POLICE RADIO INTERFERENCE CASE

[AA7BQ]

From the ARRL Letter, #October 17, 2003

The FCC says an Indiana amateur has agreed to relinquish his Amateur Radio
operator license for two years as a result of allegations that he
interfered with local police department radio transmissions. FCC Special
Counsel Riley Hollingsworth outlined the terms of the agreement in a
September 23 letter to Technician licensee Justin L. Whaley, KC9DCP, of
Columbia City. According to the letter, the FCC notified Whaley last March
that close-proximity direction finding evidence indicated that the
licensee had interfered with the operation of the Columbia City Police
Department radio system early this year.

The agreement--which Whaley had not yet signed as of this week--calls on
him to resolve the enforcement issues he faces by relinquishing his
Amateur Radio operator license for two years. Whaley also must agree not
to maintain an amateur station nor to use anyone else's station.
Hollingsworth said that since Whaley shut down his station last March 28,
the agreement would remain in effect until March 28, 2005. Hollingsworth
requested that Whaley sign the letter and return it to the FCC along with
his Amateur Radio license.

The FCC meanwhile is seeking additional information from three other
licensees who allegedly used ham gear to transmit on police or emergency
frequencies.

Hollingsworth wrote General-class licensee Tom L. Christman, KB2NAV, of
Albany, New York, on September 22 regarding a complaint from the Albany
County Sheriff's Department's Office of Professional Standards. The FCC
asked Christman, a sheriff's department maintenance worker, to respond to
allegations that he used his ham radio transceiver to make transmissions
on sheriff's department frequencies last December "without a legitimate
purpose." The sheriff's department has requested that the FCC suspend or
revoke Christman's amateur license.

Hollingsworth also wrote two North Carolina Technician-class
amateurs--Daniel E. Buchanan, KF4LNE, of Montreat, and Joseph S. "Shannon"
Hutchins, KG4SXD, of Swannanoa--concerning complaints from the Black
Mountain Police Department alleging that both had transmitted on police
frequencies last February. The transmissions apparently were made using a
handheld transceiver while Buchanan and Hutchins were in the same vehicle.

Documents from the Asheville/Buncombe County District Attorney's Office
assert that the Black Mountain police channel had experienced "numerous
transmissions" earlier this year on a police frequency (156.01 MHz)
"including verbal profanity and racial slurs." A police officer who
questioned Buchanan and Hutchins said they admitted transmitting on police
frequencies. They later voluntarily signed statements to that effect in
which each blamed the other for making the racial slur.

The District Attorney's Office statement said that one transmission last
February 8, while police were attempting to respond to an auto accident
involving multiple injuries, "prevented officers from communication with
dispatch or each other."
Hollingsworth this month also heard from amateurs in the Los Angeles area
that some repeater owners are shutting down their machines due to alleged
ongoing interference from Jack Gerritsen, formerly KG6IRO. The FCC
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau set aside Gerritsen's license in 2001 a
few days after granting it after learning that he'd been convicted the
previous year on state charges of interfering with Los Angeles Police
Department radio transmissions.

Imprisoned, paroled and imprisoned again after breaking parole for
allegedly having and operating radio equipment without a license,
Gerritsen was released early due to jail overcrowding.

Hollingsworth said the FCC continues to work the case, but he expressed
frustration that Gerritsen was let out of prison again with no conditions
or restrictions "even regarding radio, which is what he was in there for
in the first place."



The ARRL Letter offers a weekly e-mail digest of essential news of
interest to active amateurs. The ARRL Letter strives to be timely,
accurate, concise, and readable. Visit ARRLWeb http://www.arrl.org for
the latest news, updated as it happens. The ARRL Web site
http://www.arrl.org/ offers access to news, informative features and
columns. ARRL Audio News http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/audio/ is a
weekly "ham radio newscast" compiled from The ARRL Letter.

Material from The ARRL Letter may be republished or reproduced in whole or
in part in any form without additional permission. Credit must be given to
The ARRL Letter and The American Radio Relay League.

[WT0A]

If you meanmon thier frequencies the that is non type accepted equipment, if you mean on ham or other frequencies it is unlisenced operation.

[w6th]

.. #Wowie #..

Can't ever remember these happenings back in 1938.


My, my, my, how the world turns. Is all of this I read an illusion? # It can't be true.

# # # # # # # # # # GOD BLESS AMERICA

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #...

[n8ary]

Using Ham radio equipment illegally really doesn't have much to do with a Ham radio license. #The folks should simply be fined in a big way and punished.

Taking the Amateur license is like taking away a person's hunting license for shooting a gun in the city limits or revoking a builder's license for vandalizing a building.

Confiscate the suspected equipment and fine them. #Sue them for the damages caused by jamming police frequencies. #If they break laws on the Amateur Bands, then yank the license. #It is relevant there.

Not having an Amateur License will never prevent a person from transmitting where they shouldn't. #You can still buy radio equipment without it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">no i mean on there frequancies . buffalo missouri city PD
use yaesu ft-1500m's in there cars and vx-150 hand helds
and most of the dallas county V.F.D use yaesu ft-2500m's/2400h's or icom 2100h mobiles in there P.O.V'S
and same hand helds THE fire trucks use relm's "comercial radios. i am sure some of them use
them on ham frequancies witch they are not licensed for [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

You ARE allowed to use commercial equipment on Amateur frequencies, if you have a license.

Someone probably thought they were pretty clever saving hundreds of dollars per radio by buying Amateur gear and using it in the vehicles. Maybe they don't even know about type-acceptance. Are they really hurting anyone if they are on their own freqs? I know they aren't hurting any Amateur Radio frequencies if they use Public Service channels.

I guess it's none of our concern if they aren't hurting our frequencies. Let Motorola sue them for not using their overpriced equipment. Personally, I think commercial radio manufacturers think their equipment is worth WAY too much. I actually think it's kind of funny. You don't even need $1000 worth of equipment and software to reprogram the radios! It sounds like they are saving a lot of tax dollars. You should thank them!

[n1pmb]

Well I believe they are breaking FCC rules just by using amatuer radio gear on there freq's they are not type accepted for that use but we can take there radios and modify them for our bands...Don N1PMB

[ka1kjz]

The major problem with using amateur radio equipment in the commercial band is not so much the performance of the radio, they utilize virtually the same boards in the ham version vs the commercial version, it is the frequency selection.

Part 90 radios, as part of the certification and type acceptance process cannot be user programmable, as well as emissions and such. A ham rig by definition IS user programmable.

Can you imagine if Officer Bagofdonuts hits the VFO knob on his ham turned commercial rig? He is now interfereing with god knows what.

Simply report them to the FCC, Enforcement Bureau, your local office preferred. I'd naturally say send a note to Riley... he can probably bounce it to the right people.

[WT0A]

Justin,
Hope you got my email. I also emailed Don.
Thanks, Glen

[KC8QMU]

Wasn't KF4LNE a regular poster here? Man that seems awfully familiar. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[n8zux]

A few thoughts here ...

One) I have a VX-150 and was asked about opening up mine I said NO, I do not have a reason to was my reply.

Like why should I waste my time what for doing stupid stuff like those who got busted kerchunking a repeater, what kinda moronish thrill is that suppoused to be ? I think that I have better things to do then to pull a idiotic stunt like that. and as to MURS well I would rather buy a separate HT just for that, besides I like FRS better anyway UHF is great for the short range at a 1/2 watt there is some activity of other services down there.

Two ) here is a legitimate corker...

I read in a Commercial Magazine that a Radio Technician who holds a Amateur as Well a Commercial 2-way License under GROL or 1st. Class Radiotelephone Op. License, and he works for a 2-way shop. there was a special needs for communications for a special Ambulance trip accross 2 states, he secured PERMISSION ( gee funny word hunh ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif ) which he rode along as Communications suppourt for this trip, paperwork was approved he would communicate on Amateur, and as well Public Saftey with a Call-Sign I believe was the Ambulance Service on a Ham Rig !

thing here is you greenhorns just because this was a Approved Special use one time shot does not mean the rest of you fall into this catergory, it was a Special Permission between the 2 states, and probably the FCC frequency coordinators.

This person was already established in the wireless industry probably held a Extra ticket as well GROL or 1st. Class Radiotelephone Operators License and was well trusted by the Public Saftey Community to do a special request by the EMS being a child was being transported to a specialized Hospital. and I just wanted to share this deal.

If you don't recall or have not read the part we are Secondary service to Government, as well other Priority Communications services on our bands we share with.

as to Police Operating Ham Rigs on Commercial freq.s maybe they have a Ham license thats a probability I know in Michigan a Sheriff Deputy holds a Extra Ticket and is a Repeater Trustee and owns the repeater, also some are State Police Troopers who also are EC's and volunteer in the Ham Radio services, I meet them at ham fests every where I go Cadillac , MI Traverse City, Kalmazoo here's a Kewl group LOST ( Line Of Site Team ) they are decaled on Kalmazoo Sheriff's Department Pickups, they do Search and Rescue Ops. Emergency Management they have a very good relationship in Kalmazoo County .

OK How many Hams are Police, Sheriff, Fire, EMS, Emergency Management by Payroll, ok lets not forget Department of Corrections, OK enough here you people can reply to my statement all showing their Mikes and say Aye !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif If your are undercover Federal and don't want to reveal its OK I understand !

I am getting responses to this I hope for info. sharing.

