motorists a day are caught speeding in school zones across the state. The rate is on the rise - up 44 per cent in the past year despite the introduction of flashing speed signs.

In recent months there have been several children injured after being hit by cars outside schools, prompting calls for heftier fines, which the State Government said it would consider if the trend continued.

Queensland Transport and Main Road figures show more than 50,000 motorists were fined in excess of $11 million for speeding in a school zone since January 2011. Last year, 317 motorists were caught travelling at more than 70km/h in the 40km/h school zones, while 43 drivers were travelling more than 80km/h.

The worst speeding motorists were caught around schools in Indooroopilly and Toowong in Brisbane's west, followed by Ipswich, Coomera on the Gold Coast, and Upper Mt Gravatt in Brisbane's south. Earlier this year, a 10 year-old boy and his mother suffered serious head injuries after being hit by a car outside Mansfield Primary School in Brisbane's south.


Add a comment


Victoria - Speeding fines erased for drivers on Western Ring Rd at Keilor East on June30

POLICE have scrapped almost 1000 speeding fines after the traffic camera watchdog ruled they were unfair.

A police statement said all fines incurred in 73 minutes on June 30 on the Western Ring Rd at Keilor East would be withdrawn. "It is not in the public interest to pursue these matters," the statement said."Victoria Police will withdraw all speeding infringements and each driver will now receive an official warning."

The Herald Sun last week revealed Road Safety Camera Commissioner Gordon Lewis had recommended police withdraw 987 fines issued to drivers travelling through roadworks under the Keilor Park Drive bridge on the ring road. "Each of the motorists did commit an offence," Mr Lewis said in his report.

"However, in the interests of fairness, I recommend that Victoria Police withdraw those infringement notices and issue official warnings in their place." Police were reluctant to withdraw the fines.

"Some of the drivers who received infringements were recidivist speeders with appalling traffic history and well-documented records for speeding," the police statement said. "Some people have even been caught speeding since this incident."

According to police data, 242 of the fined drivers were to lose their licence for a month for exceeding the speed limit by more than 25km/h. Another 22 would have lost their licence for six months because they were caught at more than 35km/h above the limit.

Of the 987, 38 have received another traffic infringement since June 30 and 131 had had more than three offences since July 1, 2011. Mr Lewis found there were not enough signs to indicate a reduced speed limit because of the roadworks.

He recommended VicRoads ensure roadworks near speed cameras had "conspicuous signage". But the police defended the signs.

"Victoria Police remains concerned in relation to the poor driver behaviour and excessive speed used by some motorists travelling through high-risk areas such as roadwork zones," it said.

"The signage did meet legal requirements and there were no errors with the speed camera itself."

Editor's Comment:  I'm completely stunned to see that this process is proving that it has some worth. I was very sceptical, but this outcome is proving me wrong which is wonderful to see. Leave these type of issues to the police and all you will get is a dogmatic stupid response. The police don't think like normal human beings. It's all "black n white" no middle ground. Keep up the good work Commissioner Gordon Lewis.

Add a comment

Speed camera watchdog Gordon Lewis calls for mercy for 1000 speedsters


 Speed camera watchdog Gordon Lewis wants Victoria Police to withdraw nearly 1000 speed camera fines -

VICTORIA'S speed camera watchdog has called for fines for almost 1000 motorists to be scrapped because they sped inadvertently. Gordon Lewis believes this is the only fair thing to do, because signs warning of temporary 40km/h zones near roadworks were inadequate.

“I think speed cameras should be highlighted with proper signage in roadwork areas," Mr Lewis said on 3AW this morning.

"There is no villain in this situation, it’s just about fairness and justice being served.”

He also couldn't rule out if this situation was occurring in other parts of Victoria. “It could have (happened elsewhere)” Mr Lewis said. In a report out today, Mr Lewis will recommend Victoria Police withdraw 987 speed camera fines and restore the demerit points and licences of the motorists. He began investigating after drivers recently contacted 3AW to claim they had been wrongly booked at the Keilor Park Drive bridge on the Western Ring Road. Is signage in 40km/h zones confusing? Have your say below.

He found the fines were correctly issued but there were not enough signs to warn drivers of the change.

"Each of the motorists did commit an offence," he finds.


Add a comment


Queensland's fixed speed cameras nab fewer motorists but most lucrative rakes in $22,000 a day

The fixed speed camera (top left) on the M1 at Loganholme is the state's most lucrative. Source: News Limited

FEWER motorists are being caught by Queensland's network of fixed speed cameras, but the state's most lucrative speed trap is still raking in $22,000 in fines every day.

The fixed speed camera on the M1 at Loganholme remains Queensland's most lucrative detection device, racking up 150 speed detections a day, or more than 1000 each week - compared with 30 a day in the Brisbane Airport Link tunnel.

The tollway is home to the state's second-busiest fixed speed cameras - generating about $4500 a day in fines, closely followed by the Main St, Kangaroo Point, site at $4000 a day in fines.

Despite being the oldest fixed camera in the state, the Main St site still catches out around 27 motorists a day exceeding the 60km/h limit, Queensland Police Service figures reveal.

....Click Read More Below

Add a comment


High Court Challenge Planned To Bring Down Speed Camera Empire

AUSTRALIA - A road-users interest group is planning a High Court challenge to the validity of speed cameras and radars in every Australian state and territory.

A successul outcome could render invalid millions of dollars in speeding fines collected over decades in Australia.

The “Association Against Speed Measuring Devices” (ASMD) is aiming to raise $300,000 in order to pursue its case, and is calling on the public to donate to the cause.

ASMD claims to have several grounds upon which to base its case, including radar accuracy, calibration and checking of equipment and the law itself.

The group claims that the National Measurement Act (1960) requires speed measuring devices to hold a “pattern approval” for use as “trade or legal” devices and that such devices currently being used by law enforcement do not meet this requirement.

ASMD points out that breath-analysis devices used to detect drink drivers do comply with “pattern approval” requirements, but speed detection devices don’t.

In addition, speed measuring devices must conform to international standards as per the International Treaty on Measurement, to which Australia is a signatory.

ASMD claims that relatively “affordable” speeding fines, the prohibative legal costs and the vague nature of state legislation is the reason no-one has attempted to launch a legal challenge on such a scale before.

To learn more about ASMD, or to donate to the cause, check out the website: (website opens in new window).

Add a comment