I am interested in learning how many, if any, accidents have occurred
while a driver was speeding and was using a radar detector or radar
jammer. There are advertisements by vendors that a manufacturer will,
under certain circumstances, pay the tickets of drivers who get
tickets while using their device. It seems to me that radar detectors
are not really to promote safe driving, but are, instead, sold to
allow drivers to speed and not get tickets. I am fearful that people
have gotten injured or killed by someone who was speeding and was
relying on the detectors to prevent him or her from getting those
tickets and fines.

I would like answers to the following:
(1) Are there any statistics which show (or disprove the assumption)
that people drive more dangerously when they feel they are protected
from receiving and having to pay speeding tickets?

(2) Have there been any law suits against any radar detector
manufacturer by any people who have been severely injured by a driver
who was speeding and using a detector?

(3) Have there have been any suits by wives or children or parents of
people who have been killed when their loved ones were hit by drivers
using those devices?

(4) Is there any literature about radar detectors and their effect on
traffic safety?

I did a little Google searching myself and found some interesting
information. The following is from the web site of a detector/jammer
vendor. Read it and see if it gives you a real warm fuzzy feeling that
the product is intended to promote safe driving. Here are portions of
the ad:

"How Does It Work?
"The [I am omitting the name of the product]'s built-in scrambling
device blocks police radar on highways, surface streets or freeways,
making it virtually impossible for police to detect your vehicle's
speed! It jams X, K and Ka radar frequencies and works instantly on
radar/laser guns."


"Just Listen... to what others are saying:

"Rob from Illinois wrote:
‘I bought this product with a bit of skepticism, but this weekend
erased all my fears. There were three separate instances on RT. 65 in
Indiana where I was clocked by radar and laser while exceeding the
posted speed limit, needless to say the first time that alert went off
I was nervous and my eyes were glued to the rearview mirror, but the
Indy trooper did nothing. By the third time I was so at ease I
actually wanted troopers to try and clock me! It was almost like a
game I was playing while driving home. I am a true believer and highly
recommend this product to anyone. p.s. I had my cruise control set at
80mph in a 55mph zone all 3 times I was clocked. "

"John from Georgia wrote:
‘I am a radar technician and Aerospace Engineer. I was skeptical of
the performance of this device until I came up over a hill doing a
little less than the required speed to leave the ground in an
aircraft, and saw a trooper facing me positioned to nail speeders. I
immediately began heavy braking and as I did the hood dipped low and
my restraint held me in place. My heart raced as I passed the
trooper...he didn't even look up! In my book buying this product is
money well spent.' "
			
"Timothy from Texas wrote:
‘This is a good unit and it really does work. I can't tell you how
many times I have gotten in trouble for going a little to [sic] fast
on the road. Now that I have the [product], I don't get into trouble
anymore. I know that it's scrambling their guns so there is no way I
will get another speeding ticket again. . . Very cool device.' "

"Guaranteed to Eliminate Speeding Fines or the Manufacturer Pays Your
Ticket!"
"The manufacture [sic] is so sure of the [product's] effectiveness,
that if you ever get a speeding ticket while using the [product], they
will pay any ticket you receive."

"Just Imagine. . .
"Days from now you will be able to drive your car in peace with out
[sic] the fear of being caught."


Incidentally, there have been a couple of other Questions for
Answers.Google regarding "stealth" products, apparently by an employee
of a company which was trying to develop the next generation
"stealth"device. The questioner was trying to decide whether to quit
his job and was "having trouble . . . because of the Code of
Professional Ethics for engineers." I wonder if he has read the ads
and if he is still with the company? (His subject was: "Explain the
difference between prudent, or proffessional [sic] or moral thing to
do?")

Does anyone have any knowledge about where people have relied on these
things to speed and have injured or killed others on the highways?
Please see the four questions above. Any information would be
appreciated.

Greetings!  I am in agreement with you regarding the use of radar
detectors.  In my opinion, they are only used to avoid a speeding
ticket, and speeding is against the law.  However, I seem to be
minority with this opinion.

In reference to part 4 of your question, "Is there any literature
about radar detectors and their effect on traffic safety?" I found a
reference to a survey in a report from the National Conference of
State Legislators titled "Radar Detectors, Lasers and Scanners - A
Legislative Overview":

"A survey by the research firm of Yankelovich Clancy Shulman showed
detector users had 23 percent fewer accidents per mile traveled than
nonowners, and drove almost 60,000 miles farther between accidents.
The survey concluded that radar detector owners are at least as safe
drivers as non-owners."

