AM and FM pirate station crackdown

[belvdr]

There are two basic theories of law in play here. Most people think the federal government has this all-powerful regulatory magic. There's rule of law and color of law. Much of the federal government runs on color of law; making the people believe that they have more authority than they really do to gain compliance. I was with a regulatory enforcement federal agency for 20 years. Almost everything was handed over to local authorities (if any existed at all) for follow-up even if it started with us. In the end, almost 100% of anything we'd pursue ourselves resulted in filing a lawsuit in federal court to get a judicial decision on whether or not the situation violated federal law. In the end, most of it is smoke and mirrors. With the FCC, there's a whole lot of color of law going on. They have the most leverage when interference occurs with a licensed entity or it becomes interstate/international (which is within the scope of their authority). Federal government has no authority to act on something that happened wholly within the bounds of a state unless a governmental entity has invited them to become involved or they've created a foothold such as through a "license." Too many movies portray the feds as "we're here now and we're taking over." That' not the way local/state/federal government works. Now, when it comes to executive agencies, that's a whole different thing that gets really grey.

Interesting points. I would "like" your post but they don't seem to be enabled in this forum.

I'm curious about your local pirate station, though. If they are interfering with licensed broadcast stations, why did they stop pursuing? They were called there by some entity or found it themselves.

 

[avaloncourt]

Interesting points. I would "like" your post but they don't seem to be enabled in this forum.

I'm curious about your local pirate station, though. If they are interfering with licensed broadcast stations, why did they stop pursuing? They were called there by some entity or found it themselves.

He wasn't interfering with any licensed station anywhere. He was very careful on his frequency decision to make sure that he wasn't in conflict with any licensed station. He spent a great deal of time going and hilltop monitoring for any receivable broadcast on many frequencies to make a decision on where he would land. I suspect, due to the nature of his broadcasting content, someone local filed a complaint with the FCC and that started the wheels turning. They, in turn, sent out a verification team, confirmed the transmitter and then tried to apply pressure and it didn't work.

It was interesting with the local ATF knock visits regarding the stills, I've spoken to several of the people visited and a local brewing store owner. Unanimously, they all said the ATF guys were very chill and didn't play games. It appears the ATF had an action against Mile High Distilling in Colorado and obtained purchase records. They then matched customer records to still purchases to determine if size matched some licensed entity. A number of large stills (in the order of 500 gallons) were purchased in the area. They made visits to residential buyers. They didn't even ask to see it. They just said something on the order of, "We're aware you have a 500 gallon still and we wanted to remind you that seems a bit excessive for personal use and you can not sell or give away product of your still without a license." That was it. No threats. Just a little reminder from your friendly neighborhood ATF agents that big brother is watching.

Unfortunately, at the state or local level, there's a lot of MOU (memorandum of understanding) in place that acts as an invitation or a joint operational agreement which leaves the door open to more activity than I'd like to see.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

There are two basic theories of law in play here. Most people think the federal government has this all-powerful regulatory magic. There's rule of law and color of law. Much of the federal government runs on color of law; making the people believe that they have more authority than they really do to gain compliance. I was with a regulatory enforcement federal agency for 20 years. Almost everything was handed over to local authorities (if any existed at all) for follow-up even if it started with us. In the end, almost 100% of anything we'd pursue ourselves resulted in filing a lawsuit in federal court to get a judicial decision on whether or not the situation violated federal law. In the end, most of it is smoke and mirrors. With the FCC, there's a whole lot of color of law going on. They have the most leverage when interference occurs with a licensed entity or it becomes interstate/international (which is within the scope of their authority). Federal government has no authority to act on something that happened wholly within the bounds of a state unless a governmental entity has invited them to become involved or they've created a foothold such as through a "license." Too many movies portray the feds as "we're here now and we're taking over." That' not the way local/state/federal government works. Now, when it comes to executive agencies, that's a whole different thing that gets really grey.

I have never been a fan of the sovereign citizen movement, mainly because most of them are disgruntled folks who are brainwashed by internet hucksters. However harking back to that childhood complaint "I never asked to be born",. In theory if you are born in the US but never got "into the system", by this I mean signing for a social security number, signed for any social services, no drivers license, etc. , what if any leverage does the government have on you except threat of violence?

 

[avaloncourt]

I have never been a fan of the sovereign citizen movement, mainly because most of them are disgruntled folks who are brainwashed by internet hucksters. However harking back to that childhood complaint "I never asked to be born",. In theory if you are born in the US but never got "into the system", by this I mean signing for a social security number, signed for any social services, no drivers license, etc. , what if any leverage does the government have on you except threat of violence?

You once used to be able to fly under the radar moderately easily. The government systems had lots of holes that you could conveniently hide in. I'm sure you've probably heard about people who assumed the identity of people who died just after birth or prior to getting a social security card. These days, if it's a hospital birth, they immediately have the paperwork to set up a SSN. With SSN, banking, and other transactions tightly intertwined so it's pretty easy to be detected unless you're operating in a fully cash environment. Even then, there's so many daily transactions that require you to be identified. Basically, the government can lock you out of any semblance of a normal life. I supposed you could be a nomad and hang out on public lands and hope you don't get caught.

 

[KevinC]

Let’s please keep this discussion about the actual RF aspect of the thread. I’m sure we can all find other places to discuss the political aspect.