Michigan Scanner Law

[n8gni]

From the ARRL Monthly Michigan Section News Summary by
Dale WA8EFK

In early May, your SM had the opportunity to provide some testimony before the
Michigan House Judiciary Committee on behalf of amateur radio. The subject
was the proposed revision to MCL 750.508, commonly referred to as the
"Scanner Law" by many of us Michigan hams. State Rep. Kevin Elsenheimer from
Bellair introduced the legislation. The primary intent is to reduce
unnecessary bureaucracy.

For example, are you aware that one employee of the Michigan State Police does
nothing else but issue scanner permits under the present law? As the present
legislation does not define the conditions for getting a permit, the State
Police must issue one to anyone who requests one, regardless of their
background. Secondly, at least twice a year, some innocent ham has his rig
confiscated from his vehicle because an officer did not understand that hams
are authorized by that very law to operate a scanner in their motor vehicle.
Thirdly, under the present law, non-hams cannot legally drive the family
car alone if there is a receiver in the vehicle capable of receiving public
safety radio transmissions. Picture also, the thousands of race fans at MIS
who carry scanners to listen to their favorite driver's race car
transmissions. They too are in violation of the present law, and at that
scale the present law is virtually unenforceable.

Several amateurs in the state as well as ARRL Counsel reviewed early versions
of the new bill. Comments were carefully considered, and the bill revised to
incorporate suggestions offered. The rewritten legislation, House Bill 4544,
passed the Judiciary Committee and has gone to the full House for approval.
It has now had its second reading in the House. Upon the third reading and
passage, it will move to the Senate. You can find the full text in its final
form at http://www.legislature.mi.gov. During the session I attended, Rep.
Elsenheimer spoke very highly of radio amateurs and their contributions to
the citizens of the State of Michigan. It is truly a wonderful experience to
have so many hams participate in the making of law in our state.

[Fizz753]

A person shall not carry or have in his or her possession in the commission or attempted commission of a crime a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on a frequency assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States for police, fire fighting, or emergency medical purposes.

Now thats a great improvment over the current law. Lets hope it passes.

Vince

[jimsokol]

Passed the House. Now in the Senate.

...jim

[cdenton]

I graduated from high school with that guy (Rep. Elsenheimer).
I'm so proud of him right now.

[OntarioScannerNut]

I'm glad to see this passed. When I went to the states a few years ago to the Nascar races I submitted an application for a permit so I wouldn't be breaking the law.

I said, you can either take my tourist $$$ or leave it. Apparently they wanted my $$$ so they gave me a permit. Now it looks like I won't even need one now the next time I go.

Good work Michigan.

http://www.cheboygannews.com/article...news/news2.txt

"One of the first groups to benefit from this change is NASCAR fans who come to Michigan and use scanners to listen to the communication between their favorite drivers and the pit crew," Elsenheimer explained. "Right now, to experience this part of the racing action you either need to apply for and receive a permit or you are breaking Michigan law."

[jimsokol]

Don't get too excited yet. It only passed the house. Still has to go thru the Senate, and if it makes it thru there would have to be signed by the governess.

...jim

[mikey60]

Originally Posted by jimsokol

Don't get too excited yet. It only passed the house. Still has to go thru the Senate, and if it makes it thru there would have to be signed by the governess.

...jim

And even then, it wouldn't take effect for 90 days...

Mike

[MetalManMI]

Originally Posted by Fizz753

Now thats a great improvment over the current law. Lets hope it passes.

Vince

Be careful of what you ask for! Remember, "a crime" includes any misdemeanor...not just a felony! There are LOTS of misdemeanors that could unexpectadly hang the scanner carrying traveler with additional hefty fines and/or jail time under the language of this bill...

As it stands, there is NO provision that the scanner be USED in the commission of the crime...as a tool...just the mere fact that the person HAS the scanner at the time of the "crime" is enough to evoke this penality...AND, there is no longer any exclusions for HAMS and LEOS.

I think it still needs work before it is "better" than what we currently have...

:?

[rtripp]

Remember, possessing a handheld radio is not equipping the vehicle. It's been fought in court and proven.

