frequency counters

[scanfan03]

Here's one to ponder over.

Are frequency counters legal in all states?

 

[Voyager]

Here's one to ponder over.

Are frequency counters legal in all states?

I am not aware of any that prohibit them. Most only want scanners illegal so you 'can't' listen to the state/local governments. Counters don't do that. Now, something like the Opto Xplorer is another matter.

Joe M.

 

[LarrySC]

They are considered to be a service tool.

 

[AZScanner]

Here's one to ponder over.

Are frequency counters legal in all states?

Hmmmmmmm!!! Good question! First off, let me clarify that I'm by no means a lawyer, let alone an expert on the interpretation of Michigan state law. But, having read thru myriads of proposed scanner laws over the years, I've become pretty well versed in how a scanner is legally defined.

Basically, it all depends on your state's legal definition of a scanner and the interpretation thereof. For example, in Michigan, it is defined as follows:

Sec. 508.
(1) Any person who shall equip a vehicle with a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on frequencies assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States of America for police purposes, or use the same in this state unless the vehicle is used or owned by a peace officer, or a bona fide amateur radio operator holding a technician class, general, advanced, or extra class amateur license issued by the federal communications commission, without first securing a permit so to do from the director of the department of state police upon application as he or she may prescribe, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

(2) This section does not apply to the use of radar detectors.

By this definition, since a frequency counter is capable of receiving signals sent on police frequencies, it falls under the legal definition of a scanner. Note the specific exemption for radar detectors! Now, depending on the radar band most commonly in use (and how good your lawyer is), a frequency counter could be arguably a rudimentary radar detector and thereby exempt. Good luck on that argument though, as it's purpose is detecting ALL nearby transmissions in it's receiving range, not just radar. That's where the really good lawyer comes in. :wink:

The thing that bears reminding here is the fact that laws like this don't just happen for no good reason. At some point, someone with a scanner did something stupid and now we all get to pay the price for that individuals stupidity. Chances are, it was either ambo chasers or tow truck drivers that were abusing the privelege to monitor a scanner while mobile. All it takes is a select few retards to spoil it for everyone. There's a lesson in there somewhere..... and that should give us ALL something to ponder.

-AZ

 

[scanfan03]

Since I'm in Texas, I'm in the clear.

 

[Voyager]

Basically, it all depends on your state's legal definition of a scanner and the interpretation thereof. For example, in Michigan, it is defined as follows:

Sec. 508.
(1) Any person who shall equip a vehicle with a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on frequencies assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States of America for police purposes, or use the same in this state unless the vehicle is used or owned by a peace officer, or a bona fide amateur radio operator holding a technician class, general, advanced, or extra class amateur license issued by the federal communications commission, without first securing a permit so to do from the director of the department of state police upon application as he or she may prescribe, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

(2) This section does not apply to the use of radar detectors.

By this definition, since a frequency counter is capable of receiving signals sent on police frequencies, it falls under the legal definition of a scanner. Note the specific exemption for radar detectors! Now, depending on the radar band most commonly in use (and how good your lawyer is), a frequency counter could be arguably a rudimentary radar detector and thereby exempt. Good luck on that argument though, as it's purpose is detecting ALL nearby transmissions in it's receiving range, not just radar. That's where the really good lawyer comes in. :wink:

Using your own terminology, a frequency counter is a DETECTOR, not a RECEIVER. A device like the Xplorer is a receiver. Someone else used the term 'service tools'. Facts are facts. Counters detect, or count. They do not receive. If frequency counters WERE receivers, they would be required to block Cellular. I know if no such block in any counter, so they are not considered receivers by the FCC's own definition.

From Webster:

7. That portion of a telephonic apparatus, or similar system, at which the message is received and made audible; -- opposed to transmitter.

A frequency counter does not make the signal audible. Therefore, it is NOT a receiver. The same is true for a radar detector. The fact that Michigan specifically exempts only radar detectors does not exclude any other similar devices. I'm sure someone simply lobbied for that specification in the law. (most likely those who manufacture radar detectors)

Joe M.

