I live in Columbus, OH and have noticed a lot of state police and Columbus municipalities use a sight-based speed gun. They typically have to stand or bend down into awkward positions in order to line up a sight with an oncoming vehicle and it appears to take a lot of time to "lock on" to a car and get a good reading. I rarely see speeding offenses in this area or people being pulled over in general.
I've lived in upstate NY and have found police there require little effort to catch speeders. I believe they use "laser radar" where they don't even have to aim anything. I realize there could be other factors such as drone or aircraft assisting in enforcement but in my experience NY (again - state and local) officers typically are picking up your speed very quickly and sometimes miles in advance based on their position.
I'm asking for an opinion. What do you think the reasoning would be behind using a more cumbersome radar which could be easily evaded and can't take as much of a sampling of drivers than a laser radar system? It seems a municipal law enforcement agency would generate greater revenues by investing in such technology so it's tough to imagine that it's a budgetary thing. Would the cumbersome radars be considered more accurate?