Radio Interference in Florida is a Felony

Correct, Mike. But a "radar detector" is nothing but a microwave radio receiver. I was actually stopped once because an antenna tuner was visible on top of my dash.

I have heard from relatives that even one in the trunk is considered "illegal" and police have been known to smash them when found - even if it is an out-of-state driver where is it perfectly legal in his home state and he took it out before traveling in Virginia.

1. It is a clear violation of the Communications Act of 1934, in that is is regulation of a wireless receiver.
2. It is a clear violation of the "free commerce" clause of the Constitution. Nothing that is legal in the home state of the driver should be subject to criminal prosecution and/or destruction in any other state (except booze, which has a constitutional exception).

 

It would appear that point 1 would make local scanner laws subject to federal pre-emption too yet they remain on the books in many jurisdictions. The FCC declaratory ruling specifically exempted amateur radios which just happened to also receive police frequencies but did not invalidate the basic scanner laws.


It would seem that if point 2 is a valid challenge to radar detector laws it would have to get at least to the Federal Court of Appeals. Since you cannot recover court costs in these type of proceedings, no one may yet have attempted a challenge of this type.

Mike WA3KYY

 

in my own opinion it sounds like a money scam.Florida is always trying to come up with new and inventive ways to fleece its residents,and "out of towners".that is just my own personal opinion.This is also my first post.I used to live there and i hated just about every minute of it.Jacksonville:THE BOLD NEW SEWER OF THE SOUTH.

 

Office of the Attorney General
Opinions Division
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL

June 9, 2995

Dear Mr. McVey

Thank you for contacting this office regarding the application of section 877.27, Florida Statutes, to amateur radio operators whose transmissions may interfere with commercial broadcasts. Attorney General Crist has asked that I respond to your inquiry.

Regrettably, the authority of this office to render formal opinions is statutorily limited to responding only to public officials and entities on questions involving their own powers and duties under state law. This precludes offering legal opinions to private citizens. Moreover, the opinions of this office are advisory in nature and, while have been found to be persuasive in certain instances, are not binding.

In this instance, the operation of short-wave radios may implicate federal law. Section 877.27, Florida Statutes, enacted in 2004, became effective July 1 of that year. The legislative analysis of the bill discusses its application to individuals who act outside FCC regulations and the potential federal preemption of the field of radio interference. You may wish to contact the Federal Communications Commission to determine whether your activity is exempt from licensure as mentioned in section 877.27(1)(a), Florida Statutes, or otherwise complies with federal regulations.

Please understand the inability of this office to become more directly involved in this matter at this time.

Sincerely,

/s/

Lagran Saunders
Assistant Attorney General

 

Thanks for making an idiot out of the amateur radio service, there Lee. IMO.

You got just what I said.

And am I the only one who noticed the LAW went into effect in July ==2004== while YOU said that 'Florida hams will go off the air in July 2005' without clarity on the LAW? Notice you got RID of that post....

Now: almost 12 months later, CAN YOU GIVE even --ONE-- instance where a Florida ham has ben arrested for using his radio legally?

Just give us one. That's all we need to start giving you any credibility again, IMO. Thanks for showing the TRUE value of 'ham activism'.

Thanks again for the egg on face for fellow Floridian hams, past and present.

 

So, basically, the AG of Florida says that private citizens are not allowed to know how the law affects them - they must wait until they are arrested..... or not.

There is just too much of this balderdash going on in this country, IMHO.

 

That's not what this says.

It states that if you operate illegally then you have problems in Florida.

Operating legally is an FCC matter.

Read it carefully. It says volumes.

This activism stuff is wasting lots of people's time, and giving us a bad image. My opinion.

Would help if Lee copied the DATE right, too.

 

Well, guess we are seeing some of the Best of Chip, here.  LOL.

Guess the July 2005 date was wrong, although the ARRL made that clarification.  And, in my haste retyping, I moved the letter forward a few years. LOL.

Addressing the commentary, I really didn't get much of a response to my letter, which, by the way, I removed because I realized that most wouldn't want to go where I did.  I do know my state law, and the fact that the AG can't give me, a private citizen, an opinion.

But, they did listen.  That was my hope in writing them in the first place.  And, judging from the promptness in response, the issue is not dead, by any means, and will find its way to hopefully get the matter clarified so we can rest a little easier.  Quite simply, someone in government could ask the same questions and, unlike me, get an official opinion.  Those tend to be circulated widely, as well.

Woudln't it have been as nice to have a response from the FCC to the League's petition in just a week?

I don't mind a little egg once in a while.  Especially if it opens doors.  And, I really doubt that it did any harm.
So, I guess I'll apologize to all of my fellow Florida hams for my egging.  Not to the past ones, though, that moved somewhere else.  

