Illinois State Rep Dan Brady introduces anti-rebroadcast legislation

Status
Not open for further replies.

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,854
Location
San Antonio, TX
Illinois State Rep Dan Brady has introduced the following bill in Illinois

Amends the State Police Radio Act. Provides that a person receiving public safety voice or data communication transmitted via the facilities of the State's public safety radio system by wire or radio shall not, without the written authority of the originator of the communication, rebroadcast the communication via any means, including radio or Internet, or otherwise divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning thereof. Provides that this provision does not apply to the public safety radio communication transmitted by any system station for the use of the general public, including Amber Alerts and other communications specifically intended for rebroadcast to the public. Provides that radio access to the public safety radio system within the State may only be accomplished upon receipt of written authorization granted by the appropriately licensed authority. Provides that a violation of these provisions is a Class A misdemeanor. Effective immediately.
Here is the full link:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/bil...0&GA=96&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=50142&SessionID=76
 

frodo069

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2004
Messages
5
Location
New Jersey, Pemberton
Provides that radio access to the public safety radio system within the State may only be accomplished upon receipt of written authorization granted by the appropriately licensed authority.

The above sounds like you won't be allowed to scan it either (or at least it could be misconstrued that way).

-joe
 

evilbrad

My head makes a bad antenna
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
232
What a winner

This guy is trouble and has passed many ignorant laws just to get his name out there
 

Squad10

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
922
My guess is that SOI will be soon be releasing information on how one can $ubscribe to legally rebroadcast. Wonder who the $ubscription fees will go directly to, the State or Motorola?
 

Astrak

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
1,618
Location
Mesa, AZ
Provides that radio access to the public safety radio system within the State may only be accomplished upon receipt of written authorization granted by the appropriately licensed authority.

The above sounds like you won't be allowed to scan it either (or at least it could be misconstrued that way).

-joe
The way that part sounds to me is that anyone who wants to TX on the system needs written authorization.
 

KIKINWING

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
130
Location
NORTH OF UR-ANUS
What NONSENSE!!!!! The government is for the people, by the people and we must guard against any body who so knowingly attempts to shield any aspect of government business from the greater population. If we are not a nation of individuals but a nation of laws moved by the masses then the price of freedom becomes eternal vigilance which means we must unite, get off our butts and swamp this foolish rep. with calls. e-mails and threats of financing any opponent we see fit to run. If we pounce and make an effect, a noticeable effect then we have clout. Any other fool who seeks to diminish Liberty via the bandwaves would only have to told the story of poor Dan Brady. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. That said i am calling this man and voicing my displeasure and I invite you all to do the same;
dan@rep-danbrady.com <dan@rep-danbrady.com> or (309) 662-1100 mention HB5194 an act to limit radio rebroadcast....
I need not remind all of us, myself included, not to call this man a scum burping little weenie. It will only make you feel good in the short term and all of us look bad in the long term. If enough of us, thats you and me, call and write then we will get at a minimum clarification if not outright success. this is serious. While I am not fully briefed on parlimentary procedures of Illinois Legislature it seems it was reported out of committee favorably and already heading for a second reading. It still has time, but if what I see is accurate it would seem that this thing may be fast tracked. So be warned, with digital encryption (another illegal government power grab) becoming the norm. If you love this hobby. If you love Mom, apple pie and your country then DO SOMETHING!!!! Democracy is not a spectator sport!!!! as the Gipper once said "Liberty is a fragile thing. It is never more then one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance. It must be fought for and defended each day by each generation for it only comes once to a people. Ronald Reagan....... GET BUSY dan@rep-danbrady.com <dan@rep-danbrady.com> or (309) 662-1100 anyone who reads this and doesnt act will be summarily bound, gagged and fed feet first through a wood chipper or just called a lazy looza!!!!
YOU DONT NEED TO BE HIS CONSTITUENT TO CALL OR WRITE. ALL POL'S HAVE HIGHER ASPIRATIONS, HE WILL LISTEN. I LIVE IN MASS, UNDER A BRIDGE, BUT WILL BE DOING MY CIVIC DUTY TODAY IN ILLINOIS. WILL YOU???
This is what I just e-mailed;

Representative Brady,

I write with hope and fear about HB5194. As I read this bill it would seem it's effect would be to destroy or greatly diminish a hobby that is very dear to myself and millions of others across this great nation of ours.
I have been a scanner enthusiast for over 30 years. It is much more than a hobby as any enthusiast will tell you. I have personally become more involved in community policing and crime watch right in my own neighborhood by knowing exactly what our public safety personnel know. Just today our own incident notification system, manned, funded and reported by us the scanning community dispatched an AMBER alert approximately 30 minutes before the general public started to receive the information.
This is but one of the many thousands of times the scanning community has rallied to assist public safety and the general public as a whole.
My fear is is you begin to diminish our ability to enjoy our hobby while simultaneously assisting our respective community's. If this Bill passes as is you will be doing Illinois and potentially this great nation a grave dis service.
I would ask that you rethink or at least explore the alternatives. There are many. I would gladly make myself available at your convenience to discuss any and all aspects of your concern. 508-xxx-xxxx
Thanking you in advance
 
Last edited:

milf

Careful, I CAN hear you!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
14,095
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Welcome to the new world order if this crap is allowed to happen. It is foot in door and will set precident. If its not tested in the supreme court if it passes. I am just surprised it isn't getting echoed in the tough scanner law states. And once again, IL?? What happened to great people like Lincoln coming from IL? Does this guy think he is the next Obama? Watch your US Senate and House guys.. If IL passes this expect the geniuses up there to love this.
 

mikepdx

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
824
Location
Corbett, OR USA
If this state bill were to pass, perhaps yagi antenna dealers will offer group pricing
to those in adjacent states who wish to stream Illinois' finest.
 
Last edited:

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,854
Location
San Antonio, TX
Yes, on first glance it appears that obviously the State of Illinois has no jurisdiction over RadioReference.com - however feed broadcasters in Illinois could be threatened by this.

But.. IANAL.... :)

It also appears that this law is only focused on rebroadcasting communications that occur on the Starcom21 P25 system - not any and every broadcast in Illinois.

And furthermore, RadioReference might argue that federal law specifically allows one to intercept and divulge public safety communications.

In any case, I would LOVE to know why this particular congressman took it upon himself to bring this bill forward. There is much more to this story.

Folks, instead of railing on this guy and the government in general, let's instead have an intelligent discourse about this issue...

BTW - I agree and fully support the other portions of the bill which restrict unauthorized radios on the system... it seems like a redundant law (there are so many other laws that would enforce this)
 

Oldglide

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
154
Location
Metro Chicago
Great ideas but......

.....if we haven't, as the general public, taken it to the street regarding all the crap that we've gone through over the past year and a half what makes you think these idiots care about a bunch of hobbyists? But, keep calling, writing and speaking out, maybe someday. Please note my signature. Most Americans believe the Supreme court got it wrong.
 

KIKINWING

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
130
Location
NORTH OF UR-ANUS
Blantol wrote "this law is only focused on rebroadcasting communications that occur on the Starcom21 P25 system - not any and every broadcast in Illinois."
This is how it starts. One system then two then three etc...etc... Then who knows? Dogs and cats living together; Total chaos!!!! That said I would encourage, AGAIN, to write, call or send smoke signals to this guy. It does matter. It does work. It can and will have an effect if everyone does there part. Belive me they listen when they are talked too enmasse.
 

datainmotion

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
2,276
Location
Colorado
In any case, I would LOVE to know why this particular congressman took it upon himself to bring this bill forward. There is much more to this story.
Well, according to his profile, he was named 2004 Public Official of the Year by the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police. I'm sure the IACP has his ear.

