you'd make a great lawyer :P

"Frank" wrote in message
news:01c3a4bd$756df320$0125250a@nwfepqxhdbaxbrno.. .
Woolridge ...

^ damn. you got some balls :P

Well, I'm not a bull.

In my haste I forgot to comment on encoding versus encrypting
transmissions.
Digital voice is an encoded signal so by his fictitious law we would not
be
able to receive it legally. Encoding is nothing more than formatting
digital
information so that it can be transmitted. All digital data is encoded.
Encryption would be applied to the data before it is encoded, so the
transmission must be decoded in order to find out if it is encrypted.

Anything that any of our federal, state, or local governmental agencies
transmit is public information. If a federal employee talks to his or her
spouse on an office phone it is not private and never has been. Government
phones, as far as I'm aware, have always been subject to monitoring by the
government.

Frank