User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 12:09:15 PM EDT
[#1]
yeah, interfering with public service radio systems isnt a good idea. the fact that he was notified that he might be causing problems and then continued to TX just goes to show he has no respect for anything other than himself.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 12:12:17 PM EDT
[#2]
I wonder if this was just a residence?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 1:59:21 PM EDT
[#3]
HMMMMM........
I am kinda torn on something like this, he has his 4th amendment rights. He is not required to be licensed for CB, if there was enough evidence that it is in fact him creating interference why can they just get a search warrant and then look? From what I understand the forfeiture is very difficult for them to enforce, I was reading an article about a HAM up in Boston? I think that has been a thorn in the side of the community for quite some time, and the FCC has been trying to get a ton of money from him also. They cannot revoke his license even after having almost a thousand letters from hams saying and recording him interfering with their transmissions. He even started a company as an "Alternative to ARRL" that has been listed by his state AG as a scam company. I guess that once he got the notice he should have 1) STFU and stop interfering or using amplifiers 2) Told the FCC to STFU and come look at my equipment, that they got the wrong guy. I am sure that after he got the notice and kept doing that they were watching him and got some evidence against him. Play stupid games win stupid prizes i guess. If the dumb ass wants to DX he just needs to get a damn HAM license and be done with it! Now he wont be able to do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 2:06:20 PM EDT
[#4]
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter.
I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 3:36:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. Pretty much my take on it! Of course us being licensed we would have not choice but to allow them in to inspect. That I would not have as much of a problem with since I knew that getting licensed and if I was interfering with the FD I would want to get it corrected asap and not be an idiot about it. The article definitely lacked a lot of details. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 3:48:38 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. The FCC has a right to inspect even if a license to operate is not required. Here's a link to the FCC's web site that covers this. Make sure you also read the FAQ's. http://www.fcc.gov/eb/otherinfo/inspect.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 4:12:39 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. The FCC has a right to inspect even if a license to operate is not required. Here's a link to the FCC's web site that covers this. Make sure you also read the FAQ's. http://www.fcc.gov/eb/otherinfo/inspect.html The FCC is a government agency and is therefor bound by the same rules as any law enforcement agency. Just because they a primarily a regulatory agency doesn't mean they automatically get a pass on violation of your 4th amendment rights. If they suspect it was him, RX till you have the evidence to get a warrant then go from there. YES, the guy was a dick, and very much in the wrong IF it was him doing it. Still the FCC can not automatically search his property because they're the FCC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 4:26:20 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Quoted: as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. The FCC has a right to inspect even if a license to operate is not required. Here's a link to the FCC's web site that covers this. Make sure you also read the FAQ's. http://www.fcc.gov/eb/otherinfo/inspect.html unconstitutional bullshit in the firearm world the ATF cant just walk into your house and look at your guns, however if you get an FFL, and therefore waive your 4th rights, they can. no license for CB? then you are just being a regular citizen with the full protection of the US Constitution.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 6:59:00 PM EDT
[#9]
I believe I would make the FCC subpoena my gear and prove their assertions in a court of law.
The guy also has 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination, in addition to the 4th. Prove it, Flatfoot!! I don't think any regulatory agency should be able to merely make an assertion and levy a fine without due process. If he broke the law, take him to task....in court.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 7:46:51 PM EDT
[#10]
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio.
Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 7:51:25 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 7:53:50 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 7:55:05 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. The FCC has a right to inspect even if a license to operate is not required. Here's a link to the FCC's web site that covers this. Make sure you also read the FAQ's. http://www.fcc.gov/eb/otherinfo/inspect.html The government has no rights. The concept does not exist in the American system.  Seems like a nitpick, but it's a fundamentally important distinction.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2011 8:36:27 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right? A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I have no problem with them inspecting me, I have a license and I would want to know how to minimize interference. the idea that the government can just do an inspection with out a warrant is in complete violation of the 4th amendment, call it an inspection if you want, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 6:16:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? It would not be unconstitutional for the FCC to inspect the station of a licensee. To inspect the home of unlicensed Joe or Jane Public without a court order would contradict the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 7:27:38 AM EDT
[#16]
INSPECTION AUTHORITY
Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 7:39:45 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. Do investigators need a warrant if there is probable cause? Police don't, but I don't know if that applies to the FCC as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 8:48:03 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: Quoted: as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. Do investigators need a warrant if there is probable cause? Police don't, but I don't know if that applies to the FCC as well. umm... police need one for your home, probable cause is how they get the warrant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 8:50:06 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: INSPECTION AUTHORITY Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. and congress passed healthcare, and thats not constitutional either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 8:53:18 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
INSPECTION AUTHORITY Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. Yeah, sorry. I don't care how much of that statist crap you dredge up, the Federal Communications Commission has no 'rights.' |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:13:44 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: INSPECTION AUTHORITY Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. Those 'regulations' are still on the books in that form because nobody has challenged their Constitutionality yet. Say what you will about the FCC's 'rights'.....the guy in the original story was not a licensed amatuer. He was a 'joe citizen' who allegedly had a CB radio. I'd just tell them to PROVE I even HAVE a radio....let alone allow some bearucrat to 'inspect' my home. Get a warrant. You catch me out with a CB radio in my car where it can be readily seen...that's a different story. Personally, I don't have much use for CB radio folks...they run shitty equipment, like cheap linears, and act like 3 graders on the air. They cause RF interference to other peoples electronics....but I just don't believe a federal agent has any business going into anyone's home without a warrant, outside of obious life threatening circumstances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:26:38 AM EDT
[#22]
They don't need to see the equipment.
Sit outside the house with DF gear. As soon as they positively identify that it came from his house, he's busted. End of story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:40:50 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: They don't need to see the equipment. Sit outside the house with DF gear. As soon as they positively identify that it came from his house, he's busted. End of story. it would be hard to do in some locations, house in the middle of a field? sure but getting 360 on anything while isolating the building and not getting too close would be hard to do. and at that point, use that information to go get a warrant and sink the bastard.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:52:59 AM EDT
[#24]
Just hand them a $40 bone stock CB and let them stand on the front porch?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 10:04:38 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Just hand them a $40 bone stock CB and let them stand on the front porch? Just give them your garage door opener. Claim spurious emissions due to shoddy workmanship. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 10:19:42 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't need to see the equipment. Sit outside the house with DF gear. As soon as they positively identify that it came from his house, he's busted. End of story. it would be hard to do in some locations, house in the middle of a field? sure but getting 360 on anything while isolating the building and not getting too close would be hard to do. and at that point, use that information to go get a warrant and sink the bastard. What I am saying is, they already have intel/hunch/thoughts/suspicions that it is caused by him. All they need is to verify that. If they cannot gain access to the equipment, then monitor for signals emitting from the residence. Seems easy enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 2:06:22 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They don't need to see the equipment. Sit outside the house with DF gear. As soon as they positively identify that it came from his house, he's busted. End of story. it would be hard to do in some locations, house in the middle of a field? sure but getting 360 on anything while isolating the building and not getting too close would be hard to do. and at that point, use that information to go get a warrant and sink the bastard. What I am saying is, they already have intel/hunch/thoughts/suspicions that it is caused by him. All they need is to verify that. If they cannot gain access to the equipment, then monitor for signals emitting from the residence. Seems easy enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 2:35:37 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
they should still need a warrant. all of those things are great and should make getting one extremely easy. Agreed. No doubt about it..no one should be able to enter you home without a warrant. But I am saying that if they catch him in the act, i.e. transmissions are coming from his house, then they can cite/fine him with that as is. Someone outside of my house can certainly tell if I am transmitting outside of my band/mode/power restrictions. Sure... it would be nice to see the equipment, but not 100% necessary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 2:56:02 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: they should still need a warrant. all of those things are great and should make getting one extremely easy. Agreed. No doubt about it..no one should be able to enter you home without a warrant. But I am saying that if they catch him in the act, i.e. transmissions are coming from his house, then they can cite/fine him with that as is. Someone outside of my house can certainly tell if I am transmitting outside of my band/mode/power restrictions. Sure... it would be nice to see the equipment, but not 100% necessary. no they shouldn't, if I am a cop, and I smell pot coming from your house can I cite you for possession? no, but it makes for good reason to get a warrant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 3:45:31 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just hand them a $40 bone stock CB and let them stand on the front porch? Just give them your garage door opener. Claim spurious emissions due to shoddy workmanship. 
