Red Light Needed for MIRT Devices

By Warren Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 31, 2003; 1:24 PM

I've long championed the free market, but that championship has its limits. It stops with the sale of products designed to disable or disrupt controls put in place for public safety.

One such product is the traffic light preemption emitter, also known as MIRT, or mobile infrared transmitter.

The device can change traffic lights to green from red in two seconds. Police and fire departments for years have used MIRT, marketed by the 3M company, to clear intersections and halt opposing traffic on emergency runs.

That is the proper and intended use for MIRT.

It never was intended for the travel convenience of individual drivers. But, increasingly, that's how it's being used today.

Some Internet entrepreneurs, apparently more interested in cash than in road rage, or the possibility of a fatal crash, have been offering MIRT and MIRT knockoffs for $300. Their pitches are quite tempting: "Never wait for a red light again!" and "Tired of Waiting for Red Lights?" and "Changes Stop Lights >From Red to Green in Seconds."

Of course, there are buyers; and at the moment, the commerce is legal.

MIRT transmits an infrared beam, instead of a radio wave. The Federal Communications Commission regulates the use of radio waves. Infrared transmission falls outside of the agency's purview. As a result, currently, there are no federal laws restricting civilian use of MIRT technology.

This, many police and auto insurance officials believe, is a problem. In cities and states nationwide, traffic safety officials are studying the possibility of implementing laws to make civilian MIRT sales and use illegal. That's a good thing.

Public safety controls, such as stop lights and airport protocols, are put in place for the general protection of the public. Compliance and respect for those controls should not be left to individual whim. People get injured or killed when that happens.

Imagine a world in which airline passengers could countermand the directives of air traffic controllers. The controllers tell an airline pilot to remain in a hold pattern. But an antsy passenger onboard, anxious to get to a business meeting, pushes a button to allow the aircraft to land in the midst of heavy airport congestion. Would you want to fly that way?

Now, imagine a more likely, more threatening scenario with the civilian use of MIRT:

It is rush hour. Cars are stacked up waiting for traffic signals to change. Someone gets tired of waiting. He pushes a button on his dashboard-mounted MIRT transmitter, which is plugged into his car's 12-volt outlet. The device, using 15 watts of energy, sends an infrared beam 1,500 feet to a traffic-light receiver installed at the intersection. The red light facing his line of traffic instantly turns green, much to the surprise of motorists already moving through the intersection on an opposing green signal.

At best, there'd be one heck of a case of gridlock. At worst, someone gets killed or injured.

We're already paying a heavy price in lives and money because of people who run red lights. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, careless disregard for red lights and other traffic control devices is the leading cause of urban crashes, representing 22 percent of the total number of those crashes. The institute assigns a $7-billion price tag to that carnage -- the cost of medical bills, lost productivity, insurance rate increases, and property damage.

It is difficult to assign a cost to the value of lives lost in those crashes.

That cost in money and lives is likely to go up, rather than down, with the civilian sale and use of MIRT. There ought to be a law on this one, a tough law.

MIRT devices are not radar detectors, whose sale and use I support. Detectors are informational devices. People who use them in the many states where they are legal usually don't speed up when they detect a police cruiser in the area. They slow down -- just as we all slow down when we see a police cruiser with the naked eye.

But I put MIRT in the same category with police radar-jamming devices, whose sale to and use by civilians I oppose. Civilians do not have the right to disrupt police operations, particularly those put in place for public safety. Civilian users of radar jammers, judging the functional intent of those devices, have no intention of obeying the law, no intention of slowing down.

Sales of radar jammers, which generally use radio waves, are outlawed. Sales of civilian MIRTs should be outlawed, too. It's a matter of functional intent, as opposed to the method of transmission.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company
________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to 
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net 

Reply via email to