Coconino County, AZ "bans" CB and Ham Radio!

What was their rational for doing this? You know our country would be a much better place if about 75% of the politicians, both state and federal, would just disappear.............

 

If you're not a member, join OOIDA and send this to them, when several cities tried to ban trucks, it was sent out, the truckers responded and in time, got the laws changed. The city has no control over using the radios, they think they do, but if challenged, I'll bet this gets changed.

 

It is interesting to see what won't happen. nothing is going to. Until they fine someone, there can't be a court case and in truth the law is meaningless and there has even been the question of whether or not a cell phone ban (hands free driving) is even legal because the feds are the only ones who are allowed to regulate radio/cell phones, not the states or cities or counties.

I'm not going to worry about it, Hams are smart enough to be test cases to fight stupidity like this and HOA.

 

[h=2]New York Judge Declares Amateur Radio Is Not a Cell Phone[/h]
TAGS: amateur radio, amateur radio service, arrl,
ARRL Regulatory
Information, cell phone, citizens band, mobile radio, mobile rig

09/10/2010
In many states and localities, it is illegal to talk on a cell phone (without
a hands-free device) while behind the wheel -- doing so can result in a ticket
and possibly a large fine. But on May 30, 2010, when a New York ham was talking
on his mobile rig, he didn’t think he was doing anything wrong. Except that the
officer who pulled him over and cited him with a $100 fine didn’t quite see it
that way.

Steve Bozak, WB2IQU, of Clifton Park, told the ARRL that when he was pulled
over while driving to Troy -- about 16 miles away -- he assured the officer that
he was not speaking on a cell phone, but on his handheld transceiver. But
according to Bozak, the officer said “it was all the same to him.” So Bozak
decided to fight the ticket in court.

“Honestly, it’s not the fine or the ticket, but that all the other hams who
use mobile radios have to hide the fact we are mobile in Troy,” he told the ARRL
just days after he was cited. “I will do my best to settle this politely and
correctly, for all of the ham community. So I will follow the course and have my
day in court, to ‘tell it to the judge.’ This matter affects 38,000 hams in New
York State.”

Unfortunately, when Bozak had his day in court for a pre-trial conference,
the prosecutor refused to dismiss the case. But he didn’t give up and took his
case to City Court where, on September 8, where at the request of Bozak's
attorney -- ARRL Volunteer Counsel (VC) Jeremy, Rase,
KC2JRD -- the judge dismissed the case in Bozak’s favor.
Bozak argued that his use “of a handheld Amateur Radio does not fit the
definition of a mobile telephone, and as such, the present charge should be
dismissed.” The prosecutor’s office did not submit a response in opposition.

Saying that New York’s Vehicle and Traffic Law defines a “Mobile Telephone”
as a “device used by subscribers and other users of wireless telephone service
to access such service,” and that a “Wireless Telephone Service” is defined as
“two-way real time voice tele-communications service that is interconnected to a
public switched telephone network and is provided by a commercial mobile radio
service,” the judge decided that Bozak’s handheld transceiver did not fit that
description.

“A review of 47 C.F.R.§20.3 reveals that Citizens Band Radio Service is
defined under private mobile radio service not commercial mobile radio service,”
the decision read. “Therefore, the Court finds that the use of an Amateur Radio
device does not fit the definition of a mobile telephone as defined under the
Vehicle and Traffic Law” As such, the judge dismissed the case in Bozak’s
favor.

“While the court cited the Citizens Band Service instead of the Amateur Radio
Service, the ruling very is favorable to amateurs on the precise point of law
raised,” said ARRL Regulatory Information Manager Dan Henderson, N1ND. “The
principle of law is spot on. This is a great ruling in New York and exactly what
we had thought would happen.”









[h=3]Photo
Gallery[/h]

• 

Back

Back to Top

Source: ARRL.ORG

 

You are correct about not being able to file suit yet. As of now there is no "standing" to do anything about it in court. Even if someone does get cited for it, it would be difficult to establish standing on anything other than the amount of the fine. Maybe in the future someone could prove that their life has been adversely altered as a result of this law.
Any municipality can enact laws that are in conflict with federal laws. Example: It is legal to own a firearm in the U.S. under federal law, it is a felony to possess one in the City of Chicago.

 

Don't know where this town or county is but I can tell you this the law violates state and federal law for some of us.
AA&E required to have a CB as well as cell phones.
Most hazmat loads required to have 2 forms on communications in the vehicle ( IE cell & CB)

And in my case OD required to have an operation Cb on at all times for communications between driver and pilots and other vehicles on the road

 

Hmmmm how old are these clowns who make these silly rules? Less than 30 years of age? I don't believe back in the 70's, during the CB craze, that we had accident after accident because someone was chatting no their CB or ham mobile....

Cell phones are different, and so is texting....but neither are in the same league as a mobile 2 way radio in terms of distraction.

I suppose next they'll ban you from eating while driving? Goodbye fast food drive thrus....