"Mr fcc, I would be more than happy to let you inspect my station, but I must warn you, I was in the middle of cleaning my rocket launchers and belt fed machine guns, so please do not worry about the hardware laying around. Oh and the gay porn is not mine, it is the midget in the corner that is tied up that was watching it. So please come on in!" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 8:08:28 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? It would not be unconstitutional for the FCC to inspect the station of a licensee. To inspect the home of unlicensed Joe or Jane Public without a court order would contradict the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. the owners manual of every radio sold in the US has an FCC notice informing the buyer to be away that even though its CB it your still being bound by FCC regs by using said radio. i check last night just to make sure. most manuals are available on line if you want to look for yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 8:13:55 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
Quoted:
INSPECTION AUTHORITY Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. Those 'regulations' are still on the books in that form because nobody has challenged their Constitutionality yet. Say what you will about the FCC's 'rights'.....the guy in the original story was not a licensed amatuer. He was a 'joe citizen' who allegedly had a CB radio. I'd just tell them to PROVE I even HAVE a radio....let alone allow some bearucrat to 'inspect' my home. Get a warrant. You catch me out with a CB radio in my car where it can be readily seen...that's a different story. Personally, I don't have much use for CB radio folks...they run shitty equipment, like cheap linears, and act like 3 graders on the air. They cause RF interference to other peoples electronics....but I just don't believe a federal agent has any business going into anyone's home without a warrant, outside of obious life threatening circumstances. so you think that this yahoo interfering with the public safety freq's isnt a life threatening circumstance? interesting. if i get attacked on the scene of an ambulance call and cant contact EOC because of your illegal gear washing out my traffic i can tell you this. if i live, you wouldnt have a good day when i find you. so yes, this could be a life threatening issue since he isnt interfering with a amateur operator he is doing it to wither fire, ems, of the pd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:00:16 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? It would not be unconstitutional for the FCC to inspect the station of a licensee. To inspect the home of unlicensed Joe or Jane Public without a court order would contradict the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. the owners manual of every radio sold in the US has an FCC notice informing the buyer to be away that even though its CB it your still being bound by FCC regs by using said radio. i check last night just to make sure. most manuals are available on line if you want to look for yourself. Why do you persist in this? It does not matter if they print a flyer on extra fancy paper and include a copy in every box of cracker-jacks. The constitution is the law of the land. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2011 9:54:40 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: INSPECTION AUTHORITY Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n) Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act, grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR 0.111(a). Both licensees and non-licensees must allow an FCC Agent to inspect their radio equipment. Along with the privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the applicable rules, including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees should be aware of the Commission's right to inspect. Equally important, FCC Agents are allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees. Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance with Part 15 of the Rules. Non-licensees also include those who should have a license to operate their equipment but have not obtained a license and are operating without authority. Those 'regulations' are still on the books in that form because nobody has challenged their Constitutionality yet. Say what you will about the FCC's 'rights'.....the guy in the original story was not a licensed amatuer. He was a 'joe citizen' who allegedly had a CB radio. I'd just tell them to PROVE I even HAVE a radio....let alone allow some bearucrat to 'inspect' my home. Get a warrant. You catch me out with a CB radio in my car where it can be readily seen...that's a different story. Personally, I don't have much use for CB radio folks...they run shitty equipment, like cheap linears, and act like 3 graders on the air. They cause RF interference to other peoples electronics....but I just don't believe a federal agent has any business going into anyone's home without a warrant, outside of obious life threatening circumstances. so you think that this yahoo interfering with the public safety freq's isnt a life threatening circumstance? interesting. if i get attacked on the scene of an ambulance call and cant contact EOC because of your illegal gear washing out my traffic i can tell you this. if i live, you wouldnt have a good day when i find you. so yes, this could be a life threatening issue since he isnt interfering with a amateur operator he is doing it to wither fire, ems, of the pd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 6:36:18 AM EDT
[#35]
you need a license to operate these things?