 

[AZScanner]

Using your own terminology, a frequency counter is a DETECTOR, not a RECEIVER. A device like the Xplorer is a receiver. Someone else used the term 'service tools'. Facts are facts. Counters detect, or count. They do not receive. If frequency counters WERE receivers, they would be required to block Cellular. I know if no such block in any counter, so they are not considered receivers by the FCC's own definition.

From Webster:

7. That portion of a telephonic apparatus, or similar system, at which the message is received and made audible; -- opposed to transmitter.

A frequency counter does not make the signal audible. Therefore, it is NOT a receiver. The same is true for a radar detector. The fact that Michigan specifically exempts only radar detectors does not exclude any other similar devices. I'm sure someone simply lobbied for that specification in the law. (most likely those who manufacture radar detectors)

Hee, heee... I love a good debate...

Again, I'm not an attorney - maybe someone here is and can clarify? But in my humble and relatively meaningless opinion, it's not Websters' definition that counts, but Michigans'. And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner. End of story. There is no clause in the definition Michigan uses that defines the word RECEIVE to mean "make audible". They left that open to legal interpretation. Think about it this way: if Websters' definition was the legal definition used by Michigan, there would be no need to exempt radar detectors - they would already be exempt, right?

That's the legal world. Here's the real world: If someone was going around robbing banks and using a frequency counter to detect PRONet transmitters they would tack on the charge of carrying a "scanner" illegally, just to add more time to the jail sentence. If you were simply speeding and got pulled over with the frequency counter on your lap, you'd probably only get a speeding ticket.

Again, if there's an attorney in the house, I'd love to have their take on this.

-AZ

 

[N_Jay]

receive:
verb: convert into sounds or pictures (Example: "Receive the incoming radio signals")

 

[Voyager]

Using your own terminology, a frequency counter is a DETECTOR, not a RECEIVER. A device like the Xplorer is a receiver. Someone else used the term 'service tools'. Facts are facts. Counters detect, or count. They do not receive. If frequency counters WERE receivers, they would be required to block Cellular. I know if no such block in any counter, so they are not considered receivers by the FCC's own definition.

From Webster:

7. That portion of a telephonic apparatus, or similar system, at which the message is received and made audible; -- opposed to transmitter.

A frequency counter does not make the signal audible. Therefore, it is NOT a receiver. The same is true for a radar detector. The fact that Michigan specifically exempts only radar detectors does not exclude any other similar devices. I'm sure someone simply lobbied for that specification in the law. (most likely those who manufacture radar detectors)

Hee, heee... I love a good debate...

Again, I'm not an attorney - maybe someone here is and can clarify? But in my humble and relatively meaningless opinion, it's not Websters' definition that counts, but Michigans'. And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner. End of story. There is no clause in the definition Michigan uses that defines the word RECEIVE to mean "make audible". They left that open to legal interpretation. Think about it this way: if Websters' definition was the legal definition used by Michigan, there would be no need to exempt radar detectors - they would already be exempt, right?

That's the legal world. Here's the real world: If someone was going around robbing banks and using a frequency counter to detect PRONet transmitters they would tack on the charge of carrying a "scanner" illegally, just to add more time to the jail sentence.

Last point first: They might charge them, but if they are SMART, they won't because it can open up a way to have the conviction overturned on a technicality - a counter is not a receiver or a scanner. You want your case to be as tight as possible - with as few technicalities to be found as possible. They may charge him with it, but certainly won't bring it up in court or base his jain time on it. (again, if they are smart)

Now the other point: No matter what someone wants a word to mean, there are specific definitions. You can't say a word means something different in one state than another, or any law is open to re-definition. A 'speed limit'? Well, limit just means suggestion in this state or that state. Nope - ain't gonna fly. A word means the same thing everywhere, and Websters would be used to shoot down any flawed interpretation. By your own statement: "And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner." A counter is not capible of RECEIVING, as NJ posted the verb version of the noun receiver, a receiver makes the signal visual or audible. A frequency counter is not capable of RECEIVING, so your statement does not apply.

Why are radar detectors in there? I already covered that. Someone probably lobbied hard (most likely the radar detector manufacturers) to add that to the law just to play it safe.

I can say this: All cars that are blue are illegal. Yellow cars are not illegal. So, does that mean that all legal cars have to be yellow? Of course not. The radar 'exemption', like the 'yellow exemption', is meaningless (or redundant) as far as that law is concerned, as they too are not receivers. But, someone most likely made a lot of money off that exemption, and it no doubt makes the radar detector manufacturers feel good.

