Nowadays cops use digital cellphones if they want to be secure from
the press.

I've never heard of anybody around here getting busted for having a
scanner. That sounds like crazy talk.

On 8 Jan 2004 18:20:21 GMT, Rich Wood wrote:

On 8 Jan 2004 15:21:45 GMT, David wrote:

I am in the media. No one has ever questioned the appropriateness of
me having a mobile receiver. In fact, I can easily justify it with
any peace officer by telling the story of a deputy who bled to death
when his gun went off by accident and he severed a leg artery. His
partner did not know the groin pressure point and the man bled to
death.

Had a scanner user with first aid training been nearby that deputy
would still be alive.

I think such laws are stupid. However, they were lobbied for by law
enforcement who believed criminals were tracking their movements and
knew when they were about to arrive. They were also concerend that the
media would monitor and interfere with their operation or expose
something that shouldn't happen.

A "peace officer" doesn't make the rules. If he sees a receiver
capable of receiving police and fire frequencies, he's supposed to
take action in those states that forbid scanners in cars. The same is
true for states that ban radar detectors.

With the no-code ham license an exemption is easy to get. Just show
the cop your license and you're free to go. The next time a cop shoots
himself, you'll be there to help.

There was a case in Cranford, NJ where a ham offered to help the
police track down someone who was causing malicious interference to
public safety services. They ended up charging him with doing it in
spite of the fact that it continued while he was in custody. Charges
were dropped after the ARRL assigned a lawyer (John Norton) to
represent him.

In my experience in the NY/NJ area it's been the "peace officer" who
is most against scanners. I wouldn't appeal to his "save my comrade"
sensibilities.

Rich