[ScanIndiana]BS laws
w9nes at comcast.net
w9nes at comcast.net
Fri Jan 21 22:27:55 EST 2005
Gentleman.For the humanity!!!Can we get off this subject matter and move forward,IC 35-44-3-12 is very clear if a person will TAKE TIME to sit down and read the Burns Statue on this law.This is a hobby for all of us to enjoy, not to be putting each other down,Can we not get along with others??? Enough Said.Thanks 73 Tim DeLong W9NES, Poud to be a Licensed Ham Radio Operator in Indianapolis!!!!!!!!!!
> Now kiddies, calm down. :-)
>
> In your own ways you both have good points but are just on
> opposite ends of the spectrum, pardon the pun.
>
> I argued in many internet newsgroups waaaaay back against the
> ECPA (which I refer to as the Electronic Communications Piracy
> Act, as opposed to "Privacy" Act.....) because it, like so much
> other law in this area, is:
>
> a) a typical Washington DC "shoot-from-the-hip-catch-all-one-size-
> fits-everyone-solution" which as usual manages to screw a lot of
> people. I still believe that today.
>
> b) predicated on the "big lie" that was being told by cellular
> providers early on that their customers should feel secure that
> nobody could listen in on them. Just one small problem - that
> was NOT true, and the CTIA knew it (that's Cellular Telephone
> Industry Association, for anyone who didn't know that). FIRST
> they sold the phones and THEN they lobbied for a law that would
> make their lie into law. With enough money to spread around
> in Washington, you can do almost anything.
>
> As for the Indiana Scanner law, my understanding is that it goes
> back to a time when criminals really did try and use receivers
> (scanners didn't even exist yet) to try and evade police. The
> original intent of the law was a good one, and I really don't think
> that anyone ever thought that listening to the cops was going to
> turn into a popular spectator sport. When I first got involved in
> radio as a kid in the early 70's, a LOT more stuff was said on
> the police bands IN THE CLEAR than there is now. So law or not,
> the cops all know that they are listened to and they take steps
> to hide or disguise a lot of critical comms. You can argue the
> success or failure of that - but I think it is a valid point that
> we, the radio hobbyists, need to be careful that what we do does
> NOT endanger either the police officers themselves or the public
> safety and welfare.
>
> I will also remind everyone that scannists all too frequently forget
> about Section 705 (formerly 605) of the Communications Act of 1934,
> as amended. Until recently, it basically said you could listen to
> anything you wanted to as long as you didn't divulge the contents
> with exceptions being ships and aircraft in distress, Amateurs and
> CBers, and signals intended for public broadcast. These could be
> divulged all you wanted. :-) The ECPA then excepted cell phones,
> and later, cordless phones; various congresscritters have tried to
> extend it into other areas as well. This is still the law of the
> land, whether we like it or not. Primarily, it isn't enforced
> except in the most egregious cases of someone being blatantly
> stupid and/or trying to use the obtained information in some illegal
> or "profitable" way.
>
> That's my 2 cents worth on issues of legality for now. In the meantime,
> back to the radios!
>
> Duane
> WB9OMC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: scanindiana-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:scanindiana-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of sdaupert
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:53 AM
> To: Indiana Scanning
> Subject: Re: [ScanIndiana]BS laws
>
> And I'm sure you've never broken any law in you life like exceeding the
> speed limit? But I guess listening to a radio is much more dangerous to
> others. Here she is, THE perfect woman.
> BTW, if you take stating facts to be whining, go back to cutting your own
> crystals and those of us who are willing to speak out about govt. waste will
> continue to do so.
> What is this "perfectly good reason" for this law (that keeps me, a hobbiest
> from listening???) I still don't see it after reading the statute again and
> again.
> Go to a NASCAR or F1 race and arrest everyone that CARRIES a scanner capable
> of getting 800 MHZ if you have so much time, money and courtrooms.Truly
> fiscally responsible, oh yes.
> My point is the law is poorly worded, does not target real criminals ONLY
> and it needs to be changed.
> You still don't get it do you?
> Stu
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Susan Barker" <bigoakqh at yahoo.com>
> To: <scanindiana at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 8:43 AM
> Subject: [ScanIndiana] (no subject)
>
>
> > Ok boys I have been scanning longer than some of you have been on this
> earth. Stop whining. The law is the law and has a perfectly good reason to
> back it up other than your loss of civil liberties. If you choose to violate
> that law then "don't do the crime..if ya can't do the time ( or
> consequences) ". The Ham law is a courtesy extended by most states. The
> violation of those laws and regulations has brought about the mistrust of
> that group as well by law enforcement. We reap what we throw out there. Now
> I know you all are going to really get in a dither but the fact is, if we
> want to put the scanners in the car (which is the only way to really do our
> thing) then it may be confiscated period. By the way, I am 62 yrs old and
> female. I haven't lost one yet but I do not flaunt it and am very respectful
> of the law enforcement in our area. You should be too. It is their life in
> jeopardy when the crook is listening on a scanner while they are trying to
> save your rump from being harm
> > ed.
> >
> >
> >
> > Is your air clean?
> > Free In-Home Evaluation
> > www.ecoquest.com/bbarker
> > ____ ____ ___
> > / __/______ ____ / _/__ ___/ (_)__ ____ ___ _
> > _\ \/ __/ _ `/ _ \_/ // _ \/ _ / / _ `/ _ \/ _ `/
> > /___/\__/\_,_/_//_/___/_//_/\_,_/_/\_,_/_//_/\_,_/
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > ScanIndiana mailing list
> > ScanIndiana at mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scanindiana
> >
> > IndyScan.com 1996-2004
> >
> > Win a new Icom IC-756PROIII and help QSL/QTH.net
> > Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/index.html
>
> ____ ____ ___
> / __/______ ____ / _/__ ___/ (_)__ ____ ___ _
> _\ \/ __/ _ `/ _ \_/ // _ \/ _ / / _ `/ _ \/ _ `/
> /___/\__/\_,_/_//_/___/_//_/\_,_/_/\_,_/_//_/\_,_/
>
> ______________________________________________
> ScanIndiana mailing list
> ScanIndiana at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scanindiana
>
> IndyScan.com 1996-2004
>
> Win a new Icom IC-756PROIII and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/index.html
>
> ____ ____ ___
> / __/______ ____ / _/__ ___/ (_)__ ____ ___ _
> _\ \/ __/ _ `/ _ \_/ // _ \/ _ / / _ `/ _ \/ _ `/
> /___/\__/\_,_/_//_/___/_//_/\_,_/_/\_,_/_//_/\_,_/
>
> ______________________________________________
> ScanIndiana mailing list
> ScanIndiana at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scanindiana
>
> IndyScan.com 1996-2004
>
> Win a new Icom IC-756PROIII and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/index.html
More information about the ScanIndiana
mailing list