On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Phil Kane wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:28:56 -0400, Jerry wrote:
I like THIS one. AW, poor cop, no donut. LOL!!!

That's what happens when you put radio-based enforcement in the
hands of unclued-in officers. It should have never gotten past the
initial field stop.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's not the last event in this story. I smell a
42 USC 1983 issue coming over the horizon (especially for "failure to
train" - cf. Monell vs. Social Services of NYC).... He should sue.

Of course, if the amateur op doesn't have his license with him, the
officer has reasonable cause to believe that the pre-emption does
not cover him even though it still does, and if the rig has been
modified so that it is capable of TRANSMITTING on the police
frequency, the pre-emption is not valid even if the operator is a
licensed amateur (per the FCC Public Notice on this matter many
years ago).

I disagree. Identity can be established with the driver's license, and a radio
license lookup is no more complicated than radioing in a wants/warrant check on
either a person or a registration check on a vehicle. With the data available,
"knowledge is in hand."