BTW, you'd best get yourself ready for a round or two, Chipster, as K1MAN has been issued a NAL in the amount of $21,000 by his own admission.  When that becomes a Public Notice, the QRZ.COM thread announcing it will bust all records........

Lee
W6EM

PS  I think I'll leave the date at 2995.  Kinda fun to laugh at a 990 year mistake.  If it were a variable in the Drake equation, it probably wouldn't affect the outcome anyway.  Within the Drake sphere.  Or is it spheroidian galaxy?

 

He got it right, Chip. You didn't. Their opinions are advisory. They have no formal position. Although, they are publicized and are respected. Tell us all about the "volumes" it says. It hints at preemption, but that's it. Its what they did with my letter and what they're doing in inside Capitol circles that would be interesting to follow.

So, the AG opinion, if they rendered one, would not be a defense in a court of law, should someone be charged with interfering with a broadcast station.

An astute defense attorney might read the preamble or the legislative analysis and convince the judge to dismiss a charge. But, how much would that astute lawyer charge a hapless ham? $10,000? And, there is absolutely, in the words of the statute, probable cause to arrest someone causing interference. So, no hopes of recovering legal expenses with a false arrest lawsuit.

We've spent lots of time covering issues of importance to many amateurs on QRZ.COM, and in only one instance did either the ARRL cover the impacted ham's legal expenses or a "pro-bono" ham attorney step forward to defend the ham.

Ham activism by the ARRL, and by individuals is a necessity if we are to survive as a service.

I fully intend to continue to use my knowledge and experience to combat the BPL scourge. Including, BTW, the proposal by UPLC/UTC to be the BPL database gate keeper. Fox and hen house classic.

Ciao,

Lee
W6EM

 

Why would I possibly have a problem with K1MAN getting an NAL--assuming he deserves one?

Why are you misleading people into thinking I am some sort of proponent of K1MAN?

That is not the case.

I am indifferent, at best.

No one gets your Drake reference. Certainly not me.

 

I wish to say, with all my heart, that if hams --have-- to be activists, then we do not have the requisite requirements to exist as a service at all.

But thanks for finally ADMITTING you are an activist.

 

You said, Lee, that on July 1, hams in Florida would shut down because of this law. That's what YOU wrote the AG. You have since removed this post which had a copy of that letter. The statement is false.

This was OPINION presented as FACT--by you-- apparently acting on behalf of Florida hams. Not that they had a chance to look it over first, mind you.

THAT, my friend, is the root of your problem.

Getting people riled up without a FACTUAL basis is pure activism propaganda, IMO. What right do YOU have to 'speak' for their best interests?

Express yourself. Don't sucker in others.

 

Your selective ability to recall, once again, comes into play.

It was shown, via a post of a part of a paper from a Cal Tech professor on a thread here, that the so-called Drake equation is not an equation at all, but merely an expression whose variables have no reasonable limits, therefore its result for a given set of variables (if one could call it a result) could possibly vary by many many orders of magnitude.

Remembering the post now? Right after your brag about Drake being your mentor....

 

I wish to say, with all my heart, that if hams --have-- to be activists, then we do not have the requisite requirements to exist as a service at all.

But thanks for finally ADMITTING you are an activist.[/QUOTE]
Whether I'm an activist or not, it doesn't matter.

What does matter, though, that as individuals, we express what and how we feel about proposals that not only affect amateur radio, but other aspects of radio and communications technology that may affect our way of life and that of the rest of our fellow citizens.

I, for one, could not sit by and read the lies submitted by some electric utility interests in BPL commentary without addressing them. That's part of my fiber. So, call it activism or even blowing the whistle. I could care less.

The ability of the money lobby in this country to prevail over reason, logic, science, and the law is indisputable.

Please, don't ask me for examples. I won't waste my time.

 

Sure, the date was wrong. My fault for copying that from the email that was widely circulated in FL ham circles. And, my fault for my poor typing or spell checking skills.

You know, one way to get an answer is to include an error. What? Did I receive an AG opinion (with respect to the law's effective date?) Gee, I think I did. Proof by contradiction, eh, Chipster?

There was and still is lots of 'factual basis' for concern in Section 877.27, F.S.

Like anyone else who is a FL citizen, I have a right to question those in public office in this state. You don't.

My letter was removed so as not to 'sucker in others' as you put it. After I posted it, and the letter to each of my US Senators, I had second thoughts, since I thought and think that the best approach would be for the politicians to receive individually different letters, not a bunch of rubber stamps. If anyone wants a copy, email me at my call at arrl dot net and I'll send them one. Except, you, of course.


Ciao,

Lee
W6EM