Earlier this summer, I bought a legal CB radio antenna from Radio Shack
and followed the instructions on it when putting it on my car. Then
right after it was on, while I was driving, something happened that
never happened to me before while I didn't have it. A cop followed me
for miles, following every turn I made, even though I wasn't speeding
and wasn't breaking any laws. It was like he was following me for it
being against the law to have a CB antenna on your car. Through my
rearview mirror, I also saw him radio gfrom his car. I guess he was
running my plates just because I had a cb antenna on my car. After
miles, he finally turned a different way. I was on the regular roads
when all of it happened, not on the freeway.

However, now a ham radio operator who was using his ham radio while
driving was arrested for using his "cell phone" while driving. The ham
radio operator fought it in court and after the judge heard the real
descriptions about the radio, the judge ruled that it is similar enough
to a cell phone that it is against the law to use it while driving.

That's what the judge basically said and still counted it as a cell
phone.

I think most people use their cb's in their car. Now, since mobile ham
radios and mobile cb's operate the same way, a separate hand held
microphone that can be used with one hand,

the judge has in effect also ruled that it's against the law to use any
cb while mobile in your car, since a cb is similar enough to a cell
phone. (although the judge had actually said it about mobile ham
radios while driving).

So how come the police, judge, and federal government isn't going after
the manufacturers of the mobile cb's (since those are made to be used
in only cars and not homes, (you can't operate them on house current or
AA batteries) same for mobile ham radios) or after the FCC who approved
of these illegal radios as legal?


Here's the source of the story:

Source: This Week in Amateur Radio
Categories: Amateur Radio News

17:45

Ham Operator ticketed for using his ''cell phone''

Joey Hernandez, W2JLH, was issued a citation for operating his amateur
radio while mobile. He went to court where the judge presiding had to
consult a law book regarding the issue, and when the radio was
described to him, he pronounced a guilty verdict to Mr. Hernandez,
saying that the description of the use of the radio was too similar to
the use of a cell phone and therefore he was guilty as charged. More on
this issue can be found at the linked URL.
Source: This Week in Amateur Radio
Categories: Amateur Radio News

sorry about the double posting. I don't know how that happened.
Regarding my post, I just remembered, isn't there a federal law that is
supposed to exempt any ham radio operators from any local or state laws
that forbid the use of ham radios while mobile?

And yet, the ham radio operator is still counted as "guilty" by the
judge for using his ham radio while mobile.

Or was this a federal judge who ruled that it was against the law for
the ham radio operator to use his mobile ham radio while he is mobile?

which, in effect, also makes using mobile cb radios against the law
while mobile.

going by the reasoning the judge gave about the ham radios.

I guess we all have to start looking for base cb radios now, unless you
already have one.

But what's the use if you're trying to stay in contact with someone who
is mobile while you're at home or vice versa?

wrote in message
oups.com...
sorry about the double posting. I don't know how that happened.
Regarding my post, I just remembered, isn't there a federal law that is
supposed to exempt any ham radio operators from any local or state laws
that forbid the use of ham radios while mobile?

And yet, the ham radio operator is still counted as "guilty" by the
judge for using his ham radio while mobile.

Here in blighty it isnt illegal to use one while driving UNLESS..... you
show signs of careless driving or lack of proper control of your vehical to
which then the cb/amateur radio will be used as the cause of your clumsiness
and you will be prosecuted.

Or was this a federal judge who ruled that it was against the law for
the ham radio operator to use his mobile ham radio while he is mobile?

which, in effect, also makes using mobile cb radios against the law
while mobile.

going by the reasoning the judge gave about the ham radios.

To describe a cell phone as the same or near enough the same as a CB shows
the Judges lack of understanding in this case. Cell phones have to be held
to the ear to talk and listed rendering one hand useless for driving as its
held to the head during the entire call(for god sake if your driving and
have a headache dont hold your head or you will be pulled over thinking your
on a cell phone) whereas CB/Amateur hand mics are only used when
transmitting and can be rested on the steering wheel or kept to one side of
the hand while operating the other functions of the car. (indicators, gear
lever etc) so basically the Judge is a dick and the guys defence was bloody
useless. Like i said earlier though if you show signs of losing control of
your vehical or careless driving you will be prosicuted and the CB will be
cited as the reason for your incompetance.

I guess we all have to start looking for base cb radios now, unless you
already have one.

Theres always the hands free option the same as mobile phones. As far as i
know theres no law against using these, in the phones case your not meant to
touch the phone to recieve or end calls with your hand otherwise you should
be fine. Mind you thats in the UK but with all the laws we have im sure the
US cant be worse.... or can it??

But what's the use if you're trying to stay in contact with someone who
is mobile while you're at home or vice versa?