Joe M.

 

[W4KRR]

Again, I'm not an attorney - maybe someone here is and can clarify? But in my humble and relatively meaningless opinion, it's not Websters' definition that counts, but Michigans'. And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner. End of story.

Well, almost anything could receive police radio transmissions; a cellphone, a pack of gum, the fillings in your teeth. But that doesn't make them scanners. It's what the device DOES with those transmissions that counts. IMO.

 

[AZScanner]

receive:
verb: convert into sounds or pictures (Example: "Receive the incoming radio signals")

Actually... no.

Here is the defacto standard legal definition of the word receive:

RECEIVE - To get, accept, take, or acquire; to be a recipient.

Voluntarily to take from another what is offered.

As found on both http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/q019.htm and http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Receive

It doesn't say "to take from another and convert it to a usable medium." It simply says to receive something is to take it voluntarily when offered. A frequency counter does this with a radio transmission, does it not? It's irrelevant what it actually does with it.

Think of it this way. According to your definition, if you paid your internet bill by check and your ISP never cashed it, they could legally say they never received it and sue you. Legally however, it doesn't matter what they do with it once you have given it to them and they accept it; they can burn it, eat it, wipe the floor with it, throw it away or cash it. Matters not - they received it and that is that. Of course the burden of proof is yours if that ever happened..

Wow Maybe I should be an attorney! LOL....

-AZ

 

[AZScanner]

Last point first: They might charge them, but if they are SMART, they won't because it can open up a way to have the conviction overturned on a technicality - a counter is not a receiver or a scanner. You want your case to be as tight as possible - with as few technicalities to be found as possible. They may charge him with it, but certainly won't bring it up in court or base his jain time on it. (again, if they are smart)

Yeee haaa!!! Here we go!

Here's an appellate case where a man was convicted of attempted bank robbery without ever having actually entered and attempting to rob the bank! A key piece of evidence was the police scanner he had in his possession when he was arrested. The rest of the evidence was just as compelling without the scanner - and this wasn't even a state where scanners are illegal to transport! Yet they make it a point to mention it again and again...

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/8th/963475p.html

US v. Carlisle,No. 96-3475,US 8th Circuit Court of Appeals,5/21/1997

Now the other point: No matter what someone wants a word to mean, there are specific definitions. You can't say a word means something different in one state than another, or any law is open to re-definition. A 'speed limit'? Well, limit just means suggestion in this state or that state. Nope - ain't gonna fly. A word means the same thing everywhere, and Websters would be used to shoot down any flawed interpretation. By your own statement: "And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner." A counter is not capible of RECEIVING, as NJ posted the verb version of the noun receiver, a receiver makes the signal visual or audible. A frequency counter is not capable of RECEIVING, so your statement does not apply.

I disagree. See my reply to N_Jay on this. Besides, what happens when a frequency counter DETECTS a transmission? Why, it DISPLAYS the frequency it's on, thereby converting the transmission into a VISUAL signal! Sounds like a receiver to me, even by your interpretation of the word....and I bet if I was a D.A. in Michigan, I could convince a jury to agree.

Why are radar detectors in there? I already covered that. Someone probably lobbied hard (most likely the radar detector manufacturers) to add that to the law just to play it safe.

hee hee heeeee.... OK, well don't they have attorneys over there at Cobra and Tandy and every other company that makes those things? If a radar detector can't be legally defined as a receiver why would they be worried about this? Seems to me, if they did lobby for that exemption, it was because their legal staff felt it was necessary.

I can say this: All cars that are blue are illegal. Yellow cars are not illegal. So, does that mean that all legal cars have to be yellow? Of course not. The radar 'exemption', like the 'yellow exemption', is meaningless (or redundant) as far as that law is concerned, as they too are not receivers. But, someone most likely made a lot of money off that exemption, and it no doubt makes the radar detector manufacturers feel good.

That's not the issue. The issue is, relatively speaking, what is a CAR? And what is BLUE? If I'm driving a sky blue F150 pickup truck am I exempt or guilty? That's the question, not if a black Cadillac is illegal. (Is it? Isn't blue a component of the color black?) See how sticky that can get? Are green cars legal? Your example doesn't say, yet they are neither blue OR yellow.

