I think he missed a couple important points. The sweep effect, shaking and aiming are more amenable to signal processing than it seems, depending on the resolut

I think he missed a couple important points. The sweep effect, shaking and aiming are more amenable to signal processing than it seems, depending on the resolution and noise in the system. I tried to illustrate in pictures: 1) Just to demonstrate that a nonuniform sweep is amenable to detection or processing, consider this picture, with the correct estimate in green: http://imgur.com/FsPAwCn http://imgur.com/FsPAwCn 2) Now imagine the device is more sophisticated. Consider it has a very large resolution around the incoming pulse: http://imgur.com/z8UrhUw http://imgur.com/z8UrhUw In this case the beam width is actually beneficial, and so are large distances. The sweep effect would cause a shift in the peak intensity shown in the graph, but the object depth frustrum should be clear across samples (and dislocating at t'=t-v*dt/c). 3) Officers can be trained to recognize situations unforable, regardless of distance. One fast car passing a slow one would make it easy to confuse the equipment. A clear desert however doesn't present many threats for error.