Name Rank & Department ie

Sgt. John Doe of Radio City New York
NYPD position Police officer .
Ham Call xxxxx

SK & 73

[w5zzq]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n1pmb @ Oct. 18 2003,17:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well I believe they are breaking FCC rules just by using amatuer radio gear on there freq's they are not type accepted for that use but we can take there radios and modify them for our bands...Don N1PMB[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hello Don - I agree with you 100%. Larry/W5ZZQ..

[K0RGR]

I'm with W6TH on this one. If a ham did this in 1965, we'd have gotten out the Wouff Hong and the Rettysnitch. Seeing members of the ham community do these things is humiliating!

I've always thought that having to take your FCC exam in an FCC office did tend to instill more respect for the FCC than the current volunteer examiner process. Perhaps we should beg FCC to take it back.

Looking at the callsigns listed, three of the five were fairly recent Technicians. There was no age info on two of them, but one of the three was well over 21. One of the five was a General, and also well over 21. The last mentioned has a long history of deranged behavior on the air, that is apparently tied to some sort of fringe conspiracy-theory group. I believe he was once a General or higher, but was most recently a Technician after his license was revoked years ago. He has done time in prison for his radio crimes.

We've always had members of the lunatic fringe. We've even had a few felons - the ones I remember were at least 13 WPM Generals.

I could see a bunch of teenagers riding around in a car being stupid. But what possesses otherwise apparently normal adults to do these things? Do they think FCC is such a paper tiger that they don't believe they'll be caught? How were these guys apprehended? One of the items indicates that FCC used 'close range direction finding'. Did other hams help to catch them? I do believe that we need to encourage more people to become expert 'fox hunters' so we can help track down these miscreants, particularly when they are hams! The equipment does not need to be terribly expensive.

Perhaps, we need to find a way to 'put the fear of God' into new licensees, to a small degree. I teach Technician classes, and I am not sure that we really put enough emphasis on the penalties for abusing radios.

[KD7WHQ]

Might be just me, but modding a radio "just in case" isn't cause for looking over the shoulder, nor fearing a pull over.
This TR-2600a was already modified to transmit anywhere it recieves when I bought it.
Am I afraid to take it mobile, or am I looking furtively in the rear view mirror? No.
I don't transmit out of band. The capability is there as an "in case", and is likely to be negated by the trunking systems anyway.. Makes no matter.

And it may well be a good thing some radios are so modified, in the current climate..

I run just commercial Motorola gear in my rigs so I'm kind of on the other side on this. My county and local services are still on VHF, at least for a few more months until they get the Smartzone trunking system tested. I have all the cops and FDs channels as RX only (you try to TX and the radio bleeps at you) except for LERN and the state SAR channels. If, for some unknown reason, I should ever feel the absolute need to talk to the cops I'll contact the dispatcher on LERN where they are expecting non-routine traffic from units not on their system. I keep the SAR channel enabled because I have a friend that sometimes rides with me that has a county issued call for SAR use. Every LEO dispatch center that I know of in the state monitors LERN. Most of the cars can access it directly or via a trunking patch. Most of the modern 2m ham radios I've programmed can set a channel as RX only.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you have that emergency that you feel requires you to directly contact the police on your radio, don't use the main dispatch channel. You'll just disrupt everything by doing that. Contact them on LERN (155.37) or on their "TAC2" or "data" channel. If you are going to try to help, don't make things worse.

I also understand that if you do ever TX on a cop or fire channel you better be ready to write a letter to the FCC right away and explain exacty why you thought it was a good idea, and hope that they feel the same way.

[KB2VQS]

My view is if your stupid enough to transmit on a police channel and your stupid enough to get caught you deserve what you get. They should not only pull your ticket but you should be fined and your radios should be dumped in the trash. Alot of us have worked very hard to get our tickets we don't need these idiots giving us a bad reputation.

[kc8www]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8ary @ Oct. 18 2003,17:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You ARE allowed to use commercial equipment on Amateur frequencies, if you have a license.

Someone probably thought they were pretty clever saving hundreds of dollars per radio by buying Amateur gear and using it in the vehicles. #Maybe they don't even know about type-acceptance. #Are they really hurting anyone if they are on their own freqs? #I know they aren't hurting any Amateur Radio frequencies if they use Public Service channels.

I guess it's none of our concern if they aren't hurting our frequencies. #Let Motorola sue them for not using their overpriced equipment. #Personally, I think commercial radio manufacturers think their equipment is worth WAY too much. #I actually think it's kind of funny. #You don't even need $1000 worth of equipment and software to reprogram the radios! #It sounds like they are saving a lot of tax dollars. #You should thank them![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hams can use commercial radios as well as CB radios on Ham frequencies because they fall under the category of homebuilt equipment. One can even sell homebuilt equipment. The minute you sell a given number of radios in certain amount of time, you have to have it type accepted, even for ham use.

When you modify amatuer equipment for use outside the amateur band, spurious emisions increase. this means that gear that shouldnt cause interferance to an adjacent frequency, now probably does. And does hurt the amateur community as well as the general public. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N0RTU]

It seems the folks being discussed here got their "wagons fixed". #I'm glad. #They certainly deserved it.
W6TH,K0RGR, #we are now seeing in increasing numbers what the "dumbing down" of ham radio is getting us. #I'm sure as time goes on, and the requirements for getting any ham license gets easier and easier you'll see more and more of these incidents. #I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think so. #As for the "lunatic fringe" person who has even been jailed for his radio crimes of the past...........I truly believe he is beyond help. #I believe in his case, it will now be up the authorities to deal with him. #Now, on to the other folks listed in the article. #Here is what I see as I look on the QRZ pages and visit with some of my local hams. #There are very few of the "more experienced" hams getting involved with "less experienced" hams. #This, gentlemen and ladies, is part #of the problem. #As "more experienced" operators, are we doing enough to help those newer in our ranks to see the benefit of being an "A-1" type operator? #Do we go to club meetings and outings and go out of our way to befriend our newer brothers and sisters? #Not from what I've seen in my area. #Sure, some of us will shake a hand and say hello, but will we put forth a little effort to begin a friendship and possibly dispel some of the misconceptions our newer brethern may have about our radio service. #For the most part, NOT! #It's awfully easy for the "more experienced" to sit back and complain about those who are "less experienced". #But what are you doing in your area to help a newcomer to become a respectful, courteous operator who is welcome wherever he/she goes? #I think it's time for us who have been around while and truly know how lucky we are to have our ham bands, to not do quite so much finger pointing and saying "what a shame, these new operators" and get off our backsides and try to get some of our newer licensed folks started off on the right foot with truth and facts and most importantly a polite and CORRECT example of what a REAL ham is. #If you already take an active part in club meetings, outings, and testing, God bless you. #You are doing the right thing. #But, if you don't, either get off the couch and help make a difference out here, or sit back and watch the ship sink and whine some more here in these forums and on the air when you can find someone to listen to you!
Here is a couple things you can do to make ham radio better.
1. If you are a "phone" oriented person, check out your states traffic net on HF and at least get an idea of how it works and what it does. #When you know, teach and encourage someone else to do the same. #Will it take a little of your time? Would it maybe cost you coffee and cookies?(when you invited the "new op" over to check out the net with you) Yep, it sure will.
But I'll gaurantee you this. #If you've not done this type of thing before, the paybacks to you will be absolutely outstanding! #You'll likely make a true friend(one that helps you when you can't help yourself) and there WILL be less "crap" our bands because you will starting someone off on the "right foot". #

2. #If you are a "code" oriented person(either morse or "digital") #get into a net or some other activity that promotes courtesy, CORRECT operation, and Facts. #When you are reasonably proficient in this, invite someone over and show them first hand what you are doing. #If you are more into the digital modes, take the time to show and explain what you are doing.
If you are a Morse person, set up a slow code session with someone. #I know you may be a 30 wpm op on a daily basis. #But would it really kill you to operate at 3 to 5 wpm a couple times a week for twenty or thirty minutes? #Not one person walked into ham radio a 30 wpm op. Not you, not me, nobody. #Its time for us to pay back for all the enjoyment we have had. This can be done across town, across the state, or as we all know across the country.
But, maybe even better that that, would be across our kitchen tables!
I'm not much at digital, but if you are a brass pounder and you would like to make a difference, #Check out Fists.org on the net. #You can become a "code buddy" and truly make a difference.
No matter what decisions are made by the FCC, or the ARRL, we hams can make the difference.
We all can see the problems. #We have a wonderful grasp of the obvious...........
Now let's quit whining about them, and do something. #If all it costs you is some soda pop, coffee, and an hour of your time each week for a few weeks to improve our great hobby, wouldn't it be worth it?
If not, have you checked life preserver lately???
It's not just loose lips that sink ships, apathy does too..

Regards
Mike
N0RTU
A proud fists member # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[WA9SVD]

The FCC rules are pretty clear. You can NOT use modified Amateur Radio equipment to TRANSMIT on other than Amateur Radio frequencies. No matter your intent, desire, other license, etc. You CAN, according to the FCC listen to your hear's content (except to cellular frequencies.)
If a public service (Police, Fire, Ambulance, whatever) group is using modified Amateur Radios for their cdommunications, on public service frequencies, they ARE operating illegally; the radios are NOT legal for that use, and not type accepted for that use.
Look at recent FCC proceedings at the ARRL web site for letters sent to public service groups allegedly using "modified" Amateur Radios on the Public Service frequencies. The possible fines would be greater than the cost of using legal equipment in the first place, not to mention possible confiscation of the existing equipment, and having to replace it with type accepted equipment.

