Again, though, that means EVERY web enabled cellphone is illegal, because they are CAPABLE of going to RR and listening. So I don't see how your definition works.
- Status
Again, though, that means EVERY web enabled cellphone is illegal, because they are CAPABLE of going to RR and listening. So I don't see how your definition works.
JoeyC
Senior Member
A cellphone does not receive police "signals" over frequencies allocated to public safety. :roll:
shooter2jim
Member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3
First, I'm a little confused as to whether the law says it's illegal to "possess" or just "use" a "police radio". If the law says it's illegal to possess a (portable) police radio, then they're going to have to go after everyone who owns a handheld scanner and doesn't meet the requirements.
"Signals" is the term any decent defense attorney should focus on, and a distinction must be made between a device that can receive "signals" and a person listening to voice "communications". You can argue "sprit of the law" until you're blue in the face but unless there's some previous precedent set, the law says "...a device capable of receiving ...'signals' ". If the court equates a "police radio" with a mobile device such as a smartphone, iPad, laptop, or any other such device with internet connectivity, then you've criminalized hundreds of thousands of IN residents, even those who never even heard of a scanner app or had any intention of ever using one. It's pretty much a ridiculous argument.
Just because I possess an automobile doesn't mean you automatically can arrest me for speeding, reckless driving, DUI, or any other offense that I could commit with that car. Any argument that equates possession of an internet capable device with possessing a police radio is equivalent to convicting anyone who possesses a car with the example I gave.
If you're going to stick with the cell phone = police radio argument, then I could set up an FM broadcast band transmitter, rebroadcast police traffic and make everyone with a radio in their car within range of my signal subject to prosecution under this law. No one may have been listening, but they possessed the equipment that could do so..... or did they? Was a car radio designed to receive police "signals"? Of course not.
Absolutely, the law is very poorly worded, in addition to being a pretty stupid law to begin with. The "criminal tools" law is 100x better. They should abolish the stupid law, or at a minimum amend the law to stipulate using any device that can receive police communications when used in such a manner as to commit a criminal act, etc. Everyone go get your ham ticket and show IN lawmakers one of your fingers... you decide which one.
That is correct. That's what the law specifically says, and what the officers are technically allowed to do.
I'll add another layer. If I go to a Radio Shack store and buy a new scanner, put it in the back set of my car, and get stoped on the way home, for any reason, the scanner could be confiscated, ect, ect.
radioman2001
Member
I would like to see how this plays out if it makes it to court at all. Sometimes laws that are a little fuzzy on language are not challenged in court as to not have them struck down. (They are then corrected in the next legislative session) Also I would never use the Police spokesman as an official interpreter of a law, that's not their job. They enforce, not interpret or make law. In my opinion this is a case of the Police trying to scare the public, not what I would consider to be in the best interest of the Police.
BTW based on this law I would never consider vacationing in Indiana.
BTW based on this law I would never consider vacationing in Indiana.
It would be interesting to hear what the Delaware County Prosecutor has to say about these charges. I'm assuming the prosecutor is standing behind the police on this one. It would also be interesting to hear what the Indiana Attorney General's office has to say.
Of course, you won't get a court interpretation until the case goes to trial.
We tip-toe along a fine line here with regard to intent to commit a criminal act. Is the possession of a smoking pipe or a crowbar illegal? No, it isn't. Is the use of them to use drugs or break into a building illegal. Yes, it is. Are people ever charged with possession of drug paraphernalia or possession of burglary tools separately from actually using drugs or committing burglary? I don't know. But possession of a radio scanner should be no different than posession of a smoking pipe or a crowbar. It shouldn't be illegal to possess one until you use it to commit a crime.
At least one local broadcast media outlet has played right into their hands. They have reported on the Muncie Police charges and interviewed the detective without presenting an alternative legal position.
And told everyone to "delete the app now."
Confuzzled
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2008
- Messages
- 704
Yes, they have been. Especially if they have a previous history of possession or burglary and they can't provide a rational explanation for having a pipe or crowbar. People have also been charged with possession of paraphernalia for having a digital postal scale.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if a tow truck driver or auto mechanic with a burglary history were caught with a crowbar away from the wrecker or shop.
Last edited:
GTO_04
Member
Actually other media outlets have done the same thing. FOX59 and I think WISH-TV also had similar stories.
Don't underestimate the behavior of overzealous prosecutors. The Parke County prosecutor had a grandmother arrested after buying too much cold medicine. They executed the arrest warrant at 4:30 AM and hauled her off to the slammer.
Wabash Valley woman didn't realize cold medicine purchase violated the law
GTO_04
Last edited:
usswood
Member
this is dumb...having something in a sealed box is completely different then scanning while your driving, and if you can't understand that, know one of this fourm can help you with it!
