Your getting desperate. Now you're making claims about things you know
nothing about (actually, more that you know nothing about). My knowledge of
this subject is far deeper than yours ever will be and the fact that I read
this group simply proves that I read this group. Are you saying that
participation in a news group implies lack of knowledge? I am not going to
post my qualifications. I don't have to. The ridiculous statements you
continue to make show you to be the ignorant one. I think it's about time I
simply plonk you as it is becoming increasingly obvious that I am arguing
with an idiot. I have better things to do.


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:Ppa7c.12939$F91.4325@lakeread05...

Since your deck of know-how comes from reading in these groups,

"Ed Price" wrote
"Jack Painter" wrote in message
Mostly one sea-lawyer's rant in this group, was that it is illegal to
interfere with any radio signal, etc. That opinion is absent of
understanding the intent of that law, or where it may be applied.

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.


Your wishes do not carry the force of law. Certainly, you may shield your
property from unwanted emissions. However, can you cite any allowance for
deliberate jammers, especially for a licensed service, in the CFR?

Ed
wb6wsn
Ed,

Don't mistake my comments as inviting anyone to break the law. But also
avoid the trap of thinking that permission from the government is required
in order for you to act.

I've noticed that good Amateur Radio operators behave in a most responsible
fashion, proud of the responsiblity and mindful of the consequences of radio
operation. But the word priviledge is something reserved for a
self-regulated hobby like amateur radio, not the law. The law and the
constitution do not grant citizens "priviledges".

In a previous part of this thread a member already gave the example of
intentional radiators (low power) allowed. If that (part 15 ?) exemption was
not there, it would still not make the force of law any more permissable for
government to interfere with the rights of a property owner, as long as (he)
was not harming interstate commerce, which is the currently used
(wider-than-hell and not always defendable) definition for every new
encroachment on our Constitution. Patriot act definitions will probably not
survive long enough to be tried in a court, but if they were the standard,
even the rumour that you were thinking about signals would subject you to a
search.

73's,

Jack

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:rlt6c.8629$F91.8390@lakeread05...
Mostly one sea-lawyer's rant in this group, was that it is illegal to
interfere with any radio signal, etc. That opinion is absent of
understanding the intent of that law, or where it may be applied.


Using this logic, it is okay to pirate encrypted satellite signals
encroaching on your property....

Pete

" Uncle Peter"
"Jack Painter" wrote in message
Mostly one sea-lawyer's rant in this group, was that it is illegal to
interfere with any radio signal, etc. That opinion is absent of
understanding the intent of that law, or where it may be applied.


Using this logic, it is okay to pirate encrypted satellite signals
encroaching on your property....

Pete

Pete, you smirkingly use the word "pirate" to imply illegal activity, so
answer your own question. Sarcasm aside, then yes you may learn the nature
of anything that enters your property. But we are all well aware of the
consequences for acting on that knowledge.

Jack

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:1F_6c.11827$F91.7199@lakeread05...
" Uncle Peter"
"Jack Painter" wrote in message
Mostly one sea-lawyer's rant in this group, was that it is illegal to
interfere with any radio signal, etc. That opinion is absent of
understanding the intent of that law, or where it may be applied.


Using this logic, it is okay to pirate encrypted satellite signals
encroaching on your property....

Pete

Pete, you smirkingly use the word "pirate" to imply illegal activity, so
answer your own question. Sarcasm aside, then yes you may learn the nature
of anything that enters your property. But we are all well aware of the
consequences for acting on that knowledge.

Jack


It is still intentional interference with a LICENSED service, regardless of
where it is used.

Pete