Nothing in that clip is open for 'opinion'... The law he quoted is CLEARLY referring to eavesdropping / telemetry, but he left that out in order to 'make his case.'
baw352 said:Yeah, there are frequencies in the 156.xxx area of the band for assignment to the public safety agencies. Just because they are assignable doesn't mean you can hijack them for use whenever you want. You still have to obtain a license from the FCC for them and use a type accepted radio.
The biggest problem I have is there is a well known use of modified amateur radios being used by officers for tac channels. The admin knows this and does nothing.
From my understanding there has been offical complaints to uncle sam in the past but there isn't enough resources to enforce it.
w8fcc said:WRONG! GO TO APCO YOU WILL SEE THEY PAY BIG FEES AND GO TO THE FCC WEB SITE AS WELL
w8fcc said:WRONG! GO TO APCO YOU WILL SEE THEY PAY BIG FEES AND GO TO THE FCC WEB SITE AS WELL
rdale said:Are you serious? Did you REALLY intentionally cut off the rest of that section? You would INTENTIONALLY mislead people, then post a link that doesn't work?
(i) these are modified ham radios, which would not be certified
(ii) okay, meets that
(iii) must NOT be voice, yet they are using voice. Two strikes (no strikes allowed)
The more I read, the more I realize this is about communication taps or similar, NOT daily chatter.
Wow. I'd be embarassed to have posted that clip to intentionally mislead others.
===
(i) In accordance with Sec. 90.203 and Sec. 2.803 of this chapter,
the transmitter must be of a type which has been certificated by the
Commission.
(ii) The carrier frequency shall be within the bands listed below
and must be maintained within 0.005 percent of the frequency of
operation. Use on assigned channel center frequencies is not required.
30.85-30.87 MHz
30.89-30.91 MHz
30.93-30.95 MHz
30.97-30.99 MHz
31.01-31.03 MHz
31.05-31.07 MHz
31.09-31.11 MHz
31.13-31.15 MHz
31.17-31.19 MHz
31.21-31.23 MHz
31.25-31.27 MHz
31.29-31.31 MHz
31.33-31.35 MHz
31.37-31.39 MHz
31.41-31.43 MHz
31.45-31.47 MHz
31.49-31.51 MHz
31.53-31.55 MHz
31.57-31.59 MHz
31.61-31.63 MHz
31.65-31.67 MHz
31.69-31.71 MHz
31.73-31.75 MHz
31.77-31.79 MHz
31.81-31.83 MHz
31.85-31.87 MHz
31.89-31.91 MHz
31.93-31.95 MHz
31.97-32.00 MHz
33.00-33.03 MHz
33.05-33.07 MHz
33.41-34.00 MHz
37.00-37.43 MHz
37.89-38.00 MHz
39.00-40.00 MHz
42.00-42.91 MHz
44.61-45.91 MHz
45.93-45.95 MHz
45.97-45.99 MHz
46.01-46.03 MHz
46.05-46.60 MHz
47.00-47.41 MHz
150.995-151.490 MHz
153.740-154.445 MHz
154.635-155.195 MHz
155.415-156.250 MHz
158.715-159.465 MHz
453.0125-453.9875 MHz
458.0125-458.9875 MHz
460.0125-460.5125 MHz
460.5625-460.6375 MHz
462.9375-462.9875 MHz
465.0125-465.5125 MHz
465.5625-465.6375 MHz
467.9375-467.9875 MHz
(iii) The emitted signal shall be non-voice modulation (type PO
emission).
(iv) The maximum occupied bandwidth, containing 99 percent of the
radiated power, shall not exceed 2.0 kHz.
(v) The transmitter output power shall not exceed a mean power of 30
mW nor shall any peak exceed 1 watt peak power, as measured into a 50
ohm resistive load. Should the transmitter be supplied with a
permanently attached antenna or should the transmitter and antenna
combination be contained in a sealed unit, the following standard may be
used in lieu of the above: the field strength of the fundamental signal
of the transmitter and antenna combination shall not exceed 0.4 V/m mean
or 2.3 V/m peak when measured at a distance of 3 meters.
(vi) The transmitter shall contain positive means to limit the
transmission time to no more than 10 days. In the event of a malfunction
of this positive means, the transmitter signal shall cease. The use of
battery life to accomplish the transmission time limitation is
permissible.
rdale said:It's not really a bubble, but it sure does bring shame down on the hobby and ham radio operators when someone would clip out snippets here and there for the purpose of intentionally misleading the RR forum users.
BigDog-911 said:Thankful I live in Kentucky where nothing illegal occurs on our radio systems.
ecps92 said:Nothing was intentionally clipped. The URL was posted. Do some more reading.
I think that W9NES is just looking out for the good of the scanning / amateur radio hobby. I do not think he takes it too seriously. Thanks for being aware Tim.
Deletedretroactiv said:great comment on Indyscan, I don't think that even if you get IMPD to send out a memo about not using tac radios, that they will cease using them, They have been using them for to long and they have now become part of the mainstay it seems like from reading all of these comments, if someone(s) has a problem then they should just turn it into the FCC, if there are enough complaints then they might do something about it, but I don't think that the FCC has arrest powers (I might be wrong), so who would make the arrests in this case? Prob IMPD... and that isn't going to happen.
mtindor said:For those of you who want to play radio police, I've got the following to say:
I cannot believe that people on this website are complaining about somebody using frequencies unlawfully. We are a bunch of monitoring enthusiasts. This website would not exist if there was nothing to listen to.
1. You aren't the FCC - stop acting like it. You're merely a scanner monitoring zombie
(for clarification, a scanner monitoring zombie too - so don't get your panties ruffled)
2. These are exactly the kinds of transmissions that are of interest to us - We want to hear anything and everything, especially things that people think aren't being heard.
It makes absolutely no sense for a bunch of scanner enthusiasts to B & M, try to wear the hat of FCC official, and potentially PO people within your area where you live because you want to play radio police.
Things could be worse... imagine not having anything to listen to because everything is encrypted and out of our reach. Be thankful for what you can hear.
Mike
mtindor said:For those of you who want to play radio police, I've got the following to say:
I cannot believe that people on this website are complaining about somebody using frequencies unlawfully. We are a bunch of monitoring enthusiasts. This website would not exist if there was nothing to listen to.
1. You aren't the FCC - stop acting like it. You're merely a scanner monitoring zombie
(for clarification, a scanner monitoring zombie too - so don't get your panties ruffled)
2. These are exactly the kinds of transmissions that are of interest to us - We want to hear anything and everything, especially things that people think aren't being heard.
It makes absolutely no sense for a bunch of scanner enthusiasts to B & M, try to wear the hat of FCC official, and potentially PO people within your area where you live because you want to play radio police.
Things could be worse... imagine not having anything to listen to because everything is encrypted and out of our reach. Be thankful for what you can hear.
Mike