ad: MultusSDR-1

Echolink and cell phone laws?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KD2AFV, Nov 13, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: l-assoc
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
  1. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    How does a law prohibiting the driver from using a radio restrict our ability to "transport our mobile radios across state and local boundaries for the purpose of transmitting on authorized frequencies"? Nothing in the law prohibits possession or transporting of radio equipment. It doesn't even prevent its usage while rolling down state highways, it only prohibits the driver from using his hands to operate the device, while moving. Driving a motor vehicle falls under state laws. Operating a ham radio falls under FCC laws.

    Having an FCC license doesn't exempt you from any driving law, whether or not that law is based on facts or supposition. The way to attack these laws is not through calling for an FCC pre-emption (which will never happen), but to get the laws themselves to exempt ham radio operation. There is nothing in 91-36 that indicates that the FCC has any role over motoring laws. They do have some power over equipment possession and transport issues. That is what 91-36 is all about.
     
    WZ7U, K3XR and KU4X like this.
  2. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    KX4O, KC8VWM, KU4X and 1 other person like this.
  3. AG6QR

    AG6QR Subscriber QRZ Page

    Another way of phrasing it is that it doesn't restrict any radio operation whatsoever, it only prohibits driving while operating a radio.

    It amounts to the same thing, of course, but the difference in phrasing emphasizes that it may be seen as a driving law.
     
    K3XR and KK5JY like this.
  4. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yes, since when do cell phones not contain a transmitter and when did the FCC stop regulating transmitters?

    Correct, There is no state regulation I am aware of that contains such a prohibition. If found please provide a link.
     
  5. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's what I am saying; you just described it better. And the users then agree to a contract
    But. The users sign contracts and agree to certain rules set forth by the carrier. Two way radio licensees deal directly with FCC and the Rules acrue directly to the user. IOW, if you create interference, you are subject to the applicable Federal law. Even the state, or town, must call FCC about external interference. In this case, FCC has already set forth clear Rules as to what the licensee is allowed to do. The state can't just come along and supercede the Federal Rule. They can certainly regulate driver behavior (Weaving, speeding, driving too slow--all signs of distracted driving). But until FCC Rules otherwise, agrees with the state, changes its existing Rules/position on the matter, IMHO, the state cannot effectually prevent the use of a mobile amateur radio simply because they see someone with a mike in their hand.
     
  6. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Those were the laws that would be ruled invalid by this FCC pre-emptment. They were already gone by the time the FCC made this ruling.
     
  7. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    If a cop sees a ham using a microphone (and I can think of ways to hide it) and writes a ticket for "distracted driving" simply on the basis of observing a ham driving along and using a mike, then that restricts the ability of the ham to transport and transmit on our authorized frequencies. It goes against all the intent of 91-36 and that of Congress. Without quoting same just now, that document also mentions "unrestricted mobile operations" and the "ability to use our radios to the fullest extent". Again, having a ham in fear of a ticket, or being seen talking on a mike has the same effect! Preventing the use of our radios in accordance with FCC Part 97 is what such does!

    We have too many stoopid, ill-conceived laws as it is! Go after what DOES cause distracted driving! Think of the last time you had to toot your horn at someone who didn't "go" at the light, or shied you out of your lane. Then think of the last time you had to toot at someone sitting at the light talking on a mike. Can you even FIND or remember such a thing?
     
  8. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    public in nature.
    PORTABLE RECEIVER
    Shall mean a radio receiver set of such size as to be easily and conveniently carried by hand or in a vehicle from one location to another, regardless of the type of power supply, and which can be quickly used while being carried by a person either on foot or in a vehicle.



    ยง 44-2Radio receiving sets. [1]
    A.
    No person shall use a portable receiver for the purpose of receiving signals on police or fire frequencies.

    B.
    No person shall equip any motor vehicle with a radio receiving set capable of receiving signals on the frequencies allocated for police or fire use or knowingly use a motor vehicle so equipped or knowingly in any way interfere with the reception or transmission of radio messages by the Police or Fire Department.
    [Amended 1-27-1970 by Ord. No. 70-36]

    C.
    The Chief of Police is hereby authorized to issue, regulate or revoke permits for the use of such receiving sets to persons or corporations engaged in official business.
    [Amended 1-27-1970 by Ord. No. 70-36; 5-28-1974 by Ord. No. 74-180]

    D.
    The provisions of this section shall not apply to peace officers, authorized technicians of the Police and Fire Departments or persons holding a permit from the Chief of Police.
    [Amended 1-27-1970 by Ord. No. 70-36; 5-28-1974 by Ord. No. 74-180]

    I found this in a post of QRZ from 2005. It seems that Rochester, NY is one place that doesn't distinguish between "radio receiving sets" and amateur radio. So it would seem that if your amateur radio is capable of receiving the po po, you might get a ticket.
     
    KX4O likes this.
  9. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    CONCLUSION

    13. We hold that state and local laws that preclude the possession in
    vehicles or elsewhere of amateur radio service
    transceivers by amateur operators merely on the basis that the
    transceivers are capable of the reception of public safety,
    special emergency, or other radio service frequencies, the reception of
    which is not prohibited by federal law, are
    inconsistent with the federal objectives of facilitating and promoting
    the amateur radio service and, more fundamentally,
    with the federal interest in amateur operator's being able to transmit
    and receive on authorized amateur service frequencies.
    We, therefore hold that such state and local laws are preempted by
    federal law.

    14. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the request for a declaratory ruling
    filed by the ARRL IS GRANTED to the extent
    indicated herein and in all other respects IS DENIED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    William F. Caton
    Acting Secretary
    The entire document can be seen here....http://www.arrl.org/files/file/pr91-36.pdf
     
    KC8VWM likes this.
  10. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's what I'm talkin' about. FCC has already said its OK to use your mobile radio. State and local laws that tamper with that
    are preempted by Federal law. To get what the states (want) they would have to get FCC to change its rulings or annul the existing rulings.
     

Share This Page