Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site teklabs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!teklabs!rafaeld
From: rafaeld@teklabs.UUCP (Rafael De Arce)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: re: Radar Detectors...
Message-ID: <3162@teklabs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 15:29:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: teklabs.3162
Posted: Fri Aug  9 15:29:00 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 07:25:52 EDT
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 29


I don't own a radar dector nor do I have a need for one. I usually drive at
the speed limit except when driving long distances. (ei. Oregon to California)

It doesn't bother me that others own radar dectors. Who knows... maybe I'll
buy one someday.

It doesn't bother me that the police use radar to catch speeders.

What does bother me is the legislature trying to regulate the use of Radar
Dectors. It looks to me as though the police want to assert their authority
beyond their bounds. 

Certainly the manufactures of radar detectors, users of detectors and the gener-
al public couldn't care less about the damn contraptions in so far as initia-
ting laws againts the devices. So who else is their but the police?

The F.C.C. has stated on many occasions that recieving RF is free for the
taking. It is the responsibility of the transmitor to secure their signal.
That puts the burden on the police to figure out a better way to catch speed-
ers using radar. That would require re-engineering their devices and that 
spells money. It's cheaper to take them out of use (by law)!

The state legislature has no jurisdiction in this area. This is a federal
matter. Who knows... maybe NJ will try to pass a law forbiding people of
their state from watching or listening to programs originating from outside
the state (or within).

Big Brother is on the move. Cost over-runs and delays.  -1994-