Petition RM-11833

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K4KWH, Apr 5, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: L-MFJ
  1. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    My Petition for Rulemaking finally made it! This is to provide a blanket Ruling from FCC that precludes states and local jurisdictions from "policing" mobile amateur radio and writing tickets for operating our radios according to FCC Rules and Part 97. It would, I hope, also include commercial (business) and Citizens Band users as well. Because FCC is the sole authority for amateur operation (as well as other Parts of the CFR's, states who enact rules that, in fact, and in principle, prohibit the operation of our mobile radios are actually guilty of superceding FCC's historical oversight and regulation. Because the operation of a two way radio is different from a cell phone, it presents a very minimal impact upon driving and should be treated as a separate operation solely regulated by FCC, NOT by the states. Also, due to the FCC Brief 91-36 that states unequivocally FCC's authorization and approval of mobile operations, such regulations fly in the face of FCC's direct licensure of our radios. Congress itself, thru this Brief, expressed support for unhindered mobile amateur operation. And finally, to have a firm statement FROM FCC as it did during the "scanner" controversy will clear up a lot of confusion as amateurs attempt to navigate thru various states' distracted driving rules.
    I am hoping most of you and as many amateurs as possible will comment in favor of such a blanket exemption.
    We do certainly respond to emergencies and volunteer for many duties during time of need, and having restrictive regulations from states will only put a damper on said response.
    K5ABB and KA4DPO like this.
  2. N8OHU

    N8OHU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Looks good. Will comment on it later.
  3. ND6M

    ND6M Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well, my hats off to you, you actually DID what you said you would![​IMG]

    I will comment favorably on your proposed petition
  4. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thanky! I am very concerned (as if you can tell) about allowing states to get their feet in the door of regulation of our service. If such laws were allowed to stand, what other local regulations would they try? Like...……..getting into the business of telling us we can't transmit within their city limits, for example (that's been tried). OR writing tickets for the mere "crime" of having a radio in our vehicles. (How DARE the masses have such!) In order for any entity with an agenda to get something past the unawares, they often (must) make it seem like a good thing--something that, on the surface, would appear to protect the public. By sneaking it in with another agenda (distracted driving) and, in this case, cell phones, they might be able to persuade people to believe that another activity is equally dangerous and must be curtailed along with something that obviously IS dangerous (cell phones). Some of it is motivated by ignorance that two way radios work differently from cell phones, and ignorance that the state is not allowed enact rules and regulations that already exist on the Federal level. Yes, they certainly can enact distracted driving laws, but it is not proven that two way radio is even microscopically involved in the issue while it IS proven that cell phones cause an inordinate amount of distraction. IOW, they are two different things and should be treated differently.

    Forgive my long posts, but I really want this to pass, and I believe fervently that a rule exempting licensed radio services from state/local regulation IS the right thing. Until a state, town, city, county, etc can prove otherwise, it should remain that way!
  5. N8OHU

    N8OHU Ham Member QRZ Page

    What strikes me as odd is that, if a cell phone is such a distraction to the average person, why isn't it a distraction to Law Enforcement? Why should they get preferential treatment in a law?
    KN6SD likes this.
  6. N2EY

    N2EY Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    IOW, a sort of "OTARD for mobile radio".

    That depends on whether their rules actually supersede FCC's authority.

    An FCC license does not magically invalidate state and local laws. Anybody who has tried to put up a tower in a place where a permit is permitted has discovered the need to follow ALL applicable regulations.

    But let's talk about mobile operation.

    Here in PA, and I suspect in most if not all other states, the motor vehicle code sets standards for motor vehicles that all must follow. For example, the view out the windshield must be unobstructed - I can't put a radio on top of the dashboard in such place where it materially obstructs my view out the windshield. There are maximum height and width of vehicle restrictions before special permits are needed; I can't put a 16 foot whip on the roof of my Odyssey and go driving down the road with it sticking straight up. State laws restricting such things are NOT attempts to supersede FCC's authority.

    The problem is that your claim that operating a two-way radio is different from a cell phone and presents a very minimal impact upon driving is nothing more than an opinion. Your reference to the days of the cb boom doesn't hold up because 1) there's no real data, 2) the boom didn't last all that long, 3) the boom was decades ago (Both "Smokey" and "Bandit" are dead, and Sally Field is a senior citizen).

    As for the emergency-communications claims, opponents could easily ask "Show us some examples in the past 5 years where an Amateur Radio mobile unit provided essential emergency communications by the driver of the vehicle while in motion, which could not be provided with the vehicle pulled over and stopped." How many do you have lined up?

    Distracted driving is a real issue, and a public-safety one. Maybe FCC will see it your way, but don't hold your breath. I think the best you can hope for is some sort of preemption ruling that prevents blanket prohibitions of mobile radio installations. Operation is a very different thing.

    I can bring an HT into a cinema, but the management can prohibit me from using it there. Same principle.

    N2SR, WA7PRC, K7JEM and 1 other person like this.
  7. N2EY

    N2EY Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    1) Because they are trained drivers.

    2) Because they are The Law.

    3) Because their use justifies the added risk. The typical person's doesn't.

    I've seen LEOs and emergency vehicles (fire trucks, ambulances) violate the speed limits, go through red lights, etc. - and nothing is done about it. Same principle.
    W4NNF, N2SR, W2AI and 1 other person like this.
  8. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Let's say you had a heart attack, not that I would wish that on anyone, should the ambulance and the police that come to your aid be exempt from the speed regulations or should they just turn off their lights and sirens and go with the flow? Should they be able to use a cell phone to verify certain information when responding to that call?
    KK0K and N2EY like this.
  9. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think so. There seems to be trouble on the part of some in separating what the FCC can regulate versus what a state can regulate when it comes to the operation of a motor vehicle on their roads. Keep in mind that the operation of that motor vehicle is a privilege and not a right. Could a state, for example, say it's permissible to operate a two-way radio in a motor vehicle by the passenger(s) but not the driver? What would give the FCC the power to supersede that regulation? I will avoid touching on the states' rights issue to keep from mudding up the conversation.
    N2EY likes this.
  10. ND6M

    ND6M Ham Member QRZ Page

    Not to side track the thread, but,................. emergency responders do NOT have the authority to disregard the law.

    Even when running "code 3" they must "PROCEED WITH CAUTION".
    N4AAB and KK5JY like this.

Share This Page