Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Florida
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
Bill Graham
May 2, 2012, 12:57:52 AM5/2/12
to
radioguy wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> a ham radio operator wrote:
>
> "As a ham in a place where i can't legally record a traffic stop, I
> have wondered what the implications of leaving on open mic on a
> repeater durining an abusive traffic stop would be. I would not be
> "recording" the incident, but there might be other witnesses that hear
> the abuse. And some repeaters record all of their traffic"
>
> If you're in Florida, then unfortunately for you, Florida law already
> has that covered.
>
> In Florida it is against the law to transmit the police officers' live
> converstions(also video)live over any radio or television.when they
> stop you at a traffic stop or for amy reason.
>
> However, this is going to get "very very intersting" as many more hams
> will soon be breaking this law as more laws get passed rewiring hands-
> free operation on ham radios even though those laws violate fcc rules
> since music will get transmitted over ham radio anytime some young kid
> driver (or old senior citizens who can't hear good) conme driving by
> you in the other lanee blasting their car stereos.
>
> These laws force hams to use either Vox or bluetooth for their ham
> radios which is a fcc biolation because of the illegal transmission of
> music over ham radios which automatically come with using such
> devices.
>
> even if a ham is lucky enough to not have any such drivers drive past
> him, vox will autimatically open and illegally transmit the police
> officers' conveesations over ham radio if the ham is law-abiding since
> the law also says that as soon as you see a police vehicle flashing
> its lights to pull you over, you must immediately pull over and stip
> and then immediately put both your hands on the steering wheel and
> wait for the police officer.
>
> In other words, no turning off the radio allowed. It is completely
> illegal to turn off your ham radio as that is not immediately putting
> both your hands on the steering wheel as the law requires right after
> immerdiately pulling over and immediately stopping as the law
> requires.
>
> However, it is also ullegal to leave the ham radio on as that is
> illegally transmitting the police officers who are trying to give you
> a ticket for something that is not a crime conversations live over ham
> radio.
>
> Those are your ONLY two choices. And BOTH are illegal. So there is NO
> way at all you can be a law-abiding ham radio operator if you live in
> or are travelling through the state of Florida.
>
> and operating mobile.
>
> Aalso, there is NO way you van be a law-abiding ham radio operator if
> you're travelling throygh Palmdale, California either as the law there
> alrready stated by Palmdale officials is that it is illegal and
> against the law to have an antenna on your vehicle that is more than
> one inch above the roof of your vehicle. (and ham hts are icompletely
> illegal there. Palmdale officials already said they can confiscate
> them if they catch you with them. And despite what several hams
> thought, the California state court upheld the Palmdale city rulings
> in favor of Palmdale and against the hams, and no federal marshalls
> coming down on either Palmdale or the California state court yet after
> over two years. And no FCC officialss coming down on eiether Palmdale
> or the California state court yet after over two years.
>
> So the FCC lied when they said hams can just operate mobile if they
> can't operate at their homes.
>
> so now we know we can no longer trust any statements the FCC makes.
>
> Even the FCC itself basically said not to trust anything they
> theirselves said when they said that we all should have known from the
> rules that the radios they theirselves said were completely legal were
> actually always illegal, even though all of their rules we read at the
> time said they were completely legal.
>
> And there were not any rules the public could see at the time which
> even remotely suggested they were illegal.
>
> Their own rules at the time said they were completely legal.
>
> But then the FCC did a complete 180 degree turn and said those radios
> always were illegal and never had been legal at any time, even when we
> first bought htem when they claimed they were completely legal.
>
> (no, this is not about the 10 meter cb's)
>
> So now, we can get get put in jail for buying illegal merchandise
> which at the time it was bought, the FCC said was completely legal to
> buy and use.
>
> since they now say it is and always was illegal even at the time they
> theirselves said it was completely legal.
>
> and since doing illegal things is a cause for revoking your ham radio
> license, several hams who thought they were legally buying and legally
> using these radios since the FCC said they were completely legal can
> now have their ham radio licenses revoked for their illegal activities
> since the FCC said they are and always were illegal to buy and illegal
> to use even at the time they theirselves said they were completely
> legal to buy and completely legal to use.