[w0tlo]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w5zzq @ Oct. 18 2003,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n1pmb @ Oct. 18 2003,17:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well I believe they are breaking FCC rules just by using amatuer radio gear on there freq's they are not type accepted for that use but we can take there radios and modify them for our bands...Don N1PMB[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hello Don - I agree with you 100%. #Larry/W5ZZQ..[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

----------------------------------------------------------
I remember a story not too long ago about a volunteer
fire dept. that was busted big time for using ham
gear on fire dept. frequencies.

If I recall, it also involved the person that sold them
the radios.

John

[kc8wie]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Look at recent FCC proceedings at the ARRL web site for letters sent to public service groups allegedly using "modified" Amateur Radios on the Public Service frequencies. #The possible fines would be greater than the cost of using legal equipment in the first place, not to mention possible confiscation of the existing equipment, and having to replace it with type accepted equipment.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
While I agree it is an illegal practice, having worked as law enforcement officer for 18 years, I can understand why they are using amateur equipment. I currently assist smaller agencies in acquiring technology. The majority of agencies (recent numbers show 89% nationally) have fewer than 50 full-time officers. Commercial radio systems are vastly expensive compared to amatuer radio equipment and in many cases, not as good. As a result, many agencies must "share" a system with a county authority or continue using outdated VHF systems. In one county close to my home, 10 police agencies must share a "single" frequency for voice communications INCLUDING running records checks. That means that while one person is talking approx. 30 others are unable to communicate. Most of the officers I know have gone to Nextel phones just to be able to call for help (walkie-talkie feature) in the event of an emergency.
To make matters worse, the Mortorola system that the county has only uses the Astro line of radios which range from $2000-$4000 each on state contract. Imagine the cost to a small police department when the average officer makes $40k per year and the need is 8 handhelds and 14 mixed mount radios. It was around $135,000 just to get current!!! # This is OUR TAX DOLLARS!!

Many smaller agencies have given up on radio all together and started using cell phones, like Nextel, to dispatch officers because of the "bloated" prices charged by the communications companies.

I believe until some sort of price fixing can be accomplished within this industry, towards the public safety user, violations will continue. It is hard to justify a $4000 "brick" radio that doesn't do any better job that a $400 ham HT.

Thought you might appreciate the "other side" as well.

73s

-Keith

[kd5sdi]

I have an icom 2100 that came to me brand new in the box from aes that will transmit out of band. I sent it back after a mishap on the college police frequencies at my school.(Which was how I found out it would transmit out of band.) They returned it to me still transmitting out of band so I said screw it and just didn't store any out of band freqs in the memory. Some of my fellow students found out that I could "talk to the cops" if I wanted and asked why I didn't. My reply? What would I have to say? That is what doesn't make sense about these idiots. What in the hell would you say that would not simply showcase your stupidity?

[KE4MOB]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The FCC rules are pretty clear. #You can NOT use modified Amateur Radio equipment to TRANSMIT on other than Amateur Radio frequencies. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Unless, of course, you are a MARS or CAP member.

[KD0HG]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w6th @ Oct. 18 2003,17:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">.. #Wowie #..

Can't ever remember these happenings back in 1938.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Did the Columbia City, Indiana police have radios in 1938? ;-)

[N4NB]

I don't get the feeling some have...or imaginary need to modify their radios for out-of-band use. If someone feels the need to talk directly to their local public service then use a cell phone!

BTW...a 911 call on a cell phone will work regardless of the cell phone being activated or not. So if you need a cell phone and are too cheap to get one activated, then go to your local flea market or yard sale and buy a $5.00 special for just such ocassion. I'll bet most of ya with modified radios have a cell phone lying around right now, if not glued to your hip!!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8wie @ Oct. 19 2003,17:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Look at recent FCC proceedings at the ARRL web site for letters sent to public service groups allegedly using "modified" Amateur Radios on the Public Service frequencies. #The possible fines would be greater than the cost of using legal equipment in the first place, not to mention possible confiscation of the existing equipment, and having to replace it with type accepted equipment.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
While I agree it is an illegal practice, having worked as law enforcement officer for 18 years, I can understand why they are using amateur equipment. I currently assist smaller agencies in acquiring technology. The majority of agencies (recent numbers show 89% nationally) have fewer than 50 full-time officers. Commercial radio systems are vastly expensive compared to amatuer radio equipment and in many cases, not as good. As a result, many agencies must "share" a system with a county authority or continue using outdated VHF systems. In one county close to my home, 10 police agencies must share a "single" frequency for voice communications INCLUDING running records checks. That means that while one person is talking approx. 30 others are unable to communicate. Most of the officers I know have gone to Nextel phones just to be able to call for help (walkie-talkie feature) in the event of an emergency.
To make matters worse, the Mortorola system that the county has only uses the Astro line of radios which range from $2000-$4000 each on state contract. Imagine the cost to a small police department when the average officer makes $40k per year and the need is 8 handhelds and 14 mixed mount radios. It was around $135,000 just to get current!!! # This is OUR TAX DOLLARS!!

Many smaller agencies have given up on radio all together and started using cell phones, like Nextel, to dispatch officers because of the "bloated" prices charged by the communications companies.

I believe until some sort of price fixing can be accomplished within this industry, towards the public safety user, violations will continue. It is hard to justify a $4000 "brick" radio that doesn't do any better job that a $400 ham HT.

Thought you might appreciate the "other side" as well.

73s

-Keith[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
If your counties system will work with a $400 ham HT, then it will not only work with an Astro HT as far as the commercial line goes, but anything else. In fact, with the latest public safety offering from Vertex, expense is no longer and excuse for not using type certified equipment whatsoever. Not that it was ever a valid excuse for those that are sworn to uphold the law to violate it anyway.

A true Astro system will work with Astro radio and nothing else, if your system can be accessed with a ham HT thats been modified then the idiots in your area are buy a $4000 radio and paying $3000 or more of that for features they are not even using. If not than whats the excuse for the ham HT's and comparing them to an Astro HT.

Heck the Vertex VX 180 is under $300, somtimes close to $200, programming software and cable under $100. at that cost, there is no excuse for not being legal, especially for those who are supposed to have enough integrity to enforce the law.

After all, if I got pulled over for expired registration and told the officer "its just too expense for a legal tag, so I put my brothers out of state tag on" think I would get any mercy? Same concept.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w0tlo @ Oct. 19 2003,12:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w5zzq @ Oct. 18 2003,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n1pmb @ Oct. 18 2003,17:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well I believe they are breaking FCC rules just by using amatuer radio gear on there freq's they are not type accepted for that use but we can take there radios and modify them for our bands...Don N1PMB[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hello Don - I agree with you 100%. #Larry/W5ZZQ..[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

----------------------------------------------------------
I remember a story not too long ago about a volunteer
fire dept. that was busted big time for using ham
gear on fire dept. frequencies.

If I recall, it also involved the person that sold them
the radios.

John[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Try the Philadelphia FD, the big boys got busted for it in PA!

[ka8jhm]

My, my, shure looks like Riley.s been busy, busting other amateurs that is. Now if someone could build a fire under his butt to get on the illegal use of the ten meter band by truckers, which I don't think will ever happen.
Bob ka8jhm
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[WA9SVD]

I can understand the DESIRE to use modified Amateur equipment for public service. YES, it IS less expensive. BUT, it is still ILLEGAL.

TConsider: the cost of possible fines, confiscation of equipment, loss of communications, and subsequent purchase of "legal" radios. Is it REALLY worth it in the long run? If you, or someone in a similar position elsewhere recommend the use of "Amateur" equipment, what then? Will you still have a job? Is it worth the gamble? And it's illegal.

[kb6ssn]

Jackbooted thugs with elitist radio privileges? They used to pass out medals for those who jammed the Gestapo! While I do not condone the interference of any radio station that has chosen to transmit, this smacks of the Cops saying, “Hey look everybody! We’re better than everyone else! And if you cross us you’d better watch out!” They have no more rights to the frequencies than anybody else! What seemed like a good idea 150 years ago has turned out to be one of the biggest mistakes ever made in this country. We are now patrolled by badge carrying murderers who have become nothing less than the private army of the legislature! The penalty for interfering with Police communications should be no different than the penalty for interfering with your fellow Ham’s communications. With rulings like this from the FCC, while ignoring the same activity in other portions of the spectrum, we have facilitated the completion of the goal that Hitler could not achieve. We have created a group of elitist killers! And now we’ve given them their own protected frequencies to use to ruin the lives of American Citizens!

[KG6SWK]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd5sdi @ Oct. 19 2003,18:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have an icom 2100 that came to me brand new in the box from aes that will transmit out of band. I sent it back after a mishap on the college police frequencies at my school.(Which was how I found out it would transmit out of band.) They returned it to me still transmitting out of band so I said screw it and just didn't store any out of band freqs in the memory. Some of my fellow students found out that I could "talk to the cops" if I wanted and asked why I didn't. My reply? What would I have to say? That is what doesn't make sense about these idiots. What in the hell would you say that would not simply showcase your stupidity?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I used to work for a small division of a University police department. (I drove the shuttle vans/buses). We had Motorola radios in the vans operating on 154.54. Every once in a while we would pick up Pittsburgh EMS dispatch. Also, if I drove within a half mile of KFC I could hear the drive-thru orders being placed. Why was I picking up EMS and Kentucky Fried Chicken? Is it likely that they were able to hear me? I was particulary concerned with EMS - if they were able to pick up our shuttle dispatch communications, I could see some problems there.

