"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:M6L6c.9938$F91.9269@lakeread05...
"Me" wrote in message
...
In article rlt6c.8629$F91.8390@lakeread05,
"Jack Painter" wrote:

On private property, one may install any device, counter-signal,
shielding,
etc that prevent or otherwise render inoperable any other signal that
enters
or tries to leave that property.

Bzzzzt, Wrong, would you like to try again for what is behind Curtain
No.3?

In the USA, deployment of any "Active" device that transmits any
electromagnetic signal, without the appropriate License, would be
contrary to US Law. Specificly CFR47, as this is Regulated by the
Federal Communications Commission for all US Territory, Public or
Private.

Nice try though......

me

It doesn't help to reference code not properly cited. Then consider how
the
U.S. Attorney General (pick your year of political flavor) decides that
the
government will interpret specific circumstances of every federal case
that
is not well supported by existing case law.

Some broad-reaching statements exist in most federal statutes that cannot
be
applied to any individual circumstance, and broad language such as you
paraphrased is not appropriate here either.


Ahhh, then you ARE a lawyer!

Ed
wb6wsn