IM (libertarian)O, this is a law made to be broken. I would record (with a
small hidden camera) everytime I was stopped for any reason and broadcast
the recording on Youtube. I would also encourage others to do the same, and
I might even start a bsiness installing the recording equipment on cars. If
it happens, especially on either my, or public, property, it is my
constitutional right to record it. After all, just what are the police
afraid of? The truth? If they don't commit any crimes, then they have
nothing to worry about. Don't forget. These guys are our public
servants.....
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> a ham radio operator wrote:
>
> "As a ham in a place where i can't legally record a traffic stop, I
> have wondered what the implications of leaving on open mic on a
> repeater durining an abusive traffic stop would be. I would not be
> "recording" the incident, but there might be other witnesses that hear
> the abuse. And some repeaters record all of their traffic"
>
> If you're in Florida, then unfortunately for you, Florida law already
> has that covered.
>
> In Florida it is against the law to transmit the police officers' live
> converstions(also video)live over any radio or television.when they
> stop you at a traffic stop or for amy reason.
>
> However, this is going to get "very very intersting" as many more hams
> will soon be breaking this law as more laws get passed rewiring hands-
> free operation on ham radios even though those laws violate fcc rules
> since music will get transmitted over ham radio anytime some young kid
> driver (or old senior citizens who can't hear good) conme driving by
> you in the other lanee blasting their car stereos.
>
> These laws force hams to use either Vox or bluetooth for their ham
> radios which is a fcc biolation because of the illegal transmission of
> music over ham radios which automatically come with using such
> devices.
>
> even if a ham is lucky enough to not have any such drivers drive past
> him, vox will autimatically open and illegally transmit the police
> officers' conveesations over ham radio if the ham is law-abiding since
> the law also says that as soon as you see a police vehicle flashing
> its lights to pull you over, you must immediately pull over and stip
> and then immediately put both your hands on the steering wheel and
> wait for the police officer.
>
> In other words, no turning off the radio allowed. It is completely
> illegal to turn off your ham radio as that is not immediately putting
> both your hands on the steering wheel as the law requires right after
> immerdiately pulling over and immediately stopping as the law
> requires.
>
> However, it is also ullegal to leave the ham radio on as that is
> illegally transmitting the police officers who are trying to give you
> a ticket for something that is not a crime conversations live over ham
> radio.
>
> Those are your ONLY two choices. And BOTH are illegal. So there is NO
> way at all you can be a law-abiding ham radio operator if you live in
> or are travelling through the state of Florida.
>
> and operating mobile.
>
> Aalso, there is NO way you van be a law-abiding ham radio operator if
> you're travelling throygh Palmdale, California either as the law there
> alrready stated by Palmdale officials is that it is illegal and
> against the law to have an antenna on your vehicle that is more than
> one inch above the roof of your vehicle. (and ham hts are icompletely
> illegal there. Palmdale officials already said they can confiscate
> them if they catch you with them. And despite what several hams
> thought, the California state court upheld the Palmdale city rulings
> in favor of Palmdale and against the hams, and no federal marshalls
> coming down on either Palmdale or the California state court yet after
> over two years. And no FCC officialss coming down on eiether Palmdale
> or the California state court yet after over two years.
>
> So the FCC lied when they said hams can just operate mobile if they
> can't operate at their homes.
>
> so now we know we can no longer trust any statements the FCC makes.
>
> Even the FCC itself basically said not to trust anything they
> theirselves said when they said that we all should have known from the
> rules that the radios they theirselves said were completely legal were
> actually always illegal, even though all of their rules we read at the
> time said they were completely legal.
>
> And there were not any rules the public could see at the time which
> even remotely suggested they were illegal.
>
> Their own rules at the time said they were completely legal.
>
> But then the FCC did a complete 180 degree turn and said those radios
> always were illegal and never had been legal at any time, even when we
> first bought htem when they claimed they were completely legal.
>
> (no, this is not about the 10 meter cb's)
>
> So now, we can get get put in jail for buying illegal merchandise
> which at the time it was bought, the FCC said was completely legal to
> buy and use.
>
> since they now say it is and always was illegal even at the time they
> theirselves said it was completely legal.
