Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site trsvax
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!trsvax!mikey
From: mikey@trsvax
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: Radar Detector Legislation
Message-ID: <55200198@trsvax>
Date: Thu, 15-Aug-85 10:20:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: trsvax.55200198
Posted: Thu Aug 15 10:20:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 03:18:33 EDT
References: <1081@homxa.UUCP>
Lines: 24
Nf-ID: #R:homxa.UUCP:-108100:trsvax:55200198:000:1229
Nf-From: trsvax!mikey    Aug 15 09:20:00 1985




First off, the fed does regulate receiving the airwaves.  The Communications
act of 1934 has specific areas that apply to divulging of information of
things that can be received.  Where most of the radar detector ordinances
have stood is because they are not considered receivers, that are basically
signal detectors.  Even the superhet receivers are basically super field
strength meters.  Personally, I'll use a remote and hide the head to avoid
trouble, even where the use is not regulated, but I won't take it out of 
my car.  If I lived in PA  near the NJ border, I'd just get me a lawyer
and fight it.  Most people give up instead of continuing the fight.  It's
not principle, people just figure that the $50 - $200 fine is not worth the
court battle.  I read that Washington D.C. had a detector law that stood
for quite a few years because no one bothered to fight it.  When someone
finally did, it was struck down first round.  I remember reading that the 
judges comment on the ruling was something about we can't afford to live in
a country where a citizen does not have the right to know what the police 
department is doing.


mikey at trsvax
55, it's not just a good idea, it S*CKS!!
It's mostly revenue anyway.