Pull over in a safe area to take the call or just listen? Personally as long
as you are competent in talking on a mic while driving and you dont go into
another world and lose concentration i wouldnt worry too much about it.

Regards,
Graham
--
_._. _... ._. ._ _.. .. _ _ _

Radio is only a Hobby. Don't let it rule your life...

73's - Graham (www.open-channel.co.uk)

Maybe you should of made a citizens arrest when the officer used
his radio?

On 11 Dec 2005 01:40:13 -0800, wrote:

+That's what the judge basically said and still counted it as a cell
+phone.
******

Not exactly.

What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.

This does set a precident in that it is the distraction that is at
issue and that whether it is by a cell phone or CB radio or even an
amatuer radio can lead to the same distraction.

What will be an interesting thing is if loud music can be linked into
the same kind of distraction while driving.

This does pose a serious infringement on the use of CB and amatuer
radio units within a car. It can also be said of commercial uses of
the GMRS band as well as public safety and government vehicles.

james

On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Dec 2005 03:23:58 GMT) it happened james
wrote in :

On 11 Dec 2005 01:40:13 -0800, wrote:

+That's what the judge basically said and still counted it as a cell
+phone.
******

Not exactly.

What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.

This does set a precident in that it is the distraction that is at
issue and that whether it is by a cell phone or CB radio or even an
amatuer radio can lead to the same distraction.

What will be an interesting thing is if loud music can be linked into
the same kind of distraction while driving.

This does pose a serious infringement on the use of CB and amatuer
radio units within a car. It can also be said of commercial uses of
the GMRS band as well as public safety and government vehicles.

james
I would argue with that judge that having 2 kids in the back is ALSO a
distraction, specially if one is dropping half chewed candy down your shirt.
So, should we not drive with kids in the car?
You can get some car manufacturers to help you / sponsor your case perhaps.

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 12:32:38 GMT, Jan Panteltje
wrote:

+On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Dec 2005 03:23:58 GMT) it happened james
wrote in :
+
+On 11 Dec 2005 01:40:13 -0800, wrote:
+
++That's what the judge basically said and still counted it as a cell
++phone.
+******
+
+Not exactly.
+
+What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
+while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
+talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.
+
+This does set a precident in that it is the distraction that is at
+issue and that whether it is by a cell phone or CB radio or even an
+amatuer radio can lead to the same distraction.
+
+What will be an interesting thing is if loud music can be linked into
+the same kind of distraction while driving.
+
+This does pose a serious infringement on the use of CB and amatuer
+radio units within a car. It can also be said of commercial uses of
+the GMRS band as well as public safety and government vehicles.
+
+james
+I would argue with that judge that having 2 kids in the back is ALSO a
+distraction, specially if one is dropping half chewed candy down your shirt.
+So, should we not drive with kids in the car?
+You can get some car manufacturers to help you / sponsor your case perhaps.
******

While a kid dropping h alf chewed candy down one's shirt is a
distraction, it is classified under different types of distraction.
Talking on a cell phone or a radio is essentially identical. You are
using an RF radio communications device to hold a conversation.

As to how far we legislate what distractions are legal and illegal is
up to the state/federal legislative branches and the courts. Nearly
all my driving is by myself and I seldom have a radio on or even a
cell phone on while driving. Yes I do find them a distraction that I
care not to fool with.

james

+That's what the judge basically said and still counted it as a cell
+phone.
******

Not exactly.

What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.

Not if your an experienced driver it isn't. Its like rubbing your head and
patting your tummy. Some people can do it easily, others cant. Some people
would get distracted and some wouldn't as far as talking on the CB.

Thenagain the same argument can be levelled at Car radio's/cassette
recorders/CD's/passengers talking/kids in the back/Christmas lights on
houses/short skirted women on the pavement or even constantly checking your
speed limit in camera zones, are all these things going to be banned and
treated as illegal. Nah........

It should only land you in trouble if its seen to distract your driving not
that it "could". I "could" easily be a cold blooded murderer but as I
haven't killed anyone yet (as far as I know ;o) im not... but I might be.
The law is an ASS.

Regards and Merry X-mas,
Graham

--
_._. _... ._. ._ _.. .. _ _ _

Radio is only a Hobby. Don't let it rule your life...

73's - Graham (www.open-channel.co.uk)

What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.

Not if your an experienced driver it isn't. Its like rubbing your head and
patting your tummy. Some people can do it easily, others cant.

Something that you obviously have trouble with.

wrote in message
...

What is linked is that it is considered that tlaking on a cell phone
while driving is a distrraction. What the judge has linked to this is
talking on a CB radio is essentially the same kind of distraction.

Not if your an experienced driver it isn't. Its like rubbing your head
and
patting your tummy. Some people can do it easily, others cant.

Something that you obviously have trouble with.

No trouble at all.