So it is illegal to scan while in your car?

[B_Mitchell]

As the law states the radio has to be a "frequency modulation" receiver.

Some one told me thatyears ago (the 1970's) that Meade county was stopping truck drivers and
confiscation their CB radios.
not exactly legal, but try to fight it.

 

[Evert]

……. I want perfection just as you do. However, this is all I had and was trying to share. Maybe some day I will measure up.....

You may find your perfection goal will be hard to achieve if your dog keeps eating important parts of your copy of the South Dakota Codified Laws.

 

[Evert]

…….. Some one told me thatyears ago (the 1970's) that Meade county was stopping truck drivers and
confiscation their CB radios. …

Frick: What do you have when a County confiscates and destroys 100 CB radios?

Frack: A good start!

 

[DickH]

Everyone seems to be ignoring the first few words.

§23-4-2 No person who has been convicted of a felony in this state or elsewhere within the past ten years ...

Since the other sections reference this one, isn't everyone off the hook unless they are a convicted felon?

 

[Evert]

…….
§23-4-2 No person who has been convicted of a felony in this state or elsewhere within the past ten years ...
Since the other sections reference this one, isn't everyone off the hook unless they are a convicted felon?

The reference to §23-4-2 in §23-4-5, “…"The possession of any receiving set or converter described in § 23-4-2” could mean the “possession described” or it could mean the “receiving set or converter described”. This is some of the poor wording that I mentioned.

It would seem that the intent was to refer to the “receiving set or converter described in § 23-4-2”. Otherwise § 23-4-5 would apparently allow a felon to get a permit to have his illegally possessed radio in a vehicle. § 23-4-5 referring to the description of the radio in § 23-4-2 would not let “everyone off the hook”.

 

[KF6NFW]

I have had a minor encounter with the local PD and Clay county sheriff over my radio, however I instructed them to get a warrant for entry to confiscate anything.

I havent heard from them since and they are pissed because I dont hide my radio use, as it is always with me even when I go for a walk
Though the County EM and I have had words over this he is under the impression he can stop persons from using a scanner by not giving out the freq. little does he know that these are public information as well as encryption type, though to decode is illegal.

 

[loumaag]

I have had a minor encounter with the local PD and Clay county sheriff over my radio, however I instructed them to get a warrant for entry to confiscate anything.

I havent heard from them since and they are pissed because I dont hide my radio use, as it is always with me even when I go for a walk
Though the County EM and I have had words over this he is under the impression he can stop persons from using a scanner by not giving out the freq. little does he know that these are public information as well as encryption type, though to decode is illegal.

I am not sure what the encounter was, but assuming your UserID here on RR is actually your call sign, the entire statue does not apply to you.

 

[n1das]

I am not sure what the encounter was, but assuming your UserID here on RR is actually your call sign, the entire statue does not apply to you.

statue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue

statute:
http://www.answers.com/topic/statute

If I'm ever traveling in SD, my solution is to monitor using my HAM transceivers instead of my scanners so the FCC's declaratory ruling preempting state anti-mobile scanner laws applies in addition to the ham exemption in SD's law. For listening to P25 digital stuff I'll use my P25 commercial radios since they are my ham equipment (100% legit). All out of ham band freqs monitored would be programmed for receive-only of course.

 

[N1508J]

Operative word is FELONY!

§23-4-2 No person who has been convicted of a felony...


Apparently this law only applys to a felon, not anyone else....or am I missing something????

 

[N_Jay]

§23-4-2 No person who has been convicted of a felony...


Apparently this law only applys to a felon, not anyone else....or am I missing something????

Yes, it appears that you are missing the fact that being a LEO in SD does not include passing high school English.

 

[guitarbrian30]

interesting

23-4-3. Permit to monitor assigned frequencies. At the discretion of the attorney general or the legal licensee of each county or municipality, a permit to monitor said assigned frequencies may be issued. Such permit will apply to fixed monitors in authorized places of business. Application for such permit will be made in writing to the attorney general for frequencies assigned to the State of South Dakota and to the sheriff or fire chief for frequencies assigned to various counties and to the chief of police and fire chief of the various municipalities.

Source: SL 1965, ch 233, § 3.

Chapter 23-4


reading the above Code. All the towers are state ran? right? Do you need permission to listen to a talk group? or above mentioned Freq.? Does that mean voice controlled channels or control channels? This is very vague now. What does one of these permits look like. Does anyone have one?

 

[KF6NFW]

I am not sure what the encounter was, but assuming your UserID here on RR is actually your call sign, the entire statue does not apply to you.

That is what I thnk also, but according to our County EM, I had to ask permission from the county SO/PD.

My encounter with them on this matter was I took a fall a couple months agoin my home and had required medical assist and transport. the PD was first on scene and heard my radios in my office/ radio room ad asked about them.

The officer told me I had to have a permit to listen in, so I informed him that I am a lic. amateur operator and believe I am exempt from the state laws.
He argued back and said I was not exempt. at which point I shut down the conversation and handed him my attorny's buss. card and told him to discuss the matter with him. I have not heard back since then, all though I do notice that they take notice of me mre when I am out in public, especialy while I have my HT with me.

 

[KF6NFW]

23-4-3. Permit to monitor assigned frequencies. At the discretion of the attorney general or the legal licensee of each county or municipality, a permit to monitor said assigned frequencies may be issued. Such permit will apply to fixed monitors in authorized places of business. Application for such permit will be made in writing to the attorney general for frequencies assigned to the State of South Dakota and to the sheriff or fire chief for frequencies assigned to various counties and to the chief of police and fire chief of the various municipalities.

Source: SL 1965, ch 233, § 3.

