Mobile Scanner Law?

[n4yek]

A scanner carried by a ham may or may not be exempt depending on the officer (perhaps based on how the ham handles himself during the stop) and/or the court handling the case.

843.16
(3) This section does not apply to the following:
(a) Any holder of a valid amateur radio operator or station license issued by the Federal Communications Commission.

Pretty much negates the argument of it being a ham radio or a scanner.

 

[n4yek]

The way that law is written, you could also be arrested just for listening to a scanner app in the car. :roll:

843.10
1)......any frequency modulation radio receiving equipment so adjusted or tuned as to receive messages or signals on frequencies assigned by the Federal Communications Commission to police.....

With the key words: ON frequencies, one can argue that a cell phone with an app does not fall under this law as they do not operate ON frequencies and can not be tuned to frequencies assigned to law enforcement.

You might be listening to them, but not on their assigned frequencies when using a cell phone app.

 

[SCPD]

It would be a court battle followed by word changing in politics to and or devices intercepting frequencies etc.

 

[n4yek]

It would be a court battle followed by word changing in politics to and or devices intercepting frequencies etc.

Still wouldn't work, a cell phone isn't and can't intercept any frequency from the public safety bands. They have their own allocated frequencies.

 

[Voyager]

843.10
1)......any frequency modulation radio receiving equipment so adjusted or tuned as to receive messages or signals on frequencies assigned by the Federal Communications Commission to police.....

With the key words: ON frequencies, one can argue that a cell phone with an app does not fall under this law as they do not operate ON frequencies and can not be tuned to frequencies assigned to law enforcement.

You might be listening to them, but not on their assigned frequencies when using a cell phone app.

Prosecution attorney: Were you monitoring the transmissions made by the PD?

You: Yes

Prosecution attorney: Were those transmissions made on frequencies assigned to Law Enforcement?

You: But my phone can't pick up those frequencies.

Prosecution attorney: Judge, please instruct the defendant to answer 'yes' or 'no'.

Judge: The defendant is instructed to answer the question 'yes' or 'no'.

Prosecution attorney: Were those transmissions made on frequencies assigned to Law Enforcement?

You: (either 'yes' or 'no' will lose your case here)

If you answered no, they will bring in experts who will refute your testimony and prove the origin to be on police frequencies. And if you answered yes, you just admitted violating the law.

You are now found guilty of (note the key words) "receiv(ing) messages or signals on frequencies assigned by the Federal Communications Commission to police"

The fact it wasn't directly received on those frequencies is irrelevant, as that is only one criteria of two.

It's not different than using a string to pull the trigger of a gun, then arguing that you didn't fire it since you never touched the trigger. You still shot the gun.

 

[WQPW689]

Everyone is an arm chair lawyer until they end up in court, then they start begging for a real lawyer. I personally know of a few cases in which an individual was arrested and charged with possession of a radio capable of receiving LE frequencies. One such case in Ocala involves an individual who told some people he worked for the SO. When officers pulled him over, he had a scanner tuned to Ocala PD, lights and a siren.

The guy in Ocala is a whole different ball of wax. Given what you described the thrust of the police investigation was the possibility of a police impersonator, not necessarily just the scanner.

In any event, if you want to use a scanner in a vehicle or your business in the State of Florida, get an amateur radio license. As has been explained above it's an exception to the statue written in plain language and endorsed by a former Attorney General in a written opinion.

You start using it with a different intent of the written law, as the clown in Ocala did, expect to have problems.

And needless to say, if you don't have the ham license, you're simply taking a chance. You'll probably never get bothered, but you'll be taking the chance.

 

[n4yek]

The case you are trying to present assumes everyone is a scanner owner and hence know what frequencies are being used. There are a lot of people out there that only monitor the police using apps on their phones.

......
Judge: The defendant is instructed to answer the question 'yes' or 'no'.

Prosecution attorney: Were those transmissions made on frequencies assigned to Law Enforcement?

You: I do not know where they were being transmitted, I was listening to them on my phone with this app I have. ( I would not be telling a lie since I could not see the scanner to see what frequency was being used.)

Defense attorney:
Were you monitoring police communications ON and I stress ON frequencies assigned to law enforcement personnel?
You: Again, I don not know what frequencies were being used, I was listening to them on my cell phone.
Defense attorney: Your Honor, let it be known that his cell phone can not receive frequencies assigned to the Public Safety Law enforcement personnel and I introduce it into evidence to be tested by any electronic firm to check and see if his phone can or can not receive those, and i stress the word, frequencies in it's current configuration.

It's all in the wording my friend, no matter how you look at it and in plain text is says "ON FREQUENCIES"


Again, get an amateur radio license and you won't have to worry about it anyway.

The OP's question has been answered, let arguments die away now.

 

[XTS3000]

Got pulled over for a license tag light being burnt out.

Cop asked if that radio on my passengers seat was a scanner.

I didn't say yes or no to his question, but rather said "it's a Digital FM/AM radio".

Cops said OK and told me to fix my burnt tag light, and sent me on my way.

 

[Voyager]

You: I do not know where they were being transmitted, I was listening to them on my phone with this app I have. ( I would not be telling a lie since I could not see the scanner to see what frequency was being used.)