Sorry for the questions, but I'm new to HAM radio. I just passed the Element 2 exam this past Saturday and I'm waiting for my callsign (and a radio).

[mackinac]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (BASSIC @ Oct. 20 2003,11:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I used to work for a small division of a University police department. (I drove the shuttle vans/buses). We had Motorola radios in the vans operating on 154.54. Every once in a while we would pick up Pittsburgh EMS dispatch. Also, if I drove within a half mile of KFC I could hear the drive-thru orders being placed. Why was I picking up EMS and Kentucky Fried Chicken? Is it likely that they were able to hear me? I was particulary concerned with EMS - if they were able to pick up our shuttle dispatch communications, I could see some problems there.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You don't say how far you are from Pittsburg. There are a couple of possibilities. Whatever channel you might have been assigned in the Private Land Mobile service, there would probably be someone in a nearby area assigned the same channel. They shouldn't be close enough to really interfere with your use, but might still be close enough for you to hear.

Still, you'd probably rather not even hear the other users. This problem is resolved by the use of a tone squelch, referred to as CTCSS (or it's Motorola trademark PL or Private Line). Adjacent users of the same channel should be using different CTCSS tones so that they don't hear each other under normal conditions.

In the case of hearing Pittsburg, the some possibilities are: 1) The CTCSS on your radios isn't installed properly, 2) Your CTCSS is set up to be disabled when you pick the mike up off the hangup box (do you only hear them with the mike off the hangup clip?), 3) They are so far away that they are reusing not only your assigned channel but your CTCSS code. Then you would only hear them in rare conditions then there is long distance tropospheric propagation.

There may be a few other possibilities, but it would some onsite investigation to be sure. The problem with KFC could be something like this, too.

[KD7SVR]

Just thought to let everyone know, according to Part 97.403, "No part of these rules prevents the use by an Amateur station of any means of radiocommunications at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communications are not available."

My understanding is this, that if you are driving on a road, thru a "cell-fone dead zone", of which there are quite a few on the forest highways here, and you happen upon an accident or a fire or whatever, you may contact emergency assistance by "whatever means of radio(communications) that are at your disposal".

Just playing around kerchunking the local PD's repeater is a no-no, but if youhappen upon an accident and have no cell-fone, call for help.


My .02 worth.....

Rev. Christopher Linder
KD7SVR
Skywarn: Lincoln-9H
OFP200 Dispatcher

[mackinac]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc8wie @ Oct. 19 2003,17:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
[...]
Commercial radio systems are vastly expensive compared to amatuer radio equipment and in many cases, not as good. As a result, many agencies must "share" a system with a county authority or continue using outdated VHF systems. In one county close to my home, 10 police agencies must share a "single" frequency for voice communications INCLUDING running records checks. That means that while one person is talking approx. 30 others are unable to communicate. Most of the officers I know have gone to Nextel phones just to be able to call for help (walkie-talkie feature) in the event of an emergency.
To make matters worse, the Mortorola system that the county has only uses the Astro line of radios which range from $2000-$4000 each on state contract. Imagine the cost to a small police department when the average officer makes $40k per year and the need is 8 handhelds and 14 mixed mount radios. It was around $135,000 just to get current!!! This is OUR TAX DOLLARS!!

[...]
I believe until some sort of price fixing can be accomplished within this industry, towards the public safety user, violations will continue. It is hard to justify a $4000 "brick" radio that doesn't do any better job that a $400 ham HT.

Thought you might appreciate the "other side" as well.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Keith,

I have some experience maintaining and using radios for fire and EMS and have had the experience of standing on the scene of an ambulance call waiting for a break in the almost continuous transmissions on the channel.

But saving a hundred dollars or so by using a ham HT on the fire dept frequencies wouldn't help a bit. Cheaper radios wouldn't save enough to hire another dispatcher and add a channel to the system.

A radio doesn't have to be new to be type accepted and we have saved quite a bit by buying used when we can. A Motorola HT-1000 is a good type accepted radio and can readily be found used from reputable dealers for the $400 that you used as an example for the ham HT.

The trunked radios, such as the ASTRO, are expensive but there is no way a $400 ham HT can be converted to work in such a system. They don't have the digital computing power and software to do the trunking.

A lot of counties near where I live are going to digital trunked radios systems for public safety. The individual radios do cost $3000 - $5000 each. I don't know what factors were considered in going to such a system, but someone decided that the features were worth the cost.

[K7LJ]

There's not much excuse for using "opened up" ham radio gear because commercial type-accepted radios are "too expensive". All the time on places like rec.radio.swap, ebay, etc. you can get excellent GE and Motorola base station, handheld and mobile radios, such as MTS-2000, MCS-2000, Spectra, LTS/LCS-2000,HT-600/1000, etc. for extremely low prices -many of them being current production models. The crying about not being able to afford such "expensive" radios just doesn't wash. If they can't afford a $150-400 radio, then they shouldn't be in the fire/law enforcement, etc. business in the first place. Even nearly brand-new trunked 800-MHz SmartZone mobile and portable radios are often less than $700. I know - I've bought lots of them right here on the 'net.

Sorry, that's the way it is- go check and see for yourself.....

[K3CW]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k0qhh @ Oct. 18 2003,17:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you meanmon thier frequencies the that is non type accepted equipment, if you mean on ham or other frequencies it is unlisenced operation.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

What???

Why post if you won't even take the time to read your own posts before sending?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Oct. 19 2003,19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The FCC rules are pretty clear. #You can NOT use modified Amateur Radio equipment to TRANSMIT on other than Amateur Radio frequencies. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Unless, of course, you are a MARS or CAP member.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Also handy when your in the military and deployed overseas, or for that matter for any military use. FRS radios are pretty popular with soldiers, and the government still issues Bendix King PRC-127 VHF portables. Having a dual band radio opened up allows me to communicate on the official unit VHF freqs and the expedient FRS used at the squad/platoon level.

The FCC doesn't apply to military use, and if my chain of command is happy with it I will use it.

[N0MLR]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8zux @ Oct. 18 2003,20:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">as to Police Operating Ham Rigs on Commercial freq.s maybe they have a Ham license thats a probability I know in Michigan a Sheriff Deputy holds a Extra Ticket and is a Repeater Trustee and owns the repeater, also some are State Police Troopers who also are EC's and volunteer in the Ham Radio services, I meet them at ham fests every where I go Cadillac , MI #Traverse City, Kalmazoo # here's a Kewl group #LOST ( Line Of Site Team ) #they are decaled on Kalmazoo Sheriff's Department Pickups, they do Search and Rescue Ops. #Emergency Management they have a very good relationship in Kalmazoo County .

OK #How many Hams are Police, Sheriff, Fire, EMS, Emergency Management by Payroll, ok lets not forget Department of Corrections, #OK enough here you people can reply to my statement all showing their Mikes and say Aye !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif # If your are undercover Federal and don't want to reveal its OK I understand !

I am getting responses to this I hope for info. sharing.

Name Rank & Department #ie

Sgt. John Doe of #Radio City #New York
NYPD #position Police officer .
Ham Call #xxxxx

SK & 73[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
People it makes no differance if your the HEAD of the FBi it is not legal to use Non Type Accepted equipment on the Business and Public Safty Frequencies. You can convert Business and Public service equipment to Ham use but that is it!
The guys who the FCC contacted deserve everything they get and then some for interfering with Public Service Users.

Greg Dunn

[wd5dbc]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ka8jhm @ Oct. 20 2003,06:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My, my, shure looks like Riley.s been busy, busting other amateurs that is. Now if someone could build a fire under his butt to get on the illegal use of the ten meter band by truckers, which I don't think will ever happen.
Bob ka8jhm
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
The FCC has almost begged for help in tracking down the illegal 10 meter ops, and is not getting much help from the amateur community.

hc

[ehidle]

I have to take exception to the growing "fad" among government entities of inappropriate and even unconstitutional punishments. It has become increasingly popular for governments to, say, revoke a driver's license for the crime of petty theft (as in the case of a drive-off). Stealing gas is not a moving violation and is no way related to the responsibilities and privileges of posessing a driver's license. The driver's license is not an enabler for the crime, as it is still possible, and rather easy, to steal gas without holding a driver's license (or even owning a car, for that matter).

Here, the FCC is exercising the same flawed legal theories to revoke, suspend, or set aside licenses that have nothing to do with the crime committed. Again, the license is not an enabler for the crime. It is still possible, and again rather easy, to walk into Radio Shack, buy a radio, modify it for illegal transmission, and talk over safety communications.

In both cases, there needs to be motive, opportunity, and a means by which to commit the crime.

In the first case:

Motive: "I want gas"
Opportunity: "Hey, there's a gas station"
Means: "Hey, I'm holding this gas can"

In the second:

Motive: <who knows?>
Opportunity: Hey, here's this frequency chart
Means: Now where did I see that local radio shack?

In neither case is "Ok, gotta go get a license" a part of the algorithm for committing the crime, and it can more or less indefensibly argued that licensure isn't even an contributing circumstance, as it does not make it any less difficult to commit either crime. This easily substantiates the conclusion that revocation of the license in question is neither a deterrent nor a valid or appropriate punishment for the crime.

