parnass@ihuxf.UUCP (Bob Parnass, AJ9S) (06/27/84)
x
From an article in net.auto:
> Nf-ID: #N:trsvax:55200084:000:5280
> --->>> Hitchhikers guide to radar jamming <<<---
.
.
[explanation of how Doppler radar works]
.
.
> How about jamming. OK, lets assume that you don't care about the legality
> and you just want to try to jam for funs sake.
.
.
[how to construct a radar jamming transmitter]
.
.
> Be forwarned that police are getting more adept at detecting jammers, and
> the penalty is not light. If you have a HAM ticket, you could lose it.
> There could even be criminal penalties in some states.
.
.
> ....If you do jam........
.
.
[more jamming hints]
.
.
Is this "radical chic", or just poor judgement?
Congratulations, you have just used the net to advocate
the breaking of federal and international regulations:
+ FCC Rules & Regulations:
- R&R 89.51 - Station Authorization Required.
- R&R 89.117 - Acceptability of Transmitters
for Licensing
+ Communications Act of 1934:
- Sec 324 - Use of Minimum Power
+ International Telecommunications Commission Con-
vention 1947:
- Article 44 - Harmful Interference
+ International Radio Regulations Annexed to the
International Telecommunications Convention 1947:
- Article 13 - Unnecessary transmissions and
superfluous signals
- Article 22 - Station license
+ Geneva Treaty 1959:
- Article 1 Sec 3 - Harmful interference
I hope you don't hold amateur or commercial licenses.
...Bob
(FCC Radiotelephone Operator's License P2-18-37775/Radar Endorsement)
--
==========================================================================
Bob Parnass, AT&T Bell Laboratories - ihnp4!ihuxf!parnass - (312)979-5414 lrd@drusd.UUCP (DuBroffLR) (06/27/84)
[Just in case...]
"Is this 'radical chic', or just poor judgement?
Congratulations, you have just used the net to advocate
the breaking of federal and international regulations:
Bob Parnass, AT&T Bell Laboratories
- ihnp4!ihuxf!parnass - (312)979-5414
(FCC Radiotelephone Operator's License
P2-18-37775/Radar Endorsement)"
From the quoted exerpts, it SEEMS as if Mr. Parnass and I have read the
same article, but our reactions are totally different.
I did not see any details that would enable anyone to build a RADAR
jammer if the builder did not already have the knowledge to do so;
all I saw was a general description of the principles involved.
Further, I don't agree that the original poster has "just used the net
to advocate the breaking of federal and international regulations."
I saw neither advocacy nor encouragement; indeed, I saw cautions and
warnings of the penalties for using a jammer.
Maybe we weren't reading the same article.
L. R. DuBroff ...[ihnp4!]drusd!lrd
FCC Ratio Telephone Operator License
(First Class) #P1-18-52382
Ship Radar Endorsementmikey@trsvax.UUCP (06/29/84)
#R:ihuxf:-228100:trsvax:55200086:000:3400 trsvax!mikey Jun 29 12:57:00 1984 I'm afraid that I must take exception to Mr. Parnass's opinion of my article reguarding radar jamming. I had a number of reasons for posting the article. Mainly, there is so much BULLSH*T flying around about how police radar works that the record needed to be set straight. In some communities there are probably no police officers who understand how that little box operates and it is still used to deprive you of your driving privilidges for revenue. Now before any flames start, I not going to argue that even most speed limits need to be enforced for the greatest public good, but it seems that the areas that need to be enforced take a back seat to the areas that return the greatest profit. And right or wrong, if radar tickets are not challenged, they will stand. Another reason is that there are a number of jammers already on the highway. I've seen adds in the back of Computers and Electronics for "The Worlds Most Remarkable Radar Jammer". Come off it, I gave less information in my article than you would probably get if you paid for theirs, and I tried to present the side of the ramifications of using the jammer. I don't condone the type of jammers that I described. On any given night I can go out on a major highway and I'll lay even money I can find a jammer within 4 hours. Some people don't even trigger their jammers, they just leave them on 100% of the time. Besides the health aspect, these people deserve to get caught for poluting the airwaves. I don't condone the indescriminate use of police radar either. Leaving radar on all the time is like looking in your house to see if you're doing something wrong. I know that's not a good analogy, but it's how I feel. I guess what it all boils down to is that I don't approve of the way radar is used by MOST police and communities. I want everyone to be aware of how it works and how it can be fooled. I don't approve of the jammers I described either. Just consider it information for information's sake. If you don't know how it works, how can you reasonably expect to fight it? I will NOT post any articles on a detector proof jammer, even though I know of a design that would be VERY easy to build and EXTREMELY difficult to detect. Not 100%, but I'll put more trust in my jammer theories than I will in a local cop who never operated anything other than his police radio and maybe a CB being told "Leroy, go get us some speeders!" Please don't take this personally Mr. Parnass, but my initial reaction upon reading your note was that you felt that information on police radar and activities belonged in the dark and shunned the light of day. An activity that we all will be involved with at least once or twice a month deserves our investigation, or should we all sit back complacently and say it doesn't affect me? I'm glad that you took the energy to inform everybody of the formal legal ramifications, but I wish that if you want to complain, complain to the magazines that publish ads like I mentioned previously, or the one that starts off "New amatuer transmitter shown to interfere with police radar". These dupe the public into a full speed ahead mode without reguard to any consequences. By the way, I do have a ham ticket, I am active on the ham bands, and I do not have a jammer in my car. I am also eagerly awaiting your reply. Mike Yetsko KA5MJQ mikey at trsvax
mikey@trsvax.UUCP (07/03/84)
#R:ihuxf:-228100:trsvax:55200088:000:696 trsvax!mikey Jul 2 17:35:00 1984 I just thought I'd add a little note here. Since the posting of the original radar jamming article, I've received some mail, all POSITIVE about my article. However, I must admit that there was some request for more information. Due to the controversy that has ensued, I will post no more articles on jamming or the legal aspects therof. I'm also sorry, but I will also not send out any more information about or on jammers by mail. Perhaps I'll post ideas on natural things that can interfere with radar that may be of interest if anyone out there has a ticket that they think is undeserved. Maybe even articles on radar proofing your car, if it won't offend anybody. mikey at trsvax