my radio works fine without one. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 6:45:28 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
no they shouldn't, if I am a cop, and I smell pot coming from your house can I cite you for possession? no, but it makes for good reason to get a warrant. Surely they cannot cite you for posession, as they have no proof of your posession. They havea hunch, but they cannot prove it without further evidence. Likewise, they are not necessarily citing this man for having non-compliant equipment. They are citing him for unlawful emissions. It is not only unlawful to use non-type accepted equipent, it is also unlawful to transmit outside the modes/frequencies alloted.The latter can be proven quite easily with DF equipment. I'm not saying that they can cite him for an equipment violation based on transmissions outside his allowed areas. But they can certainly fine him for the transmissions themselves.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 9:13:10 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? It would not be unconstitutional for the FCC to inspect the station of a licensee. To inspect the home of unlicensed Joe or Jane Public without a court order would contradict the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. the owners manual of every radio sold in the US has an FCC notice informing the buyer to be away that even though its CB it your still being bound by FCC regs by using said radio. i check last night just to make sure. most manuals are available on line if you want to look for yourself. Why do you persist in this? It does not matter if they print a flyer on extra fancy paper and include a copy in every box of cracker-jacks. The constitution is the law of the land. why do you persist on refusing to see the facts? when you purchased and started using said equipment you agreed to follow the rules. as i said earlier, if you dont like the rules sell your gear and give up your license. its that simple. do you rent where you live? if so, the land lord has the right to come in and inspect the property any time he wants. some states require 24 hour notice but some dont. so does that mean its unconstitutional and he needs a warrant to come in? what about FFL holders? when they acquired there license they agreed to allowing the BATFE in anytime for inspection. so now you think that the ATF needs a warrant to inspect FFL holders place of business and there paperwork? those same FFL holders agreed to the rules. if you dont like the rules hire a lawyer and fight them so the FCC would need a warrant for an "inspection". if your not going to do anything about it other than bitch, STFU. man up or shut up. its that simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 9:15:59 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
as much as I disagree with what he is doing, he never received a license and agreed to waive his 4th amendment rights in the matter. I kinda feel that the 4th trumps in this case and that he wins until they get a search warrant to charge him accordingly. +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 11:37:34 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the rules to operating radios in the US eludes some of you. no warrant needed per the FCC since its not a criminal matter. those of you calling this BS might want to read the FCC rules and understand them. if you dont agree with them then its time for you to give up your license and sell your gear. not trying to start a pissing match but facts are facts. dont like them, dont use a radio. Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don't have to let him in, right? A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission's Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a "blanket" rule or approval, such as Citizen's Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission's inspection requirement. I don't think that would pass constitutional muster. it has and it does. its an inspection, why would you think that would be unconstitutional? It would not be unconstitutional for the FCC to inspect the station of a licensee. To inspect the home of unlicensed Joe or Jane Public without a court order would contradict the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. the owners manual of every radio sold in the US has an FCC notice informing the buyer to be away that even though its CB it your still being bound by FCC regs by using said radio. i check last night just to make sure. most manuals are available on line if you want to look for yourself. Why do you persist in this? It does not matter if they print a flyer on extra fancy paper and include a copy in every box of cracker-jacks. The constitution is the law of the land. why do you persist on refusing to see the facts? when you purchased and started using said equipment you agreed to follow the rules. as i said earlier, if you dont like the rules sell your gear and give up your license. its that simple. do you rent where you live? if so, the land lord has the right to come in and inspect the property any time he wants. some states require 24 hour notice but some dont. so does that mean its unconstitutional and he needs a warrant to come in? what about FFL holders? when they acquired there license they agreed to allowing the BATFE in anytime for inspection. so now you think that the ATF needs a warrant to inspect FFL holders place of business and there paperwork? those same FFL holders agreed to the rules. if you dont like the rules hire a lawyer and fight them so the FCC would need a warrant for an "inspection". if your not going to do anything about it other than bitch, STFU. man up or shut up. its that simple. your landlord is not the government, they own the property and maintain the right to go into their building when you get an FFL, you sign away your 4th amendment rights, with regard to your firearms on book for your FFL work, their scope is extremely limited and I believe they are not allowed to come in to your home if you don't want them to, you just have to let them inspect your books and firearms, probably different for people who don't operate out of their house, but what ever point remains, you sign away that right. you don't seem to understand that laws on the books can be unconstitutional, or illegal. I suppose you are perfectly ok with the healthcare law now that Obango signed it into law.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 5:26:07 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