Chapter 23-4


reading the above Code. All the towers are state ran? right? Do you need permission to listen to a talk group? or above mentioned Freq.? Does that mean voice controlled channels or control channels? This is very vague now. What does one of these permits look like. Does anyone have one?

The codefied law applies to both Felons as they are not to have a radio period if witin the time period described. the remainder of the law applies to general population. in translation of loose means that you may own a scanner and the rcvrs of choice but they must be reported to the state attorny or local pd for permission to listen in.

And with most states amateur radio ops are exempt, and had to be added to protect our own communication radios as most LEOS cant tell which is legal and not.

I run into this several times a month in various states, for my work.

I am a disaster operations specialest and travel extensivly. I am also a communications lead for many operations and therefor have a bit of contact with several agencies who have a negative view on amateur radio ops as well as those of us with scanners.

I always have a current copy of my lic. with me and while most officers havent a clue what it means or is, they respect the words of United States Federal Communications Commision printed on the top.

 

[kb0nly]

I keep a copy of both the SD and MN scanner laws in my vehicles along with a copy of both me and my wife's amateur radio licenses.

Interestingly enough i have never been bothered much about the radios in my van, except for when stopped at the local gas station one day and the cop filling up the squad heard the dispatch come over both his HT and out of the window of my van. We had a brief discussion, i handed him copies of the MN scanner laws and my license, he perused them a second and then looked at me with a slightly angry look on his face and i told him if he wants to get near my equipment he will need a search warrant. Besides, its not their jurisdiction when it comes to matters of radio, that's for the FCC.

We put amateur radio license plates on both vehicles, that totally eliminated any looks or questions from LEO's regarding the radio equipment inside.

Some towns are worst than others, we are happy to have licensed hams working in law enforcement around here so the rest of the LEO's know what we are actually up to with our gear.

 

[Chevyman22360]

That is what I thnk also, but according to our County EM, I had to ask permission from the county SO/PD.

My encounter with them on this matter was I took a fall a couple months agoin my home and had required medical assist and transport. the PD was first on scene and heard my radios in my office/ radio room ad asked about them.

The officer told me I had to have a permit to listen in, so I informed him that I am a lic. amateur operator and believe I am exempt from the state laws.
He argued back and said I was not exempt. at which point I shut down the conversation and handed him my attorny's buss. card and told him to discuss the matter with him. I have not heard back since then, all though I do notice that they take notice of me mre when I am out in public, especialy while I have my HT with me.

So is it illegal to have a scanner in your home? Why would the PD even question? I guess I didn't think there was any problem as long as it was not a business.

 

[N_Jay]

I just don't get how anyone applies that law to anyone who is not a convicted felon.

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[loumaag]

I just don't get how anyone applies that law to anyone who is not a convicted felon.

Maybe I'm missing something.

The chapter is 23-4. Each sub-section of that chapter stands on its own unless it references some other sub-section for an explanation, definition, or refinement of the sub-section you are reading.

The sub-section dealing with a felon, 23-4-2, has nothing to do with 23-4-5 except to provide a definition of the radio equipment.

23-4-5 is the applicable part of the statue that allows seizure of equipment from a citizen in a vehicle; note, there is no other penalty for possession other than seizure under this sub-section (or any other that I am aware of). A search warrant is not necessary under the "plain sight" doctrine so any posturing in that regard will get you further grief (for those of you who mentioned it).

23-4-4 exempts amateur radio operators from the entire chapter (all sections of 23-4); hence, there is some confusion as to if a Ham felon can possess such equipment.

 

[N_Jay]

The chapter is 23-4. Each sub-section of that chapter stands on its own unless it references some other sub-section for an explanation, definition, or refinement of the sub-section you are reading.

The sub-section dealing with a felon, 23-4-2, has nothing to do with 23-4-5 except to provide a definition of the radio equipment.

23-4-5 is the applicable part of the statue that allows seizure of equipment from a citizen in a vehicle; note, there is no other penalty for possession other than seizure under this sub-section (or any other that I am aware of). A search warrant is not necessary under the "plain sight" doctrine so any posturing in that regard will get you further grief (for those of you who mentioned it).

23-4-4 exempts amateur radio operators from the entire chapter (all sections of 23-4); hence, there is some confusion as to if a Ham felon can possess such equipment.

From 23-4-5 ". . .described in § 23-4-2 . . ." could easily be interpreted as such equipment in the possession of a convicted felon, and not all equipment.

Has anyone actually been to court on this?
Is there any case law?

 

[loumaag]

From 23-4-5 ". . .described in § 23-4-2 . . ." could easily be interpreted as such equipment in the possession of a convicted felon, and not all equipment.

Has anyone actually been to court on this?
Is there any case law?

There is no doubt (as noted previously) that his chapter has some fairly poor wording in several areas.

As for case law; we do know that equipment has been confiscated from vehicles under section 23-4-5 and basically there is nothing that can be done about the lost equipment, but since it is not a criminal offense (no penalty) there will never be any case law. As for case law on anything to do with the felon portion, I don't know of any. In regard to the portion in reference to business premises, I know of one instance that a scanner was removed by officers, again nothing to be done since it was in direct violation of the statue.

 

[N_Jay]

There is no doubt (as noted previously) that his chapter has some fairly poor wording in several areas.

As for case law; we do know that equipment has been confiscated from vehicles under section 23-4-5 and basically there is nothing that can be done about the lost equipment, but since it is not a criminal offense (no penalty) there will never be any case law. As for case law on anything to do with the felon portion, I don't know of any. In regard to the portion in reference to business premises, I know of one instance that a scanner was removed by officers, again nothing to be done since it was in direct violation of the statue.

Oh well.

I guess we have to wait for a scanner listening lawyer with spare time to challenge it.