These nuts don't break the law because they have Ham Radio licenses. They break the law because they are either pathologically inclined to do so or have some other ulterior motive, monetary or otherwise, other than the crime itself.

The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?

What happens when you forget that you left your EZ-Pass at home and get a letter from the FCC revoking your Ham Radio License for failing to pay your toll?

[n8ary]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have an icom 2100 that came to me brand new in the box from aes that will transmit out of band. I sent it back after a mishap on the college police frequencies at my school.(Which was how I found out it would transmit out of band.) They returned it to me still transmitting out of band so I said screw it and just didn't store any out of band freqs in the memory. Some of my fellow students found out that I could "talk to the cops" if I wanted and asked why I didn't. My reply? What would I have to say? That is what doesn't make sense about these idiots. What in the hell would you say that would not simply showcase your stupidity? [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

EXACTLY!! What would you say? They don't want to BS with Joe Schmo. They're trying to do a job. If you want to "ragchew" or BS with someone, tune to FRS, CB, or (God forbid) actually use your Amateur Radio privileges. My favorite way to avoid a TX mishap is to store a Ham freq in the transmit (ODD SPLIT). This works well. That way you don't throw out your callsign on Central Dispatch.

I don't know what it is about the average "joe" that makes him want to tx on police freq's. I was working a parade one time and was scanning police freqs on one of my radios. A young man asked me if he could look at the radio and the first thing he did with it is try to transmit "OFFICER DOWN" "BREAK BREAK." Fortunately, I had locked out the transmit button before handing it to him. I had to suppress the urge to bat him alongside the head. Talk about showcasing stupidity. This kid was even the son of a member of the US Coast Guard.

[n8zux]

Also I did not mentioned earlier that there are commercial 2 ways that may look similar to Ham rigs but are in the respected band assignments that they were made for.

Yeasu / Vertex/ Standard, Kenwood, Icom, Uniden, Pryme, Relm, Regency used to do it too.

check there web sites for details.

[N8HE]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7SVR @ Oct. 20 2003,19:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just thought to let everyone know, according to Part 97.403, "No part of these rules prevents the use by an Amateur station of any means of radiocommunications at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communications are not available."

My understanding is this, that if you are driving on a road, thru a "cell-fone dead zone", of which there are quite a few on the forest highways here, and you happen upon an accident or a fire or whatever, you may contact emergency assistance by "whatever means of radio(communications) that are at your disposal".

Just playing around kerchunking the local PD's repeater is a no-no, but if youhappen upon an accident and have no cell-fone, call for help.


My .02 worth.....

Rev. Christopher Linder
KD7SVR
Skywarn: Lincoln-9H
OFP200 Dispatcher[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Breaker breaker Cop Shop, This is Joe Blow, a Ham Operator out on route 69. I just came apon a car turned over in the ditch, everyone is out and we need a wrecker and a cop pronto....breaker breaker....

A call like that surely will get you a ticket from the arriving officer and probably a fine from the FCC.....the key word is LIFE or DEATH.....More and more emergency services are going 800mhz, trunked, coded, and sometimes scrambled. They don't want you on thier frequencies period. Your better off driving to the top of the hill and using your cell phone.

They think of us, as we do the freebanders on 10 meters, think about it....you out of band ....period.

[n8zux]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0MLR @ Oct. 20 2003,22:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif4--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8zux @ Oct. 18 2003,20http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif4)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">as to Police Operating Ham Rigs on Commercial freq.s maybe they have a Ham license thats a probability I know in Michigan a Sheriff Deputy holds a Extra Ticket and is a Repeater Trustee and owns the repeater, also some are State Police Troopers who also are EC's and volunteer in the Ham Radio services, I meet them at ham fests every where I go Cadillac , MI #Traverse City, Kalmazoo # here's a Kewl group #LOST ( Line Of Site Team ) #they are decaled on Kalmazoo Sheriff's Department Pickups, they do Search and Rescue Ops. #Emergency Management they have a very good relationship in Kalmazoo County .

OK #How many Hams are Police, Sheriff, Fire, EMS, Emergency Management by Payroll, ok lets not forget Department of Corrections, #OK enough here you people can reply to my statement all showing their Mikes and say Aye !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif # If your are undercover Federal and don't want to reveal its OK I understand !

I am getting responses to this I hope for info. sharing.

Name Rank & Department #ie

Sgt. John Doe of #Radio City #New York
NYPD #position Police officer .
Ham Call #xxxxx

SK & 73[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
People it makes no differance if your the HEAD of the FBi it is not legal to use Non Type Accepted equipment on the Business and Public Safty Frequencies. You can convert Business and Public service equipment to Ham use but that is it!
The guys who the FCC contacted deserve everything they get and then some for interfering with Public Service Users.

Greg Dunn[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Say Greg you lost what I said here.. these law enforcement officers are 100 % licensed Ham Operators and I'll clairify what I said off duty non police business they operate no different than you or I do sure there is the legality Question of operating in a business sense but these people are not conducting police business, I hoped I have clairified what I said. I hope that I did not confuse anyone ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[n8zux]

reference to cell range yes there are holes, but If you do have a bunch that you KNOW on a simplex channel, I had done that on 146.520 to ask someone to call 911 gave the info. did not bother using a repeater being that radio could not access the repeater & no DTMF mic. If I felt I knew a payphone was nearby or next exit, I would use it ! , Michigan has a toll free number for state police State wide 800-525-5555.

If everyone obtained those type of numbers, even write it down in a dollar store phone directory or a spiral notebook along with any ARES stuff you have someplace, I'll tell you what a old fashioned flag a Deputy down still works, and I had a fire once even asked a Gas company employee if he had a dispatcher on duty to call 911 back in my 11 Meter days Skip was so bad in the 1970's radio was worthless for an emergency.

It's called creative thinking, Pre Proper Planning Prevents Pathetic Poor Performance ( P7 ) I still remember in Scouts that carrying a dime to call the police ( before 911 was ever heard of ) was in the scout manual.

[n8zux]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ehidle @ Oct. 20 2003,22:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have to take exception to the growing "fad" among government entities of inappropriate and even unconstitutional punishments. It has become increasingly popular for governments to, say, revoke a driver's license for the crime of petty theft (as in the case of a drive-off). Stealing gas is not a moving violation and is no way related to the responsibilities and privileges of posessing a driver's license. The driver's license is not an enabler for the crime, as it is still possible, and rather easy, to steal gas without holding a driver's license (or even owning a car, for that matter).

Here, the FCC is exercising the same flawed legal theories to revoke, suspend, or set aside licenses that have nothing to do with the crime committed. Again, the license is not an enabler for the crime. It is still possible, and again rather easy, to walk into Radio Shack, buy a radio, modify it for illegal transmission, and talk over safety communications.

In both cases, there needs to be motive, opportunity, and a means by which to commit the crime.

In the first case:

Motive: "I want gas"
Opportunity: "Hey, there's a gas station"
Means: "Hey, I'm holding this gas can"

In the second:

Motive: <who knows?>
Opportunity: Hey, here's this frequency chart
Means: Now where did I see that local radio shack?

In neither case is "Ok, gotta go get a license" a part of the algorithm for committing the crime, and it can more or less indefensibly argued that licensure isn't even an contributing circumstance, as it does not make it any less difficult to commit either crime. This easily substantiates the conclusion that revocation of the license in question is neither a deterrent nor a valid or appropriate punishment for the crime.

These nuts don't break the law because they have Ham Radio licenses. They break the law because they are either pathologically inclined to do so or have some other ulterior motive, monetary or otherwise, other than the crime itself.

The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?

What happens when you forget that you left your EZ-Pass at home and get a letter from the FCC revoking your Ham Radio License for failing to pay your toll?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Consitutional infringement, say bud how far off topic can this be ? out left feild about a county mile or so!

[KE4MOB]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ehidle @ Oct. 20 2003,22:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Absolutely nothing--it wouldn't surprise me if a couple of licenses are pulled over the whole downloading of MP3 brouhaha. #

First off, a license to drive a car (or operate a ham radio) is a privlege, not a right. #You agree, when you sign the license, to be bound by any corny rules or regulations the issuing entity may make. #

Don't like the rules....don't get (or give up) the license, simple as that.

You are thinking about principles that apply to the United States Code (USC). #We are talking about the CFR, which is a totally different world. #The concept of "rights" don't apply here. #You do have the "right" however, to do what the FCC says. #Period. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

And if you don't like that you have the right to pay the fine by cash, check, or credit card!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[w6em]

It's really too bad that incidents like this happen, as they reinforce all the wrong decisions to move public safety radio away from amateur bands and #to make it incompatible with amateur gear.

In real emergencies, when cellular-like trunked systems go down from either lack of site redundancy or too many simultaneous users, the reliability of simplex, point to point radio won't be there. #One only need experience trying to use a cell phone in a real disaster (I did in the 1989 SF earthquake) to know what I'm talking about.

RACES used to be able to, if the situation warranted it, interface with public safety agencies on their frequencies. #Now, its virtually impossible, with the shift to 800MHz trunked systems, secure encryption, etc.

Oh sure, the radio salesmen will make the claim that outside agencies can more easily move in, share communication resources, etc. #Yes, IF the frequencies, personalities, subfleets, etc. are preprogrammed. #If not, then, well, all is not as described.