if your not going to do anything about it other than bitch, STFU. man up or shut up. its that simple. Go ahead and send the FCC to my house to inspect my garage door opener. I'll tell them to come back with a warrant. They will, or they can go pound sand. As far as simple, it doesn't get any more simple than me refusing to adhere to plainly unconstitutional laws and regulations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 6:12:19 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
if your not going to do anything about it other than bitch, STFU. man up or shut up. its that simple. Go ahead and send the FCC to my house to inspect my garage door opener. I'll tell them to come back with a warrant. They will, or they can go pound sand. As far as simple, it doesn't get any more simple than me refusing to adhere to plainly unconstitutional laws and regulations. they wont come back with a warrant, they will come back with your fine and when you dont pay or contest it they will seize your house. just because you feel something is unconstitutional doesnt make it so. the FCC has the power to inspect your gear without a warrant. thats the bottom line. again, its an inspection, nothing more. if your running legal gear then you shouldnt have an issue. no where does it say you cant bring the gear outside for them to inspect, does it? fight the gov over something like this and you are going to lose. just like the guy in this story. dont like, you quoted me, read it again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 6:15:20 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
when you get an FFL, you sign away your 4th amendment rights, with regard to your firearms on book for your FFL work, their scope is extremely limited and I believe they are not allowed to come in to your home if you don't want them to, you just have to let them inspect your books and firearms, probably different for people who don't operate out of their house, but what ever point remains, you sign away that right. you don't seem to understand that laws on the books can be unconstitutional, or illegal. I suppose you are perfectly ok with the healthcare law now that Obango signed it into law. i understand the laws, i have read them unlike some here. maybe you missed that part when you were studying for your amateur license. the FCC rules clearly states the FCC has the right to inspect any gear that is used on there airwaves since they own them, pro, amateur or even CB. thats a fact. dont like, do something about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 8:50:18 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Quoted: when you get an FFL, you sign away your 4th amendment rights, with regard to your firearms on book for your FFL work, their scope is extremely limited and I believe they are not allowed to come in to your home if you don't want them to, you just have to let them inspect your books and firearms, probably different for people who don't operate out of their house, but what ever point remains, you sign away that right. you don't seem to understand that laws on the books can be unconstitutional, or illegal. I suppose you are perfectly ok with the healthcare law now that Obango signed it into law. i understand the laws, i have read them unlike some here. maybe you missed that part when you were studying for your amateur license. the FCC rules clearly states the FCC has the right to inspect any gear that is used on there airwaves since they own them, pro, amateur or even CB. thats a fact. dont like, do something about it. i read it and agree with it in my case where I have gotten a license and agreed to subject my equipment to that. I know that I will never knowingly break any FCC rules or regulations and would very much appreciate any help anyone can give me should I be operating a malfunctioning station. I agreed to those rules with my signature on a piece of paper sent to the FCC, the person in this story however did not (assumption) henceforth it is my belief and understanding that enforcement of those rules on him at this level would be a violation of his 4th amendment rights and there for total bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 9:22:24 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
when you get an FFL, you sign away your 4th amendment rights, with regard to your firearms on book for your FFL work, their scope is extremely limited and I believe they are not allowed to come in to your home if you don't want them to, you just have to let them inspect your books and firearms, probably different for people who don't operate out of their house, but what ever point remains, you sign away that right. you don't seem to understand that laws on the books can be unconstitutional, or illegal. I suppose you are perfectly ok with the healthcare law now that Obango signed it into law. i understand the laws, i have read them unlike some here. maybe you missed that part when you were studying for your amateur license. the FCC rules clearly states the FCC has the right to inspect any gear that is used on there airwaves since they own them, pro, amateur or even CB. thats a fact. dont like, do something about it. i read it and agree with it in my case where I have gotten a license and agreed to subject my equipment to that. I know that I will never knowingly break any FCC rules or regulations and would very much appreciate any help anyone can give me should I be operating a malfunctioning station. I agreed to those rules with my signature on a piece of paper sent to the FCC, the person in this story however did not (assumption) henceforth it is my belief and understanding that enforcement of those rules on him at this level would be a violation of his 4th amendment rights and there for total bullshit. as i stated earlier, if you read the owners manual that comes with CB's you will see there is a notation that states that users of the CB band must also conform to the same FCC regs as licensed users of other bands. it even encourages you to read them and understand them before TXing with your new radio in some/most cases of the OM. so by purchasing and using the CB you have agreed to those terms. the person in this story could have simply presented his radio to the FCC inspector and this would have never been a problem. it seems to me that he knew his gear was causing interference so he wanted to be a dick. well the FCC has been an even bigger dick and slapped him with a fine. he could have prevented it all and then just saying he didnt tamper with his gear and he would stop using it and replace it with non defective gear. but since we are talking about the chicken band im sure the gear was modded or he was running an illegal linear so he knew he was in the wrong. it really is rare for the FCC to press it as far as this has gone. usually they dont care that someone is bleeding over on other freq's but in this case the guy is bleeding over on public safety freq's so im sure they want it to end because the EOC is probably the one filing the report. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 11:05:20 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: when you get an FFL, you sign away your 4th amendment rights, with regard to your firearms on book for your FFL work, their scope is extremely limited and I believe they are not allowed to come in to your home if you don't want them to, you just have to let them inspect your books and firearms, probably different for people who don't operate out of their house, but what ever point remains, you sign away that right. you don't seem to understand that laws on the books can be unconstitutional, or illegal. I suppose you are perfectly ok with the healthcare law now that Obango signed it into law. i understand the laws, i have read them unlike some here. maybe you missed that part when you were studying for your amateur license. the FCC rules clearly states the FCC has the right to inspect any gear that is used on there airwaves since they own them, pro, amateur or even CB. thats a fact. dont like, do something about it. i read it and agree with it in my case where I have gotten a license and agreed to subject my equipment to that. I know that I will never knowingly break any FCC rules or regulations and would very much appreciate any help anyone can give me should I be operating a malfunctioning station. I agreed to those rules with my signature on a piece of paper sent to the FCC, the person in this story however did not (assumption) henceforth it is my belief and understanding that enforcement of those rules on him at this level would be a violation of his 4th amendment rights and there for total bullshit. as i stated earlier, if you read the owners manual that comes with CB's you will see there is a notation that states that users of the CB band must also conform to the same FCC regs as licensed users of other bands. it even encourages you to read them and understand them before TXing with your new radio in some/most cases of the OM. so by purchasing and using the CB you have agreed to those terms. the person in this story could have simply presented his radio to the FCC inspector and this would have never been a problem. it seems to me that he knew his gear was causing interference so he wanted to be a dick. well the FCC has been an even bigger dick and slapped him with a fine. he could have prevented it all and then just saying he didnt tamper with his gear and he would stop using it and replace it with non defective gear. but since we are talking about the chicken band im sure the gear was modded or he was running an illegal linear so he knew he was in the wrong. it really is rare for the FCC to press it as far as this has gone. usually they dont care that someone is bleeding over on other freq's but in this case the guy is bleeding over on public safety freq's so im sure they want it to end because the EOC is probably the one filing the report. in my case I signed away my right in the CB case, they never had the right. thats the difference thats why its wrong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2011 11:37:31 PM EDT
[#46]
The FCC can investigate any source of radio intererence caused by lots of devices besides radios.
They have gear that can pinpoint the source of the interference. The guy f-ed up, got caught, boo hoo. His broadcasts where screwing up the local FD's radios, how would you like your house burning to the ground cause the fire departments radios where blocked? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2011 12:02:41 AM EDT
[#47]
All of you might wanna check the back of your computers / laptops for that same FCC Part 15 statement.....
The FCC doesn't do this (go after this guy) cause they are bored, there is a reason. His radio broadcasts where interfering with the public safety, i.e. the fire departments radios. If he had just complied the first time they came by he more then likely would have just been told the decrease power, a slap on his pee-pee. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2011 3:46:37 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
All of you might wanna check the back of your computers / laptops for that same FCC Part 15 statement..... The FCC doesn't do this (go after this guy) cause they are bored, there is a reason. His radio broadcasts where interfering with the public safety, i.e. the fire departments radios. If he had just complied the first time they came by he more then likely would have just been told the decrease power, a slap on his pee-pee. So as long as I print a small blurb on the back of everything, I can violate the Constitution at will? It amazes me how may sheep willingly go along with statist nonsense. The fact that the majority of you fall for it and willingly bend over for it is exactly why they do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2011 5:40:49 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: The FCC can investigate any source of radio intererence caused by lots of devices besides radios. They have gear that can pinpoint the source of the interference. The guy f-ed up, got caught, boo hoo. His broadcasts where screwing up the local FD's radios, how would you like your house burning to the ground cause the fire departments radios where blocked? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2011 7:01:22 AM EDT
[#50]
Wired magazine has an article dealing with this particular case, and the controversy of the FCC's claims here:
Link to Wired |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