This is so fun...

-AZ

 

[Voyager]

Now the other point: No matter what someone wants a word to mean, there are specific definitions. You can't say a word means something different in one state than another, or any law is open to re-definition. A 'speed limit'? Well, limit just means suggestion in this state or that state. Nope - ain't gonna fly. A word means the same thing everywhere, and Websters would be used to shoot down any flawed interpretation. By your own statement: "And in Michigan, a device capable of receiving police band transmissions is a scanner." A counter is not capible of RECEIVING, as NJ posted the verb version of the noun receiver, a receiver makes the signal visual or audible. A frequency counter is not capable of RECEIVING, so your statement does not apply.

I disagree. See my reply to N_Jay on this. Besides, what happens when a frequency counter DETECTS a transmission? Why, it DISPLAYS the frequency it's on, thereby converting the transmission into a VISUAL signal!

No, it does NOT convert the RF signal into a visual signal. It displays you something about the charactoristics of the signal.

Now, on to YOUR source:

Not available - the stupid site qon't allow copying

But, look up recevier as it REALTES TO RADIO, and you will see that it also says that a receiver converts the signal to sound, video, or navigational information. You are not converting the signal whatsoever. You are merely displaying information about the technical aspects of the carrier of the signal. In fact, a counter doesn't even SEE the information riding on the carrier, so it obviously cannot convert what it does not see. No matter how hard you try, you can't get audio, video, or navigational information from a frequency counter.

I'm so glad you're having fun. That seems to be the only purpose to this thread anymore. :roll: A frequency counter is no more a receiver than your teeth are. In fact, your teeth are more likely to fit the term receiver if your fillings respond to the local broadcast station.

Joe M.

 

[AZScanner]

No, it does NOT convert the RF signal into a visual signal. It displays you something about the charactoristics of the signal.

So how exactly does it do that? Does the RF fairy whisper those characteristics in it's ear? Does it just "know" precognitively that a transmission will occur? NO! It RECEIVES the signal - it has to in order to tell you anything about it! Therefore it most certainly CAN be called a "radio receiver". :twisted:

But, look up recevier as it REALTES TO RADIO, and you will see that it also says that a receiver converts the signal to sound, video, or navigational information. You are not converting the signal whatsoever.
You are merely displaying information about the technical aspects of the carrier of the signal.

Something that you must RECEIVE the signal to do. Are you trying to have me believe that the frequency counter just makes really good guesses? Are you going to tell me that radar detectors don't receive radar signals either? Think about it.

In fact, a counter doesn't even SEE the information riding on the carrier, so it obviously cannot convert what it does not see. No matter how hard you try, you can't get audio, video, or navigational information from a frequency counter.

So if you tune your scanner to a paging frequency, does it SEE the information? No, of course not. But don't tell Uncle Sam you were listening to pager noises - just tuning those frequencies alone can be considered illegal, under federal law. (Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510)

I'm so glad you're having fun. That seems to be the only purpose to this thread anymore. :roll: A frequency counter is no more a receiver than your teeth are. In fact, your teeth are more likely to fit the term receiver if your fillings respond to the local broadcast station.

Well if my teeth are receivers because the fillings in them respond to FM broadcast radio, then so is a frequency counter because it will respond to the signal too - it will display it's frequency. Gotcha! :twisted:

Look, we can sit here and say "is not!" and "is too!" all day and it won't mean jack. Maybe someone who lives in Michigan could tell us for sure if the law includes frequency counters. I say it does. You say it doesn't. If I'm wrong then I'm wrong! Like I said, I'm not a lawyer. I just play one on TV :lol: Just kidding!

C'mon Joe, it's all in fun! If you're not having fun then let's just forget it. I don't want to upset a fellow scannerhead.

-AZ

 

[N_Jay]

All I can say is;
"Exacty how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

This argument is worthless.
It is a bad law poorly worded, and would probably be tossed out at the first serious challenge.

The problem with codes like these are that they are more expensive to challenge than they are worth.

 

[scanfan03]

Boy am i glad that i live in Houston, Texas, they could care less what you listen to.