Which is more important: #Encryption/security or system reliability/interoperability in times of real disasters? #I would bet a stack of Securenet boards that nobody pros and cons public safety agencies about trunked 800/900 systems before they buy them.

One last tidbit. #An amateur license is a privledge,not a right. #In 1961, when I got my first one, I had to sign a loyalty oath. #The idea behind that was that the government didn't want someone who supported the violent overthrow of our government being able to use amateur equipment to further their objectives. #Today, that's been replaced with a requirement that a person not demonstrate unlawful behavior in the operation of telecommunications equipment. #They give you the license and trust that you will follow telecommunications rules and regulations. #If you don't, they can take your priveledges away for a while. #So, where's the beef??? #


Lee
W6EM

[W0LC]

He ought to do jail time along with the others participating in this type of activity.

[AB9HR]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wc5rr @ Oct. 21 2003,05:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He ought to do jail time along with the others participating in this type of activity.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
agree 100 percent. God I hate hicks.

[WA9SVD]

Quote (n8zux @ Oct. 18 2003,204)
as to Police Operating Ham Rigs on Commercial freq.s maybe they have a Ham license thats a probability
================================================== ================

As stated, I take that to mean "Police operating Amateur Radios on Commercial frequencies." Which is illegal, whether thay have an Amateur License or not.
If they are simply monitoring any frequency, there's no problem with that, nor is there a problem if they are licensed and operate on the Amateur bands (so long as they do NOT discuss Police business.)

[kb6ssn]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Oct. 20 2003,20:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ehidle @ Oct. 20 2003,22:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Absolutely nothing--it wouldn't surprise me if a couple of licenses are pulled over the whole downloading of MP3 brouhaha. #

First off, a license to drive a car (or operate a ham radio) is a privlege, not a right. #You agree, when you sign the license, to be bound by any corny rules or regulations the issuing entity may make. #

Don't like the rules....don't get (or give up) the license, simple as that.

You are thinking about principles that apply to the United States Code (USC). #We are talking about the CFR, which is a totally different world. #The concept of "rights" don't apply here. #You do have the "right" however, to do what the FCC says. #Period. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

And if you don't like that you have the right to pay the fine by cash, check, or credit card!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
While I am sure that the control freak drunkards at the "Just Us" dept. will agree with you, I do not. Driving and using a radio are Rights in my opinion. The right to move about as I see fit and the right to talk to anyone I please. The only reason I obtained a license to do either of these things is because it's convenient. If it becomes difficult then they can stick their licenses where the sun don't shine! The government exists to serve the People. Not the People to serve the government. We are citizens not subjects.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb6ssn @ Oct. 21 2003,03:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While I am sure that the control freak drunkards at the "Just Us" dept. will agree with you, I do not. Driving and using a radio are Rights in my opinion. The right to move about as I see fit and the right to talk to anyone I please. The only reason I obtained a license to do either of these things is because it's convenient. If it becomes difficult then they can stick their licenses where the sun don't shine! The government exists to serve the People. Not the People to serve the government. We are citizens not subjects.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
With an attitude like that it must have really sucked to get that call sign (Social Security Number) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[n8ary]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[What happens when you forget that you left your EZ-Pass at home and get a letter from the FCC revoking your Ham Radio License for failing to pay your toll?]

Consitutional infringement, say bud how far off topic can this be ? out left feild about a county mile or so! [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Actually, I disagree. He's not that far off topic. Maybe Constitutional Infringement might be a little strong, but I really think a person should be protected against punishment unrelated to a crime. If you use vulgar language on a cordless phone and someone overhears, would you expect to lose your Amateur Radio license?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7SVR @ Oct. 20 2003,12:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just thought to let everyone know, according to Part 97.403, "No part of these rules prevents the use by an Amateur station of any means of radiocommunications at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communications are not available."

My understanding is this, that if you are driving on a road, thru a "cell-fone dead zone", of which there are quite a few on the forest highways here, and you happen upon an accident or a fire or whatever, you may contact emergency assistance by "whatever means of radio(communications) that are at your disposal".

Just playing around kerchunking the local PD's repeater is a no-no, but if youhappen upon an accident and have no cell-fone, call for help.


My .02 worth.....

Rev. Christopher Linder
KD7SVR
Skywarn: Lincoln-9H
OFP200 Dispatcher[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Wrong rev....hope you do better interpreting the bible....har har http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Hey rev....did you kerchunk the local p.d. with your illegal cop channel radio to see if it made the trip...me thinks so! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC8VRH @ Oct. 20 2003,18:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7SVR @ Oct. 20 2003,19:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just thought to let everyone know, according to Part 97.403, "No part of these rules prevents the use by an Amateur station of any means of radiocommunications at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communications are not available."

My understanding is this, that if you are driving on a road, thru a "cell-fone dead zone", of which there are quite a few on the forest highways here, and you happen upon an accident or a fire or whatever, you may contact emergency assistance by "whatever means of radio(communications) that are at your disposal".

Just playing around kerchunking the local PD's repeater is a no-no, but if youhappen upon an accident and have no cell-fone, call for help.


My .02 worth.....

Rev. Christopher Linder
KD7SVR
Skywarn: Lincoln-9H
OFP200 Dispatcher[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Breaker breaker Cop Shop, This is Joe Blow, a Ham Operator out on route 69. I just came apon a car turned over in the ditch, everyone is out and we need a wrecker and a cop pronto....breaker breaker....

A call like that surely will get you a ticket from the arriving officer and probably a fine from the FCC.....the key word is LIFE or DEATH.....More and more emergency services are going 800mhz, trunked, coded, and sometimes scrambled. They don't want you on thier frequencies period. Your better off driving to the top of the hill and using your cell phone.

They think of us, as we do the freebanders on 10 meters, think about it....you out of band ....period.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
har har har har...what a stupid reply...

10-4 from the can if you get caught trying that move...
are you the guy on 3904 with the echo box and roger beep??? mercy you need more fire in the wire boy! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[N7XCF]

Actually if you look at the original letter from riley there is mention of the fact that these idiots had "No legitimate reason" for being on the police frequencies - ie. threat to life or property with no other means of communicating. There is no right to a drivers license or radio license cause there was no such things when the constitution was written maybe you should push for an amendment. Most of the cases I have heard of in the past where someone used a modified ham band radio on police freqs they wind up with the radio confiscated. Also on type certification most modern commercial radios can be programmed from the front panel.


TITLE 47--TELECOMMUNICATION

CHAPTER I--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION (CONTINUED)

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES--Table of Contents

Subpart I--General Technical Standards

Sec. 90.203 Certification required.

(a) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) and (l) of this section,
each transmitter utilized for operation under this part and each
transmitter marketed as set forth in Sec. 2.803 of this chapter must be
of a type which has been certificated for use under this part...............

(g) Transmitters having frequency programming capability and that
are designed to operate above 25 MHz are exempt from paragraphs (e) and
(f) of this section if the design of such transmitters:
(1) Is such that transmitters with external controls normally
available to the operator must be internally modified to place the
equipment in the programmable mode. Further, while in the programmable
mode, the equipment shall not be capable of transmitting. The procedures
for making the modification and altering the frequency program shall not
be made available with the operating information normally supplied to
the end user of the equipment... etc. etc.

Look it up the Bendix King LPH series was one of the first and now Federal agencies such as the BLM won't buy radios which are not front programmable.

Eric N7XCF

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ehidle @ Oct. 20 2003,17:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have to take exception to the growing "fad" among government entities of inappropriate and even unconstitutional punishments. It has become increasingly popular for governments to, say, revoke a driver's license for the crime of petty theft (as in the case of a drive-off). Stealing gas is not a moving violation and is no way related to the responsibilities and privileges of posessing a driver's license. The driver's license is not an enabler for the crime, as it is still possible, and rather easy, to steal gas without holding a driver's license (or even owning a car, for that matter).

Here, the FCC is exercising the same flawed legal theories to revoke, suspend, or set aside licenses that have nothing to do with the crime committed. Again, the license is not an enabler for the crime. It is still possible, and again rather easy, to walk into Radio Shack, buy a radio, modify it for illegal transmission, and talk over safety communications.

In both cases, there needs to be motive, opportunity, and a means by which to commit the crime.

In the first case:

Motive: "I want gas"
Opportunity: "Hey, there's a gas station"
Means: "Hey, I'm holding this gas can"

In the second:

Motive: <who knows?>
Opportunity: Hey, here's this frequency chart
Means: Now where did I see that local radio shack?

In neither case is "Ok, gotta go get a license" a part of the algorithm for committing the crime, and it can more or less indefensibly argued that licensure isn't even an contributing circumstance, as it does not make it any less difficult to commit either crime. This easily substantiates the conclusion that revocation of the license in question is neither a deterrent nor a valid or appropriate punishment for the crime.

These nuts don't break the law because they have Ham Radio licenses. They break the law because they are either pathologically inclined to do so or have some other ulterior motive, monetary or otherwise, other than the crime itself.

The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?

What happens when you forget that you left your EZ-Pass at home and get a letter from the FCC revoking your Ham Radio License for failing to pay your toll?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
huh? gas/cb radio huh?? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8zux @ Oct. 20 2003,19:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ehidle @ Oct. 20 2003,22:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have to take exception to the growing "fad" among government entities of inappropriate and even unconstitutional punishments. It has become increasingly popular for governments to, say, revoke a driver's license for the crime of petty theft (as in the case of a drive-off). Stealing gas is not a moving violation and is no way related to the responsibilities and privileges of posessing a driver's license. The driver's license is not an enabler for the crime, as it is still possible, and rather easy, to steal gas without holding a driver's license (or even owning a car, for that matter).

