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