>
> and since doing illegal things is a cause for revoking your ham radio
> license, several hams who thought they were legally buying and legally
> using these radios since the FCC said they were completely legal can
> now have their ham radio licenses revoked for their illegal activities
> since the FCC said they are and always were illegal to buy and illegal
> to use even at the time they theirselves said they were completely
> legal to buy and completely legal to use.
IM (libertarian)O, this is a law made to be broken. I would record (with a
small hidden camera) everytime I was stopped for any reason and broadcast
the recording on Youtube. I would also encourage others to do the same, and
I might even start a bsiness installing the recording equipment on cars. If
it happens, especially on either my, or public, property, it is my
constitutional right to record it. After all, just what are the police
afraid of? The truth? If they don't commit any crimes, then they have
nothing to worry about. Don't forget. These guys are our public
servants.....
richard
May 2, 2012, 11:45:12 AM5/2/12
to
that even tops my stuff.
No it is not illegal to videotape an officer performing his duty in public.
When they say it is illegal, have them identify the law. I'll bet they
won't do it.
And there certainly is no law preventing anyone to broacast an officer's
conversation.
Why? There's this little thing known as "Freedom of speech", for starters.
Kent Wills
May 3, 2012, 4:53:27 AM5/3/12
to
On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:45:12 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>I gotta hand to it to you, you keep coming up with the damndest bullshit
>that even tops my stuff.
>
>No it is not illegal to videotape an officer performing his duty in public.
>When they say it is illegal, have them identify the law. I'll bet they
>won't do it.
If they are in public, there is a diminished expectation of
>
>I gotta hand to it to you, you keep coming up with the damndest bullshit
>that even tops my stuff.
>
>No it is not illegal to videotape an officer performing his duty in public.
>When they say it is illegal, have them identify the law. I'll bet they
>won't do it.
privacy.
An officer filmed giving a citation to a driver, for whatever
reason, shouldn't expect his actions are private.
>And there certainly is no law preventing anyone to broacast an officer's
>conversation.
>
A simple speeding ticket probably could be broadcast. If it's
something that could harm an investigation, probably not.
>Why? There's this little thing known as "Freedom of speech", for starters.
--
'Life is pain. Anybody that says different is selling something.'
-- Fezzik's mother
Message has been deleted
HankG
May 3, 2012, 3:58:20 PM5/3/12
to
"richard" <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:wcz3i1gfjfge$.1tf2bo486gs9q.dlg@40tude.net...
the contents of a radio transmission to a third party'? It always was a
part of the communications act. I guess it would apply to video
'broadcasts' also.
Oh, and Radioguy, I don't usually do this in public forums, but since every
poster chose to include your screed in their response, please repeat after
me: they themselves.
D. Peter Maus
May 7, 2012, 6:12:26 PM5/7/12
to
On 5/2/12 10:45 , richard wrote:
> No it is not illegal to videotape an officer performing his duty in public.
> When they say it is illegal, have them identify the law. I'll bet they
> won't do it.
This is currently in the courts. And it's very much under test in the
> No it is not illegal to videotape an officer performing his duty in public.
> When they say it is illegal, have them identify the law. I'll bet they
> won't do it.
courts in Chicago, where such an ordinance WAS passed recently.
> And there certainly is no law preventing anyone to broacast an officer's
> conversation.
and consent is illegal, according to the regulations of many radio
services. And, recording the voice of anyone without their consent is
illegal in many states. You can video them, but you can't capture the
audio. That's why security cameras are silent.
And, again, it's currently under court test for live action
audio/video of police activities to be broadcast without consent.
>
> Why? There's this little thing known as "Freedom of speech", for starters.
Speech" only refers to the ability of the citizen to speak out against
the government without the government striking back in petty
retribution. It does not confer a consequence free right to publicly
disseminate someone else's speech without permission. "Freedom of
Speech" also refers ONLY to the government not attempting to silence
criticism of the government.
But considering several persons in Congress, including, to name only
one, Senator Barbara Boxer calling for the censure, defunding, and
summary termination from their positions, of meteorologists who do not
sign onto the Global Warming Agenda; and the current program of
silencing, isolation, and revocation of permit for protests in Chicago
related to the NATO conference, you may wish to speak your protests to
your representatives before 'Freedom of Speech" is a noble memory of a
day before The Tyranny.
0 new messages