From the same report:

"The National Institute for Highway Safety in Virginia, however, sees
a strong need for banning detectors. The institute maintains that
radar detectors are bought and sold for the sole purpose of avoiding
speeding tickets. They also encourage speeding. "The only, only, only
reason [to have a radar detector] is to help you break the law," says
Julie Rochman, the institute's communications director. Institute
research has shown that interstate highway drivers with radar
detectors reduced their speeds by at least five miles per hour or
activated their brake lights when exposed to police radar. Before this
exposure, vehicles with detectors were traveling significantly faster
than other drivers."

I would suggest you review the entire report.  I also located an FCC
document concerning radar jammers, devices which jam police radar
guns:

"The FCC issued a public notice stating that the intentional use of
jammers constitutes "malicious interference" with radar units used by
FCC-licensed police and public safety agencies to measure vehicle
speeds. Appellant's App. at 96-97 (informing the public that the FCC
regulates radar jammers, which are designed to interfere with radar,
but not radar detectors, which "are radio receivers tuned to receive
radar signals and are used by motorists to provide a warning of any
radar activity in the vicinity"). The agency warned that "[a]nyone
using a jammer risks such penalties as losing an FCC license[], paying
a fine, or facing criminal prosecution." Id."

Here is other evidence supporting the use of the devices from a
document titled "Auto Safety and Crashworthiness" from the Insurance
Information Institute:

"The Insurance Research Council's (IRC) 2001 Public Attitude Monitor
shows that three-quarters of Americans think speeding is a major
factor in causing crash injuries, but two-thirds think enforcement
efforts should remain unchanged. One-quarter think enforcement should
be stepped up. Half of radar detector users say they drive faster with
the device and only 23 percent of all adults strongly favor a ban on
them."

"The IIHS also found that drivers with radar detectors generally
reduced their speeds by at least 5-mph or activated their brake lights
when exposed to police radar. By one mile past the radar, over
three-quarters of vehicles with radar detectors were traveling at
least 5 mph faster than the speed limit. Technological advances have
enabled law enforcement agencies to identify and ticket speeders
despite their use of radar detectors."

I found no references to lawsuits of any nature naming a radar
detector as the cause, but it got me to wondering if law enforcement
officials note the presence of radar detectors being enabled in cars
at crash scenes.  It would be interesting to know why they don't.

Since you said in your question "Any information would be
appreciated," I have chosen to answer the question with this
information (and lack thereof).  I exhausted numerous search terms to
locate lawsuits, even consulting my thesaurus to broaden the search
scope, but I didn't find even one.  I hope the information I provided
is of assistance, and please do not hesitate to ask for a
clarification if you would like additional research concerning this
topic that was not mentioned in your original question.


SEARCH TERMS and LINKS:

"radar detectors" cause accidents  [Google search]
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22radar+detectors%22+cause+accidents

NCSL - National Conference of State Legislators "Radar Detectors,
Lasers and Scanners A Legislative Overview
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/esnr/radar.htm


lawsuit "radar detectors"  [Google search]
://www.google.com/search?q=lawsuit+%22radar+detectors%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N

97-9579 -- Rocky Mountain Radar Inc. v. FCC
http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1998/rockymtn.html 

III - Auto Safety and Crashworthiness 
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/test5/

Also you might find this report interesting:

U. S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
(about half way down the page) 
"Drivers who use radar detectors drive faster and are less safe than
drivers who donīt use them. Teed and Lund (1993) conducted speeding
enforcement campaigns in Charleston County, South Carolina. When laser
enforcement devices were used (compared to standard police radar),
more speeding tickets were issued and speeders were four times as
likely to have radar detectors. Cooper et al. (1992) compared the
crash and speeding convictions of 174 drivers who had special
insurance covering radar detectors with a sociodemographically matched
comparison group. Those with detector insurance had significantly more
crash claims and speeding convictions."
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/research/pub/HS809012.html 

THX1138

Interesting question and answer!

On the face of it, radar detectors allow people to drive faster, and
fast driving is more dangerous (reduced reaction time, and increased
severity of any accidents that do happen).  However, some of the
statistics presents do not show increased accidents.  How can this be?
 The answer could be that people who have radar detectors behave
differently than those who don't.  If I have a radar detector, I might
stay more alert (because I know I'm going illegally fast, and might
have to slow down in a hurry if the detector goes off) and thus drive
relatively safely despite the higher speed.

This reminds me of the data showing that ABS brakes do little to
reduce accidents.  There is no question that ABS brakes are better at
stopping a car, but people with ABS seem to drive more recklessly,
relying on their brakes to save them, and this cancels out the real
benefit of the brakes.