Here, the FCC is exercising the same flawed legal theories to revoke, suspend, or set aside licenses that have nothing to do with the crime committed. Again, the license is not an enabler for the crime. It is still possible, and again rather easy, to walk into Radio Shack, buy a radio, modify it for illegal transmission, and talk over safety communications.

In both cases, there needs to be motive, opportunity, and a means by which to commit the crime.

In the first case:

Motive: "I want gas"
Opportunity: "Hey, there's a gas station"
Means: "Hey, I'm holding this gas can"

In the second:

Motive: <who knows?>
Opportunity: Hey, here's this frequency chart
Means: Now where did I see that local radio shack?

In neither case is "Ok, gotta go get a license" a part of the algorithm for committing the crime, and it can more or less indefensibly argued that licensure isn't even an contributing circumstance, as it does not make it any less difficult to commit either crime. This easily substantiates the conclusion that revocation of the license in question is neither a deterrent nor a valid or appropriate punishment for the crime.

These nuts don't break the law because they have Ham Radio licenses. They break the law because they are either pathologically inclined to do so or have some other ulterior motive, monetary or otherwise, other than the crime itself.

The CFR gives the FCC the authority to revoke a license for a crime not related to amateur radio, much like most state laws give the state the authority to revoke a driver's license for driving off at the pump. However, it's easy to see how this is unconstitutional, or can become so. If states are allowed to revoke a driver's license for a crime that has nothing to do with driving, then what's to stop them from including other crimes not related, like speaking loudly in a hospital zone, or something equally ludicrous?

What happens when you forget that you left your EZ-Pass at home and get a letter from the FCC revoking your Ham Radio License for failing to pay your toll?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Consitutional infringement, #say bud how far off topic can this be ? #out left feild about a county mile or so![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
about as far out as that guy in the stands @ wrigley field who hooked the "foul ball". http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[K3XR]

there is no constitutional right to a drivers license...courts have ruled on this in the past...a drivers license and an amateur radio license is (are) a privledge granted by the government based on meeting the requirements of the law(s) both are subject to revocation as provided by those laws.
dan,k3xr

[K9DRX]

let me remind anyone that you can transmit on any frequency using any type of equipment available in the event of an emergency. The FCC type setting deal I think makes no difference in this case or any case like this for that matter. I don't care if you use a modified FRS radio or a $3000 Motorola Syntor...anyone who does this is a moron regardless. Someone always brings up the radio is not type accepted for.... blah, blah, blah.. or this person shouldn't be licensed.. NOT THE POINT. A radio is a radio when you are doing assenine stuff like this...and it the fact that these people had Amatuer tickets is also irrelevant. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[KD7WHQ]

That was always my understanding as well.
In the event of an emergency, by strict definition, any frequency is usable to communicate on, licensed or not.
Just as you can answer any emergency call on any frequency, in or out of band.
Mind, this is within the strict defintion of life or limb. Property perhaps.

Anything other than, expect at least a pink slip, and likely an inquiry.

[kf4lne]

This is what actually happened. The BMPD charged us with NCGS 14-286.2. The courts did not get a conviction. According to court documents the BMPD stated that we had prevented officers from communicating during a wreck at 17:42 on Feb 8 03. I witnessed this wreck as I was paying for fuel I had just pumped beside where the wreck occurred. Shannon was in line behind me. Ofc Lee Ribley can be clearly heard stating on Feb 11 03 during a telephone conversation that he was not making any such allegation after another officer had told me the day before that he was in fact making that allegation. All pieces of communications gear except for the cell phone were in the cars at the time. The BMPD also stated that we had confessed to Ofc Josh King that we were on their frequency when they “caught” us, but the recording of the conversation clearly shows Ofc King stating that he knows that we are not on their frequency. The same recording also includes a threat from Ofc King’s supervisor. There is one confirmed witness to these events. Ofc Ribley also stated when asked why he stated that he would be arresting us because we hired an attorney that it is because we intended to build a case of not guilty. He made further statements during that phone conversation making passive comments that if we did not do as he wanted he would charge us with this. The court documents state that we had been caught in the act in the same car using a hand held transmitter. Ofc Ribley stated that if we cooperated with him this would be suspended. Ofc Ribley took out the warrants and within a few hours the Buncombe County Sheriffs Departments and BMPD arrived at our respective homes in a group of about 5 (witness reports) with guns drawn with the intent to arrest us as if we had murdered someone. At the time my physical address was listed as my brothers house, my brother contacted other members of my family and informed them that the BMPD arrived at his home on the evening of Feb 11, 03 with guns drawn looking for me. They also arrived at Shannon’s address in the same manor. According to another attorney this is very atypical even for some violent offenses, that the BCSD usually takes several days to serve warrants. I personally believe this is the result of #our attempt to file complaints against the officers who made the threat of becoming more unprofessional. In the presence of witnesses the Buncombe County Magistrate informed me that I must take this up with the officers supervisor. When I attempted to file the complaint with the BMPD it was refused because the supervisor on duty that night was the officer who made the threat. I still fully intend to take action against the BMPD for the actions of Ofc King and his supervisor and I have witnesses and tape recordings to back me against these officers. My attorney is currently gathering information regarding this case. If you would like to hear some of the bits of the recordings please go to http://www.linux-junkies.org/pdordeal.htm #These are in MP3 format and should play in your default media player. The whole recordings will be made public soon enough for those of you who want the whole thing. For now the recordings are evidence and are private. At this time the only people who may request complete copys are Riley Hollingsworth and my attorney.



</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hollingsworth also wrote two North Carolina Technician-class
amateurs--Daniel E. Buchanan, KF4LNE, of Montreat, and Joseph S. "Shannon"
Hutchins, KG4SXD, of Swannanoa--concerning complaints from the Black
Mountain Police Department alleging that both had transmitted on police
frequencies last February. The transmissions apparently were made using a
handheld transceiver while Buchanan and Hutchins were in the same vehicle.

Documents from the Asheville/Buncombe County District Attorney's Office
assert that the Black Mountain police channel had experienced "numerous
transmissions" earlier this year on a police frequency (156.01 MHz)
"including verbal profanity and racial slurs." A police officer who
questioned Buchanan and Hutchins said they admitted transmitting on police
frequencies. They later voluntarily signed statements to that effect in
which each blamed the other for making the racial slur.

The District Attorney's Office statement said that one transmission last
February 8, while police were attempting to respond to an auto accident
involving multiple injuries, "prevented officers from communication with
dispatch or each other."
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

[WA9SVD]

Even if there was a "life and limb" emergency involved, and NO OTHER means of communication, once the police or other appropriate authorities are notified and respond, there seems to be no further justification for "out of band" operation.
But if you EVER consider such operation, bear in mind that YOUR definition of "emergency" may not be the same as the local authorities or the FCC. And even so, be prepared for a thorough investigation if you transmit out of band, particularly on a law enforcement frequency.

[WA9SVD]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KF4PEP @ Oct. 20 2003,17:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Oct. 19 2003,19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The FCC rules are pretty clear. #You can NOT use modified Amateur Radio equipment to TRANSMIT on other than Amateur Radio frequencies. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Unless, of course, you are a MARS or CAP member.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Also handy when your in the military and deployed overseas, or for that matter for any military use. FRS radios are pretty popular with soldiers, and the government still issues Bendix King PRC-127 VHF portables. Having a dual band radio opened up allows me to communicate on the official unit VHF freqs and the expedient FRS used at the squad/platoon level.

The FCC doesn't apply to military use, and if my chain of command is happy with it I will use it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That is a very interesting point. And I would like others to comment. But is the military really using FRS for military communications? That's hardly a secure means of communication, with not even a modicum of privacy, with eavesdropping so easy by anyone having an FRS radio.
Does the military really condone such communications? Don't get me wrong; I just think our military personnel, especially when deployed in hostile territory, DESERVE better than FRS for their military communications.

[ai4xl]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N7XCF @ Oct. 21 2003,14:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually if you look at the original letter from riley there is mention of the fact that these idiots had "No legitimate reason" for being on the police frequencies - ie. threat to life or property with no other means of communicating. There is no right to a drivers license or radio license cause there was no such things when the constitution was written maybe you should push for an amendment. Most of the cases I have heard of in the past where someone used a modified ham band radio on police freqs they wind up with the radio confiscated. Also on type certification most modern commercial radios can be programmed from the front panel.


# # # # # # # # # # # TITLE 47--TELECOMMUNICATION

# # # # # # # # # #CHAPTER I--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
# # # # # # # # # # # # COMMISSION (CONTINUED)

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES--Table of Contents

# # # # # # # # Subpart I--General Technical Standards

Sec. 90.203 #Certification required.

# #(a) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) and (l) of this section,
each transmitter utilized for operation under this part and each
transmitter marketed as set forth in Sec. 2.803 of this chapter must be
of a type which has been certificated for use under this part...............

# #(g) Transmitters having frequency programming capability and that
are designed to operate above 25 MHz are exempt from paragraphs (e) and
(f) of this section if the design of such transmitters:
# #(1) Is such that transmitters with external controls normally
available to the operator must be internally modified to place the
equipment in the programmable mode. Further, while in the programmable
mode, the equipment shall not be capable of transmitting. The procedures
for making the modification and altering the frequency program shall not
be made available with the operating information normally supplied to
the end user of the equipment... etc. etc.

