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.