Talk:Radio scanner/Archive 1

Capital punishment
Do any countries REALLY have capital punishment for possession of a radio scanner? This seems like a pretty absurd notion. Perhaps the author didn't know what capital punishment is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.34.165 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 27 December 2004


 * Okay, I no-one has replied and Google gives no connection between radio scanners and capital punishment, so I'm going to edit the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.52.30 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 28 December 2004‎

Frequency ban
Does anybody know exactly what the ban says or anything else about it? It seems kind of pointless now considering I haven't seen an analog cellphone in years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.37.190.49 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 21 March 2005


 * All scanners manufactured or imported into the U.S.A must not be able to receive the frequencies cellphones use. They are not simply blocked out, but the scanners are built not to recieve them. Cheers :-) Bennyboyz3000 10:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Judgemental
This article is unfairly judgemental of lawyers, associating them wither criminals. I suggest a boycott of criminals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.135.182.72 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 28 May 2005‎

Illegality
"In the United Kingdom and France, it is illegal to listen to almost anything outside amateur radio and mid-wave AM/FM stations in the broadcast band."

I'd like to see precise information as to which laws prohibit radio scanners in France, because I have not been able to find any. David.Monniaux 15:29, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Check out www.nzscanners.org.nz for information on scanning in NZ . ( TD ) 222.153.21.203 07:32, May 16, 2006

Illegality ... in Mexico
What about in México? I was there with a Radio Shack scannner, and I was told by my Mexican friends that scanners were illegal there. The authorities there never discovered that I possessed one; so, I never knew for sure. (20 November 2005)

preventing scanners from being modified
Does anyone know how companies prevent their scanners from being modified? This Totse article allegedly shows how to modify scanners, and I'm curious as to why people think that doing so is impossible. --Ixfd64 02:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As long as the scanner's receiving range is limited by discrete components, it remains possible to modify by removing or replacing those components. The best protection against modification would be to incorporate the frequency blocking circuitry into an IC, making modification much more difficult. --Altailji 03:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Newer CPU controlled receivers have their range set by the CPUs firmware/software. Some of these newer radios allow "region" setttings to be controlled by the presence or absence of components on their motherboard. The US has really cracked down on the manufactures these days and US bought radios are mostly (100% as far as I know) impossiable to modify these days. In the old days, the frequency range was usually controlled by descrete components. These could almost always be modified to allow wider band reception. --Bagmouse7 15:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Orange County
In the legal issues section, 68.123.152.29 added (most notably all law enforcement agencies in Orange County, California), but failed to make it clear why Orange county was "most notable". I removed it. 69.224.164.131 added (Orange County, CA encrypts all of its law enforcement radio communications, for example), which is better stated. However, the edit summary was this: "Guess you're not from the OC, are you? Please do not remove."

Two points:


 * No, I'm not from "The OC". It doesn't matter. This article does not and should not center on a particular county or agency.
 * 1) "Please do not remove" doesn't protect any contirbution from scrutiny or removal.

PrometheusX303 00:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Do we have to include "criminals"
The page has the following sentence:

Popular amongst hobbyists, reporters, corporate spies, criminals and lawyers, scanners allow chosen frequencies to be stored in memory banks to allow them to be monitored later and will only stop scanning when there is a signal strong enough to break the radio's squelch setting.

Do we have to include "criminals" in this? I will admit, it is funny how the original author wrote "criminals and lawyers"! What do you guys think? Can we delete the word criminals? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bagmouse7 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC).


 * In as much as hobbyists, reporters, etc can also be criminals and any tool (cars, crowbars, flashlights) can be misused with criminal intent, it seems to me that including criminals as a specified class of user may not be necessary. Anyone else care to weigh in on this? -- Rydra Wong 07:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's been over a year since editors were asked for opinions on this issue. I will delete criminals as an unnecessary and potentially POV embellishment. -- Rydra Wong (talk) 23:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The reference to criminals and lawyers probably was included by some well meaning soul who observed that the general public's only exposure to scanner radios is seeing them as props on TV shows and in movies: the bank robbery gang who uses a scanner to monitor police frequencies, or the seedy, ambulance chasing lawyer who monitors public service channels so he can be first at the scene of a crash. Bear in mind that these are fictional characters, not real people. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Pictures
The handheld scanners look great. Does anybody have pics of desktop and mobiles scanners as well? It would be useful in showing variety. Prome theus -X303-  22:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll try to take some shots of my hubby's base models this weekend sometime. MamaGeek (talk/contrib) 11:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have an older 20 channel base model which I may be able to get a shot of if I can dig it out. If anybody has pictures of older crystal controlled 8 to 10 channel units please upload them or contact me. -- Rydra Wong (talk) 14:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Multiple problems with this page

 * hobbyists, railfans, off duty emergency services personnel, reporters, corporate spies, criminals and lawyers OK, how many lawyers keep a scanner going on their desk? As far as criminals, I'm sure some criminals do use them, but that seems too judgemental of a mainly law-abiding, and overregulated, hobbyist community. I'd say it's mainly radio hobbyists, some niches such as aircraft, railroad, or auto racing fans, and reporters.
 * Surprising to some, the United States and Canada have very lenient scanner laws. Surprising to who?
 * decryption and private investigators. I don't think the federal government is in the business of issuing P.I.'s dispensation from the ECPA to decrypt signals. If there was some reason for an outside agency to listen to something, for instance, a tow company that contracts with a police department, the police would just issue them a police radio.
 * These bands, too, are illegal to monitor in the U.S. Not exactly. The 900 MHz band is used by all kinds of devices, including ham radio. The 40-something MHz segments are used by other services, such as buses, logging companies, military, and low-power walkie-talkies. So it's not illegal to monitor the band per se, but if you hear a phone you are obliged to tune away. Also CTCSS can be used if you only want to hear the buses or the oil company.
 * In the United States, the general guidelines to follow when using a radio scanner Some of these rules precede the ECPA by many years.
 * Certain states in the U.S., such as New York and Florida, prohibit the use of scanners in a vehicle unless licensed by the FCC Sometimes there's an exemption for ham operators, but its unclear if it allows listening to the police or merely posessing a radio capable of doing so. There's other exemptions too that have nothing to do with the FCC.
 * In general the article needs work. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It is sometimes illegal to monitor military activity. Not in the U.S., AFAIK. (This sentence didn't mention the US, but was in between several sentences that did.) But probably considered espionage in other countries. Squidfryerchef (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've begun a general rewording and cleanup but any help with citations, clarification, etc, would be greatly appreciated. -- Rydra Wong (talk) 23:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Should "Example laws by country" be folded into "Legal Issues"?
Legislative examples should be placed under "Legal Issues". A full listing of should probably be a separate article entirely. Anyone agree? -- Rydra Wong (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)