Look it up the Bendix King LPH series was one of the first and now Federal agencies such as the BLM won't buy radios which are not front programmable.

Eric N7XCF

# http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Don't forget that the Bureau of Land Management (as well as the rest the Federal Government(except for The Department of State, which has its own seperate licensing and regulating agency) falls under NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Agency) jurisdiction and NOT FCC. NTIA merely requires that the radios in use meet certain spectral purity and frequency stability requirements. #Thus, frequency agility (and front panel programmability) of Federal Govt. radios is not a problem. And under NTIA regs, FCC type acceptance is NOT, repeat NOT A REQUIREMENT.

David KE4VDH
Cumming, GA

[KA3RFE]

KF4INE:

Assuming you used a rig to transmit out of band....I

You're screwed, buddy. If, in fact, you DID use a modified radio to transmit on the frequency in question, you've violated FCC regs. If you were at a gas pump, that means there were phones around. And that means there were other means of contacting the police, and you have no basis in fact to transmit out of band.

Not only that, but if you recorded a telephone or personal conversation without the knowledge of the other party, that could very well be against the law in your state. It is where I live. Remember that gal who was recording Monica Lewinski's telephone calls? She got charged for violating Maryland law for doing it, and she wasn't the first Maryland citizen to be charged under that law.

If you did use your radio out of band on the police frequency, you were probably recorded on tape. I don't think you're going to get around that tape. You're definately not going to get around the fact other means of communication were available.

[kb9num]

The discussion of using modified ham gear for emergency communications on police or other non ham frequencies is interesting. I am no lawyer, or expert on the past practice in these matters. Those that elmered me when I started in this hobby told me that I could use any amateur frequency or mode to communicate emergency traffic, even if I wasn't licensed for that frequency. They were clear that it didn't include any frequency that we didn't have for the amateur service. While I don't plan on using my equipment (modded for my MARS service) out of bands that I have a ticket for it is an interesting discussion about use in emergency. I do wonder what would happen, and I am fairly sure that it would have to be a major situation before use of my gear on police/fire frequencies would not result in punishment of some sort.

[n8ary]

Not to mention, it would need to be PREMEDITATED, since you'd need the PL tones and offset frequencies. That's hardly how an emergency works.

[N7XCF]

TITLE 47--TELECOMMUNICATION

CHAPTER I--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION (CONTINUED)

PART 97--AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE--Table of Contents

Subpart E--Providing Emergency Communications

Sec. 97.403 Safety of life and protection of property.

No provision of these rules prevents the use by an amateur station
of any means of radiocommunication at its disposal to provide essential
communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human
life and immediate protection of property when normal communication
systems are not available.

Subpart B--Station Operation Standards

Sec. 97.111 Authorized transmissions.

(a) An amateur station may transmit the following types of two-way
communications:
(1) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with other stations
in the amateur service, except those in any country whose administration
has given notice that it objects to such communications. The FCC will
issue public notices of current arrangements for international
communications;
(2) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with a station in
another FCC-regulated service while providing emergency communications;
(3) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with a United
States government station, necessary to providing communications in
RACES; and
(4) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with a station in a
service not regulated by the FCC, but authorized by the FCC to
communicate with amateur stations. An amateur station may exchange
messages with a participating United States military station during an
Armed Forces Day Communications Test.
(b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized
elsewhere in this part, an amateur station may transmit the following
types of one-way communications:
(1) Brief transmissions necessary to make adjustments to the
station;
(2) Brief transmissions necessary to establishing two-way
communications with other stations;
(3) Telecommand;
(4) Transmissions necessary to providing emergency communications;
(5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or
improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; and

[[Page 587]]

(6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins.
(7) Transmissions of telemetry.

Eric N7XCF

[kb6ssn]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w7com @ Oct. 21 2003,12:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb6ssn @ Oct. 21 2003,03:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While I am sure that the control freak drunkards at the "Just Us" dept. will agree with you, I do not. Driving and using a radio are Rights in my opinion. The right to move about as I see fit and the right to talk to anyone I please. The only reason I obtained a license to do either of these things is because it's convenient. If it becomes difficult then they can stick their licenses where the sun don't shine! The government exists to serve the People. Not the People to serve the government. We are citizens not subjects.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
With an attitude like that it must have really sucked to get that call sign (Social Security Number) #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Yes it did! Until I convinced myself that it stands for Submersible Ship Nuclear! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif I tried to give the government back my Socialist Security Card but they wouldn't take it. So I cut it up and mailed it to them! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kb6ssn]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K3XR @ Oct. 21 2003,17:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">there is no constitutional right to a drivers license...courts have ruled on this in the past...a drivers license and an amateur radio license is (are) a privledge granted by the government based on meeting the requirements of the law(s) both are subject to revocation as provided by those laws.
dan,k3xr[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Yeah, so what? A bunch of ultra-liberal fag loving drunks interpreted something different than me. Does that mean I'm going to pay even the slightest attention to what these miscreants have to say? NO! The difference is that they will come blow your freakin' brains out if you disagree. Oh what a wonderfully free country we have! NOT! Get rid of the cops and downsize the government to harmless levels. Otherwise we are all slaves. I have the right to do whatever I damn well please! And the government can go to hell!

[KD7SVR]

Dear Sir or Madam, can't tell because you hide.

First off, I do not transmit out of band, I value my license. Second, I did not even remotely imply that if you happen upon a little fender bender you call up on State Police or whatever and tell them. The key phrase in Part 97 is "Immediately threatening to life or property", so a serious accident. The thing about cell phones is, there is only so much coverage they can give going thru State and National Forests. And if there's a serious accident(of which there are at least 4 a month) where people are trapped etc., a 20 minute drive to find cell coverage is a very stupid idea. I would make the transmission, and then as soon as I got home, send a letter to Hollingsworth. I seriously doubt anyone, including Or State Police or any other agancy would make a really big deal about it, especially if your transmission saved someone's life.

If you feel the need to troll, please contact me offlist and we can discuss this privately. I will not attempt to demean you in front of the entire list. There is a little thing called tact.


Sincerely,
Rev. Chris Linder
KD7SVR
OFP Dispatcher
Skywarn Lincoln 9-H

PS-- not a hick, sorry boys http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 22 2003,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KF4PEP @ Oct. 20 2003,17:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Oct. 19 2003,19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Oct. 19 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The FCC rules are pretty clear. #You can NOT use modified Amateur Radio equipment to TRANSMIT on other than Amateur Radio frequencies. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Unless, of course, you are a MARS or CAP member.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Also handy when your in the military and deployed overseas, or for that matter for any military use. FRS radios are pretty popular with soldiers, and the government still issues Bendix King PRC-127 VHF portables. Having a dual band radio opened up allows me to communicate on the official unit VHF freqs and the expedient FRS used at the squad/platoon level.

The FCC doesn't apply to military use, and if my chain of command is happy with it I will use it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That is a very interesting point. #And I would like others to comment. #But is the military really using FRS for military communications? #That's hardly a secure means of communication, with not even a modicum of privacy, with eavesdropping so easy by anyone having an FRS radio.
# #Does the military really condone such communications? #Don't get me wrong; I just think our military personnel, especially when deployed in hostile territory, #DESERVE better than FRS for their military communications.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FRS use is pretty widespread. O the squad level, at most you may have 2 radios, one a SINCGARS spread spectrum running 30-85mhz and the other a PRC-127 running 135-174 MHZ FM in the clear. Soldiers buy FRS for routine use, and to supplement thier communications ability. If you are a squad leader and have your soldiers doing duties that split them up, it is about the only option. Icom was selected to build what basicly a military FRS, and it has seen some issue but still not in nearly large enough nummbers for what the soldiers want.

A good friend of mine said some fights almost started and an ad-hoc coordinating comittee had to be set up because so amny users were using the limited number of FRS channels at Kandahar airport in Afganistan.

here are some stories on the issue:

http://www.f-r-s.org/e-news/F-R-S.org,nr2002-0626-01.htm
http://iwce-mrt.com/ar/radio_iraq_shows_army/

[ka1kjz]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb6ssn @ Oct. 22 2003,15:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, so what? A bunch of ultra-liberal fag loving drunks interpreted something different than me. Does that mean I'm going to pay even the slightest attention to what these miscreants have to say? NO! The difference is that they will come blow your freakin' brains out if you disagree. Oh what a wonderfully free country we have! NOT! Get rid of the cops and downsize the government to harmless levels. Otherwise we are all slaves. I have the right to do whatever I damn well please! And the government can go to hell![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Tick Tock Tick Tock

.... coming soon to a clocktower near you!

[K9DRX]

(2) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with a station in another FCC-regulated service while providing emergency communications.

I interpret this as using ANY radio for ANY frequency in the state of aide during an emergency. Correct?

Were these gentleman providing crucial emergency communications or interfering? Do these cops have a reason to not like these gentleman due to prior circumstances? More important questions to be answered than type-acceptance if you ask me.

You guys missed it AGAIN.. some of you came back with the "using a modified amatuer radio on non amatuer frequencies" line again.. PLEASE, that is NOT THE POINT. The point is whether or not these gentlemen had reason to be where they were operating and if it was the only means possible to provide communications during an emergency. Correct? I still don't see ANY relevance to the tpye of radio being used..

[kb6ssn]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><