[net.auto] Michigan mobile scanner radio law

parnass@ihu1h.UUCP (Bob Parnass, AJ9S) (01/08/85)

x

Sorry if you've seen this before, but netnews has not
been functioning properly for several days through our
backbone processor, ihnp4:
==============================================================
     Michigan mobile scanner law (from the 1/85	issue of the
     RCMA Newsletter):


	 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH	SHORT WAVE LENGTH RADIO
			 RECEIVING SETS

       (M.S.A. 28.776) (AS AMENDED IN COMPILED LAWS 1957)


     Section 508.  "Any	person who  shall  equip  a  vehicle
     with  a  radio  receiving set that	will receive signals
     sent on frequencies assigned by the Federal  Communica-
     tions  Commission	of  the	United States of America for
     police purposes, or use the same in this  state  unless
     such  vehicle  is	used  or owned by a peace officer or
     bona fide amateur radio operator holding a	conditional,
     general,  advanced,  or  extra  class  amateur  license
     issued  by	 the  Federal	Communications	 Commission,
     without  first  securing  a  permit  so  to do from the
     Director of the Michigan State Police upon	such  appli-
     cation  as	 may  prescribe,  shall	 be guilty of a	mis-
     demeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the county	jail
     not  more	than  1	 year  or by a fine of not more	than
     $500.00 or	by both	such fine and  imprisonment  in	 the
     discretion	of the court."
-- 
===============================================================================
Bob Parnass,  Bell Telephone Laboratories - ihnp4!ihu1h!parnass - (312)979-5414 

mikey@trsvax.UUCP (01/11/85)

Does this mean that a Technician class can't have a 2m rig that has
the VHF public service frequencies in his car? (i.e. the new Kenwood)
Or does the fact that the law specifies receiver and not a transciever
or a transmitting receiver, as some areas clasify amatuer equipment, 
give some immunity to Hams?

Even if they are obnoxious, most small communities would probably give 
anyone a permit if they ask.  The bigger cities try to use laws like
this that were not intended to restrict the general populace to
as more controls over the publics freedom.  Face it, no criminal that
intended to stay in business very long would ever go on a job without
a scanner.  In a lot of areas, the laws are intended to try to restrict
this (ineffective) or at least give the police "first cause" to detain
and search someone.

Sounds like a good basis for a court case if it gets abused.

mikey at trsvax
KA5MJQ