[cdenton]

What about speeding?
Are some speeding tickets misdemeanors, or are they all civil infractions?
I wonder: if someone were driving fast enough, and had a scanner, could they could be prosecuted under this new law?
That's a scary thought.
It could turn a speeding ticket into a major offense.

[MetalManMI]

Originally Posted by cdenton

What about speeding?
Are some speeding tickets misdemeanors, or are they all civil infractions?
I wonder: if someone were driving fast enough, and had a scanner, could they could be prosecuted under this new law?
That's a scary thought.
It could turn a speeding ticket into a major offense.

Only if it is deemed reckless driving...

8)

[cdenton]

What about Careless Driving, I wonder. In Michigan, you can be charged with careless/reckless based on speed alone. Rolling 90-95 mph down a wide-open interstate can net an arrest and an impound. 100 mph could lead to real trouble. Lots of people go that fast once in a while (just got a new car, et cetera). Where I live, traffic frequently flows between 80 and 85, and that's in the "urban" 55 mph slow-down zone.
Technically, I could get into big trouble just because I'm trying not to get run over by some hot-shoe in a Hummer!

[Chief71]

I hope this helps so here are some examples of misdemeanors that you can get charged for while driving (so be careful if the new law passes):

-driving w/o a license
-violating a restricted license
-driving on an expired license
-OWI or OUID
-impaired driving
-open intox in a vehicle
-MIP of alcohol
-giving alcohol to a minor
-violation of a school speed zone
-disregarding school bus signals
-failure to obey a school crossing guard
-reckless driving
-drag racing
-spilling a load......

[Chief71]

.....continued from above

-disobey police officer signal
-failing to stop and identify at an injury accident or a damage accident
-failure to report an accident
-no proof of registration when driving a motorcycle
-driving a motorcycle without an endorsement

[Fizz753]

Originally Posted by MetalManMI

Be careful of what you ask for! Remember, "a crime" includes any misdemeanor...not just a felony! There are LOTS of misdemeanors that could unexpectadly hang the scanner carrying traveler with additional hefty fines and/or jail time under the language of this bill...

As it stands, there is NO provision that the scanner be USED in the commission of the crime...as a tool...just the mere fact that the person HAS the scanner at the time of the "crime" is enough to evoke this penality...AND, there is no longer any exclusions for HAMS and LEOS.

I think it still needs work before it is "better" than what we currently have...

:?

You bring up some intresting points I have not thought of. I am curious how would you write this law?

AND, there is no longer any exclusions for HAMS and LEOS.

Removing the exclusions is fine with me, after all if one were just caught committing a crime why should one get special treatment. As a note I am also a HAM. If I comited a crime I should be hit as hard as any other person.

[MetalManMI]

Originally Posted by Fizz753

You bring up some intresting points I have not thought of. I am curious how would you write this law?

Essentially, it should have language that specifically prohibits the USE of a scanner in the commission of a crime. However, the opponents of this bill have already testified that it would be difficult to prove that the scanner was actually being USED, so that is why it is worded the way it is...leaves the applicability of this statute wide open...based on merely being in possession of a scanner, on your person walking down the street or in a vehicle...or in your home...doesn't matter!

Originally Posted by Fizz753

Removing the exclusions is fine with me, after all if one were just caught committing a crime why should one get special treatment. As a note I am also a HAM. If I comited a crime I should be hit as hard as any other person.

The reason I brought that up is, the current law does NOT apply to HAMS, LEOS, or anybody that has a "grant upon request" permit from Michigan State Police (MSP). Someone who is covered in one of or all three ways today...all of the sudden is subject to penalties that may be 100% unrelated, merely because they have a scanner with them (HAMS and LEOS usually WILL have a scanner with them) and happen to be charged with a misdemeanor...now they have to defend against TWO charges instead of one! This kind of increases the penalties and creates a bias against those that will likely have a radio receiver capable of receiving police, fire...etc., etc. frequencies.

I'm glad to see this is being addressed, but I am surprised that AARL is supporting it in its current form/wording. It needs work or it will become more of an issue than it currently is (for those that know of the law and have taken steps to abide by it).

8)