 

[MetalManMI]

Maybe someone who lives in Michigan could tell us for sure if the law includes frequency counters.

I live in Michigan and can say with certainty.....it would be a case by case consideration.

If an officer happened to pull you over.....and happened to notice the frequency counter in your vehicle, it would most likely be questioned. Most LEOs wouldn't know offhand what it was, but they'd most likely ask about it. Maybe it's some sort of remote control....a detonator? Who knows, but it would most likely be questioned.

Now, when you go on to explain that it identifies nearby radio frequencies, the next question would likely be...why? Why are you carrying it around with you? If you are a licensed HAM...that would most likely be the end of that. It is a radio techie toy...err, I mean tool. End of story. Makes sense. However, if you are not a licensed HAM, and you don't have a scanner permit, the circumstances would begin to look more suspicious. Oh, you sell these things...or use them as a tool of your trade? Makes sense again. What's that? You say it is just a hobby, nothing special...no particular reason you carry it around? Sounds suspicious.

From there, it would be up to the prosecutor to decide if you have potentially broken any laws. If he or she decides to charge you with violation of the Michigan scanner law for carrying a frequency counter with you in your vehicle, it would then be up to the jury to decide.

Outside of that, it hasn't been tested (to my knowledge), so this question cannot be answered at this time.

On a side note, I'd say that since it obviously has an antenna, it is a receiver of some sort. Since it can receive frequencies allocated by the FCC for police use (and processes them according to its design function), it would fall into the definition of a device covered by this statute, as it is currently worded.

 

[CAT]

Boy am i glad that i live in Houston, Texas, they could care less what you listen to.

That's because most Texans have a good deal of common sense... it's something they're born with... most lawmakers in wouldn’t know common sense if it bit them on the $#%@!.

To a criminal, intent on breaking the law anyway, it makes little difference if scanners are illegal.

Harassing Joe-Sixpak and Jane-Tampon or even Sparky-Armature over scanner possession is poor public relations. Period.

 

[Voyager]

No, it does NOT convert the RF signal into a visual signal. It displays you something about the charactoristics of the signal.

So how exactly does it do that? Does the RF fairy whisper those characteristics in it's ear? Does it just "know" precognitively that a transmission will occur? NO! It RECEIVES the signal - it has to in order to tell you anything about it! Therefore it most certainly CAN be called a "radio receiver". :twisted:

Sigh... NO. It does NOT receive the signal. It displays the STRONGEST CARRIER within it's range. The signal consists of a carrier AND the intelligence riding on that carrier. It's that intelligence that a receiver converts to usable audio, video, or whatever. The carrier is only that: a carrier for the information.

In fact, a counter doesn't even SEE the information riding on the carrier, so it obviously cannot convert what it does not see. No matter how hard you try, you can't get audio, video, or navigational information from a frequency counter.

So if you tune your scanner to a paging frequency, does it SEE the information? No, of course not.

Well, you tell me. Can you hear the difference in the audio as the carrier swings from one state to the other? It is converting that intelligence riding on the carrier to audio. That, by definition, is receiving.

I'm so glad you're having fun. That seems to be the only purpose to this thread anymore. :roll: A frequency counter is no more a receiver than your teeth are. In fact, your teeth are more likely to fit the term receiver if your fillings respond to the local broadcast station.

Well if my teeth are receivers because the fillings in them respond to FM broadcast radio, then so is a frequency counter because it will respond to the signal too - it will display it's frequency. Gotcha! :twisted:

The difference is that the filling is converting the intelligence of the signal to a usable form of (very low level) audio.

C'mon Joe, it's all in fun! If you're not having fun then let's just forget it. I don't want to upset a fellow scannerhead.

It's just frustrating trying to show you the difference between a receiver and a counter. Counters do not change based on the intelligence riding on an RF carrier. That's the key difference. Receivers take the intelligence and convert it to audio or video. No, displaying the carrier frequency is not any type of conversion of the intelligence on the signal. The display does not change when a person starts or stops talking. See the difference there? A receiver does change when a person talks. A TV receiver display does change based on the information provided on the carrier, but NOT based on the carrier itself.

Joe M.

 

[scanfan03]

I agree w/ the poster above, w/ an antenna, it looks like a detonator.