Go take a read in the NY forum there are very careful guidelines for transporting a scanner there. Broadly written laws like the one in IN get to causing this type of issue in a hurry, how the courts rule could be a slippery slope in a hurry. The same wording is used for firearms laws in IN and unless you have a permit or are a police officer, you can't take your firearm from your home to a gunsmith or vice versa without a permit. If IN ends up going down a similar road with the "police radio" ruling it can provide serious detriment to both scanning as a hobby and amateur radio (how many listen before they decide it's worth it to go get their license?)
usswood
Member
no different then me buying a hand gun without a permit (but I do have one) how do I get it home?? leave it in the box and put it in the trunk, in the box and not loaded you can drive it all around america and there is NO STATE LAW in any STATE that can prosecute you for carrying a concealed weapon in your vehicle
Wood, I think you are not understanding this well. What you described above IS illegal, you CAN be cited if the police see the scanner in the box. Plain English.
usswood
Member
I dont think some of you out of state'rs understand Indiana Law....ok, lets put if like this and see what happens....say I build a reciever out of scrap parts. I make a dial tuner for the reciever and start tuning the reciever to see what I can pick up...as soon as I hear police communications, I now have a police radio. This is the intent of the Law, plain and simple. your IPAD, IPHONE, DROID will be considered the same way if your running anything on that device that now broadcast police traffic on it!
Crap I'd just move ouy of that Nazi police state, what a bunch of D%^b A@@S the legislators and police must be out there.
This just shows how ignorant public safety and govt officials are, I'm sure that guns are still legal in Indiana but they will not even try and outlaw them, fortunately there are way too many gun lobbyist who would be on their backs but these idiots can easily go after radio receivers and try to say they are illegal.
Unfortunately the scanner hobbyist don't have any lobbyist who give a darn like the gun groups have and no I'm not against guns I'm just against dumb city, state and federal officials who want to take our rights away.
What's next with these idiotic lazy public officials, if some criminal uses a toy train to hit someone during a burglary is some overzelous city attorney going to make model trains illegal, probably will happen sometime nothing surprises me anymore.
Sorry for the rant but I'm sick and tired of our rights to do anything fun anymore being erroded just becasue some dumb a$$ criminals choose to use our hobby items in their activities.
This just shows how ignorant public safety and govt officials are, I'm sure that guns are still legal in Indiana but they will not even try and outlaw them, fortunately there are way too many gun lobbyist who would be on their backs but these idiots can easily go after radio receivers and try to say they are illegal.
Unfortunately the scanner hobbyist don't have any lobbyist who give a darn like the gun groups have and no I'm not against guns I'm just against dumb city, state and federal officials who want to take our rights away.
What's next with these idiotic lazy public officials, if some criminal uses a toy train to hit someone during a burglary is some overzelous city attorney going to make model trains illegal, probably will happen sometime nothing surprises me anymore.
Sorry for the rant but I'm sick and tired of our rights to do anything fun anymore being erroded just becasue some dumb a$$ criminals choose to use our hobby items in their activities.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 252
I don't think usswood literally means broadcast as in "to transmit" in this case; rather, more like play it back or receive an alternate stream of that police radio traffic.
usswood
Member
right..broadcast as in 'heard' this is what they need to look at : -------------------------- my edit----------
IC 35-44-3-12
Unlawful use of a police radio; exemptions; "police radio" defined
Sec. 12. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) possesses a police radio; ---------------------------anything that causes police traffic to be heard!
(2) transmits over a frequency assigned for police emergency purposes; or
(3) possesses or uses a police radio: ------------notice it says possesses OR uses
(A) while committing a crime;
(B) to further the commission of a crime; or
(C) to avoid detection by a law enforcement agency; ------------------he was using his IPHONE to avoid detection------------------
commits unlawful use of a police radio, a Class B misdemeanor.
lets go on:
in which the employer's principal office is located;
(9) a person engaged in the business of manufacturing or selling police radios; or
(10) a person who possesses or uses a police radio during the normal course of the person's lawful business.
(c) As used in this section, "police radio" means a radio that is capable of sending or receiving signals transmitted on frequencies assigned by the Federal Communications Commission for police emergency purposes and that:
(1) can be installed, maintained, or operated in a vehicle; or
(2) can be operated while it is being carried by an individual.
The term does not include a radio designed for use only in a dwelling.
section 'C' advises sending OR receiving...your IPHONE is receiving signals transmitted on frequencies assigned by the FCC, just cause you didnt program the Freq's (you let someone else do it for you, I.E the feed your listening to) does not mean your exempt from the LAW because its someone else's Feed and your just listening, in the eyes of the LAW and the intent of the LAW you are receiving...yes listening is also considered receiving....if your not recieveing, what are you listening too???
I'll tell you also, this might open up for the feed owner to be sued by the person charged, especially if there is no disclaimer on his feed advising you might be breaking the Law by listening to this feed outside of your dwelling...please check your state and local laws for guidance! If I was a feed owner, I would get that up on my feed line ASAP!
Last edited:
Do you have a law degree?
Have you been admitted to the Bar in the State of Indiana?
Without affirmative answers to those questions, you are no more qualified to offer a legal opinion than anybody else in this forum.
W9NES
Member
I would have to back up USSWORD on his posting of Indiana Code IC 35-44-3-12.Read the law.Look at section paragraph(1) and(2) of IC 35-44-3-12. Is a Cell Phone that is running a Scanner App not fall under both of these sections? Look at the Key Words Can be maintained,or operated in a vehicle or can be operated while it is being carried by a individual.Both of these do apply to the topic at hand and does hold merit.***A cell phone can be be hand carried, can be in a vehicle and carried by a individual.***
- Status
Similar threads