Defense attorney:
Were you monitoring police communications ON and I stress ON frequencies assigned to law enforcement personnel?
You: Again, I don not know what frequencies were being used, I was listening to them on my cell phone.
Defense attorney: Your Honor, let it be known that his cell phone can not receive frequencies assigned to the Public Safety Law enforcement personnel and I introduce it into evidence to be tested by any electronic firm to check and see if his phone can or can not receive those, and i stress the word, frequencies in it's current configuration.

It's all in the wording my friend, no matter how you look at it and in plain text is says "ON FREQUENCIES"

At which point the prosecution brings in an expert witness to demonstrate that your phone app was in fact MONITORING transmissions made on frequencies used by the police. They would likely even provide a demonstration in which they made transmissions on the affected frequencies which then emanate from your phone.

The fact it was not direct reception is irrelevant (see gun analogy above).
You were monitoring police frequencies with your phone.

Juries are much more inclined to believe an expert over a defendant claiming ignorance. And yes, it IS in the wording. Key word being that it's illegal to monitor the police - the intent of the law. If you were monitoring them, you violated the law.

Bottom line - if you are in FL, don't monitor the police frequencies.

 

[wtp]

if i remember right

the fcc says it is ok for police to use any frequency from 30 to 960 for anything they want as long as it does not interfere with anything. a good Prosecutor could argue this and that the frequency list was termed secret by president regan so no list of freqs and official use. if i recall something in the 1986 ecpa law. so they could say a cell phone was used on a public service frequency. also you get to spent some court time and they get paid for this odds are you had to use some personal time.

 

[WQPW689]

Bottom line - if you are in FL, don't monitor the police frequencies.

Bottom line, if you're in FL, don't monitor the police frequencies in a vehicle unless you have an amateur radio license.

If you don't have one, you're taking a chance, and that's for you to determine if you wish to do so.

Bolded part fixed to reflect the statute.

 

[n4yek]

At which point the prosecution brings in an expert witness to demonstrate that your phone app was in fact MONITORING transmissions made on frequencies

Lets look at a different set of words in the law, the word Monitoring isn't in the law by the way.
843.16
(1) ....... any frequency modulation radio receiving equipment so adjusted or tuned as to receive messages or signals on frequencies....

Again, your argument would not work.
A cell phone will not adjust or tune to those frequencies

I have apps on my cell phone that allow me to listen to FM radio stations in other states.
Am I listening to the radio station 105.9 ? Yes.
Am I listening to the radio station 105.9 on an FM radio adjusted to their frequency? NO, my cell phone is operating in the GHz band somewhere.

Again, ham radio license is the way to go in Florida for the scanner hobbyist.

 

[Voyager]

Lets look at a different set of words in the law, the word Monitoring isn't in the law by the way.
843.16
(1) ....... any frequency modulation radio receiving equipment so adjusted or tuned as to receive messages or signals on frequencies....

Again, your argument would not work.
A cell phone will not adjust or tune to those frequencies

I have apps on my cell phone that allow me to listen to FM radio stations in other states.
Am I listening to the radio station 105.9 ? Yes.
Am I listening to the radio station 105.9 on an FM radio adjusted to their frequency? NO, my cell phone is operating in the GHz band somewhere.

That's not the same thing because the FM station is likely transmitting the broadcast AND streaming from the same (off-air) source. You're never monitoring anything that was actually on the air.

With scanner streaming, the path is clearly:
transmissions on frequencies (etc) - scanner - internet - phone - speaker

So, while your phone is not monitoring directly, it IS monitoring what is prohibited. (the bold text above)

Even the exemptions may not keep you out of trouble, as the ham exemption was only to allow licensed operation of otherwise prohibited equipment. You still don't have a license to monitor the police frequencies.

granted, you will have a little better argument in court, but in the end monitoring the police is not a prerequisite for operating a ham station.

The tuning? That would be installing and activating the app that allows you to receive messages broadcast on prohibited frequencies.

Again, the prosecution will simply show that you were in violation by transmitting on prohibited frequencies and demonstrating that your phone was receiving those transmissions that you claim it cannot (a biased defense in the first place). The app allows it to do what you say it cannot.

 

[n4yek]

The tuning? That would be installing and activating the app that allows you to receive messages broadcast on prohibited frequencies.

Wait a minute, Prohibited frequencies??? Where are you getting that from?
Florida statute law does not prohibit you from monitoring the frequencies from your home, no where in that law does it say that. You can sit at your home and monitor them all you want and it is not illegal to do so.

You can argue all you want sir, what comes over a cell phone app is from the internet, is legal and nothing in the Florida law prohibits it nor does the FCC regulate it.

Even the exemptions may not keep you out of trouble, as the ham exemption was only to allow licensed operation of otherwise prohibited equipment. You still don't have a license to monitor the police frequencies.

Florida Statute 843.16
(3) This section does not apply to the following:
(a) Any holder of a valid amateur radio operator or station license issued by the Federal Communications Commission.

Don't know how much more plain text that can be.

