[ILQSO] Proposed Distracted Driving Legislation in Illinois

[km9m-zig at comcast.net]

Bryan, 
I'd say your interpretation would be a long shot. (but who am I?) I trust nothing to long-shots, 
gimmes, or chance. I think the intended message here is: 

If we are to continue to enjoy the freedom to pursue our avocation, to enjoy the privileges our federal 
licenses grant to us, then, we Illinois hams, both individually and collectively, 
are going to have to get off our duffs and get involve d . 

So contact your legislators, friends, etc. Elected officials in our state have proven over and over that they 
don't do what is in the public's best interest. (especially when allowed to operate "unattended!") 
73, 
Zig - KM9M (just my opinion) 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Todd" <kc9nrb at gmail.com> 
To: ILQSO at mailman.qth.net 
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 10:45:14 AM 
Subject: [ILQSO] Fwd: Re: Proposed Distracted Driving Legislation in Illinois 

---------- Forwarded message ---------- 
From: "Bryan Todd" <kc9nrb at gmail.com> 
Date: Jan 27, 2012 10:42 AM 
Subject: Re: [ILQSO] Proposed Distracted Driving Legislation in Illinois 
To: "Illinois QSO Party" <ilqso at mailman.qth.net> 

If I'm reading this right. If the equipemnt is "integrated"into the 
vehicle, (I.e. mounted, wired) then it may possibly become exempt. It would 
be a long shot, but it might be a loophole. Any thoughts? 
On Jan 27, 2012 10:32 AM, <km9m-zig at comcast.net> wrote: