ad: vanity

California HF Emergency Frequencies

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by VE7CUP, Nov 12, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
  1. AG6QR

    AG6QR Subscriber QRZ Page

    According to CHP, the law in question does not apply to a radio that is installed in a vehicle.

    https://www.scc-ares-races.org/operations/docs/CVC-23123.5_CHP_Enforcement_Memo.pdf

    Back in 2016, the California legislature passed an ambiguously-worded piece of legislation, aimed against handheld cell phone use, which could have been interpreted to prohibit mobile radio use. It was subsequently clarified by the CHP and by the legislators who wrote it that it was not intended to apply to mobile radios, including business band, CB, and amateur radios installed in vehicles.

    https://www.qsl.net/mares/Documents/Email regarding AB 1785.pdf
     
  2. WZ7U

    WZ7U Ham Member QRZ Page

    D'oh!
     
  3. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Obviously, CHP HQ hasn't gotten the message. I specifically called them twice in 2018-2019 and got the same answer from the CHP officers; If seen using a 2 way radio (mike) in a vehicle, tickets would be issued. So I don't know...………….I can only put forth the info I was given. Let us hope that FCC will agree with RM-11833, my Petition for Rulemaking, and issue a blanket exemption for amateur radio.
    While well-meaning, such state laws do NOTHING to curb distracted driving!
     
  4. KG7LEA

    KG7LEA Ham Member QRZ Page

    In Washington state the first drafts of a similar bill allowed bus drivers to use the radio, but not FCC licensees. Hams wrote in and got an exemption in the final language. Still, one local ham reported in that he was ticketed and had to go to court to get the case dismissed.
     
  5. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    That is EXACTLY one of the issues I am seeking to have addressed in RM-1833: a plethora of confusing, hodge-podge laws from state to state that make it impossible for amateurs to use their privileges as they travel. In the Washington case you cited, IMHO, such arbitrary and contradictory laws go against and/or attempt to supercede CFR 47, and its various Parts, that specifically state what licensees can do with their radios. US Code clearly authorizes mobile operation of radios. When states begin to ticket authorized users for engaging in their lawful privileges US law says is authorized, then it oversteps CFR 47. The only way the states could do that would be to get FCC to agree and change their Rules.. I also don't like the "do as I say, not as I do" aspect of state laws that authorize the use of 2 way radio by their people while prohibiting licensees from using theirs: after all, THEY are licensees, and WE are, too! If WE are contributing to distracted driving, then they are, too. Hypocrites and their ideas stink no matter how many baths they take!:rolleyes:
     
  6. KG7LEA

    KG7LEA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think you will find that states can impose more restrictions than permitted by the federal government in statute, rule, or case law. The feds can do non-consensual eavesdropping (wiretaps), but some states do not allow such surveillance for their officers and citizens. The feds control from the antenna outward since the airwaves are public property, but this side of the antenna the states can regulate.

    I agree with you about the hodgepodge of laws. I know, we will have Congress enact clarifying legislation.
     
  7. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    And well we should. Two way radio has almost NOTHING to do with 'distracted driving". We don't NEED more and more ineffective "nanny state" laws that do nothing to stop that.
     

Share This Page