Tell you what, when you go to Florida, leave your scanner at home so you don't get in trouble.
When I go to Florida, I will listen to everything I want on my scanner or cell phone since I am allowed to do so.
I have an amateur radio license issued from the FCC to me which gives me permission to have a scanner in my vehicle.

You and I have hijacked this thread enough.
I am not going to reply to anymore messages from you on this subject.

Sorry scnrfrq for doing so as your question was answered many post ago.
Enjoy your hobby and having a ham radio license is always good.

 

[com501]

So, what I am reading here, is that if you are the local Motorola radio shop, not even YOU as a business, is it legal for you to monitor your own customers (your police and fire customers) within your business as a routine part of your business function. That is illegal? That is completely insane.

 

[MTS2000des]

So, what I am reading here, is that if you are the local Motorola radio shop, not even YOU as a business, is it legal for you to monitor your own customers (your police and fire customers) within your business as a routine part of your business function. That is illegal? That is completely insane.

Florida is a police state. Public flatulence is a felony punishable by death.

In all seriousness, I know of one ham who was vacationing in Orlando and was pulled over by FHP. Despite having a valid Georgia AMATEUR RADIO license plate, the trooper kept reiterating "we're gonna have a problem with these radios".

My friend had a Yaesu FT-90 dual band mobile installed in his car. The trooper, despite seeing the clearly visible AMATEUR RADIO designation on the tag:

INSISTED my friend produce an amateur radio license. (Keep in mind, in Georgia, only LICENSED hams can get the tag). The trooper consulted Orlando PD who, the officer was familiar with amateur radio, and acknowledged that hams aren't required to carry proof of license as the FCC ULS contains all the validation information one would need.

In the end, my friend was let go after an hour on the side of the road. What a way to treat someone who comes to your state to spend thousands of dollars in your economy.

I'll stay in the free state of Georgia where the cops don't freak out over radios, and we can carry our guns anywhere we please.

 

[K4SVT]

Uh oh...

 

[Voyager]

Wait a minute, Prohibited frequencies??? Where are you getting that from?

Technically, those would be the "frequencies assigned by the Federal Communications Commission to police".

Prohibited meaning those you can't monitor at certain locations.

You really need to stop reading into everything.

You can argue all you want sir, what comes over a cell phone app is from the internet, is legal and nothing in the Florida law prohibits it nor does the FCC regulate it.

Fantastic. So, all I need to do to get around the encryption ban is to stream the data over the internet and THEN decode it, and that makes it all legal. :lol:

Fact is if you use other means to circumvent the law, it's the same as the original violation.

Florida Statute 843.16
(3) This section does not apply to the following:
(a) Any holder of a valid amateur radio operator or station license issued by the Federal Communications Commission.

Don't know how much more plain text that can be.

Yes, it is plain text. And you also have to consider the INTENT of the law. It wasn't to allow hams to monitor the police channels. It was to allow hams to use radios CAPABLE of being tuned to police frequencies while operating withing the confines of their license.

It's not the "get out of jail free" card you seem to think it is.

Tell you what, when you go to Florida, leave your scanner at home so you don't get in trouble.
When I go to Florida, I will listen to everything I want on my scanner or cell phone since I am allowed to do so.
I have an amateur radio license issued from the FCC to me which gives me permission to have a scanner in my vehicle.

And guess which of us will be hassled like the hams in the above post?

You and I have hijacked this thread enough.
I am not going to reply to anymore messages from you on this subject.

Just what I would expect from someone who has no ability to think outside his own little box.

I know how you read the laws in your world, but the courts may have a broader interpretation that may not match yours. It's been known to happen.

 

[WQPW689]

Yes, it is plain text. And you also have to consider the INTENT of the law. It wasn't to allow hams to monitor the police channels. It was to allow hams to use radios CAPABLE of being tuned to police frequencies while operating withing the confines of their license.

It's not the "get out of jail free" card you seem to think it is.

Voyager, while you submit many quality posts on this forum, you seem to be pushing this argument for the sake of getting the last word in.

Unless you're a Florida resident familiar with the issue, an attorney, or work in a FL State's Attorney's office or are a FL LE official of some sort who has knowledge of the State's prosecuting practices in this matter, you're simply giving an opinion, and in my view, I think, misinformation.

As I stated above, the law is written plainly and the position that an amateur radio license allows use of a scanner in a vehicle with no additional restriction, just as a news gathering agency, is endorsed in a formal opinion to the Boca Raton Police Department by a former State Attorney general, certainly trumps whatever you personally feel.

If you have any evidence to back up that position, by all means give it to us. And I don't mean scattered anecdotal cases where individual officers mistakenly applied a specific law improperly. That probably happens every day in this country on hundreds of laws, which I learned during a full career as a policeman.

The OP's question has been answered. Time to drop the opinion pushing.

 

[Voyager]

Noted. Yes, sometimes when pushed, I tend to push back. But, I also know for a fact that laws are not always interpreted the same way by any two people. And when one of those people is a judge, you may find yourself losing what you thought was an "open and shut" (in your favor) case.

That said, I still do not believe that internet streaming nullifies the original law. Monitoring is monitoring, and I believe any court would see it the same way.