My guess is we'll see this type of legislation attempted elsewhere in the not too distant future. Get your popcorn ready!
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
Yes, on first glance it appears that obviously the State of Illinois has no jurisdiction over RadioReference.com - however feed broadcasters in Illinois could be threatened by this.

But.. IANAL.... :)

It also appears that this law is only focused on rebroadcasting communications that occur on the Starcom21 P25 system - not any and every broadcast in Illinois.

And furthermore, RadioReference might argue that federal law specifically allows one to intercept and divulge public safety communications.

In any case, I would LOVE to know why this particular congressman took it upon himself to bring this bill forward. There is much more to this story.

Folks, instead of railing on this guy and the government in general, let's instead have an intelligent discourse about this issue...

BTW - I agree and fully support the other portions of the bill which restrict unauthorized radios on the system... it seems like a redundant law (there are so many other laws that would enforce this)
Yes Lindsay, I believe you're correct (but, of course, the "legal eagles" would have to look a little more closely at it). You definitely are right though about the Federal law which allows the capture and disclosure (divulging) of public service communications. The problem though is that there are times when States face instances where their laws differ from Federal and they don't necessarily have to follow the Federal law. California is a good example, in the reverse of what we are discussing. Federal laws say we cannot grow marijuana but in specified areas in California, a certain amount of marijuana can be grown and sold for medicinal purposes (I believe it is). That becomes a situation where the Fed doesn't want to step on the State's law but in this instance it becomes the reverse. The State, in essence is stepping on the Fed's law and I pretty much doubt the Federal government would get involved here either. Even if they did, it would literally take decades for it to be resolved.

I think a much better approach is the proposed letter KIKINWING posted. There is nothing to be gained by writing something hateful and obnoxious to this (idiot) State Rep! But I believe writing to not only him but also all the other Illinois Reps would also be an important thing to do. Personally, that's what I plan to do - I live in St. Louis - right next to Illinois and I certainly monitor the Starcom channels! I'm going to download all of the email addresses for the Illinois Representatives and send each one an email - first thing tomorrow morning!

Shell
K0SHL
 

KIKINWING

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
130
Location
NORTH OF UR-ANUS
Dan Brady's legislative acomplishments:

HB 46 First Responder Communication (StarCom 21 Radio System) 3/13/09 Re-referred to Rules Committee

HR 07 Urges StarCom 21 Adoption 4/22/09 Resolution adopted

So it looks like Mr. Brady had a hand... Or a driving hand in StarCom21
This must be the rest of the story.... All the more reason to write him as he is personally aligned with all aspects of this project. That said I thank Shellys1 for her efforts and kind words but I would like to make a minor clarification if I may. The states MUST be subordinate to federal laws as local are to state. Allot of laws are never challenged. But it must be said that usually before a billl becomes law or even submitted it is usually sent for review to a source who checks conflicting laws so either the Illinois legislature is incompetent, which is my bet, or they belive they are not in violation of superior laws. Where are the scanner manufacturers anyway? Shouldnt they be fighting this stuff or are they hopeful so they can just respond to restrictive legislation with a new model we all must buy??? Hmmmm...
KEEP SENDING THOSE E-MAILS!!!!!
 

ibagli

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
979
Location
Ohio
The states MUST be subordinate to federal laws as local are to state.
I don't think there is any federal law that gives an affirmative right to stream scanners, though, but merely a lack of criminalization by the federal government.

Where are the scanner manufacturers anyway?
Why would they fight this? They probably do more in sales to public safety agencies in Illinois than they do to what I guess is a fairly small number of people who want to stream this trunked system.
 
Last edited:

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
I don't think there is any federal law that gives an affirmative right to stream scanners, though, but merely a lack of criminalization by the federal government.



Why would they fight this? They probably do more in sales to public safety agencies in Illinois than they do to what I guess is a fairly small number of people who want to stream this trunked system.
The scanner manufacturers don't have the huge sales to public safety. Companies such as Motorola, GE and Johnson are the big hardware sellers. (But please correct me if I'm wrong!)

Shelley
K0SHL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top