Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site burl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!mhuxt!mhuxr!ulysses!burl!rcj
From: rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Radar Detectors *are* illegal in the law books!!
Message-ID: <808@burl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 20:59:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: burl.808
Posted: Wed Aug 14 20:59:44 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 02:41:59 EDT
Reply-To: rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson)
Organization: AT&T Technologies, Burlington NC
Lines: 24

I can't remember my source for this, and would appreciate verification
that I am right (or a thorough thrashing if I am wrong :-( ), but it
seems to me that the law reads (paraphrasing):

"...has the right to receive any signals...so long as such reception
and reception devices are not designed to subvert the law of the land."

That is a VERY loose paraphrase; could someone verify please?  Send me
mail and I'll summarize the replies or give the answer if I get some
source I can verify on my own.

If verified this, of course, brings up the question of whether a radar
detector is designed to subvert the law.  In my opinion anyone who seriously
THINKS otherwise is crazy.  Another point no one has mentioned -- it is
illegal in most, if not all, states to possess a police/emergency band
scanner in your car or truck -- this was done to prevent "ambulance chasers"
(lawyers, thrill-seekers, rubber-neckers, et. al.)

Thanks,
-- 

The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291)
alias: Curtis Jackson	...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj
			...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj