Slashdot Mirror
FCC Reserves the Right To Search Your Home, Any Time
mikesd81 writes "Wired.com reports that you may not know it, but if you have a wireless router, a cordless phone, remote car-door opener, baby monitor or cellphone in your house, the FCC claims the right to enter your home without a warrant at any time of the day or night in order to inspect it. FCC spokesman David Fiske says 'Anything using RF energy — we have the right to inspect it to make sure it is not causing interference.' The FCC claims it derives its warrantless search power from the Communications Act of 1934, though the constitutionality of the claim has gone untested in the courts. 'It is a major stretch beyond case law to assert that authority with respect to a private home, which is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure,' says Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyer Lee Tien. 'When it is a private home and when you are talking about an over-powered Wi-Fi antenna — the idea they could just go in is honestly quite bizarre.'"
The first place they'll try this will be at NewYorkCountryLawyer's house.
...to place bear traps around my router.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
...because if someone not in a uniform bursts into my home unannounced they're going to be leaving with a few more bullet holes in their body than they walked in with.
And the resulting court case. I'm pretty sure the 4th amendment would triumph over the FCC's bullshit rule they presumably wrote themselves.
They've had this power for decades. This is nothing new. Fire up a transmitter and start broadcasting overtop an FM radio station, and just see how fast the FCC sends out their goons.
My blog
Whew good thing, I don't have either of those technologies in my cave or in my summer home (mother's basement).
Are they actually planning on home invasions? Unless they have inspectors lining up to look at my wireless setup then saying this which will clearly get a lot of people "us" all worked up, why say it at all?
The musings of just another geek and his junk.
Only after they speak with my lawyers Smith & Wesson.
The way Britain and the US are going, the only true bastion of freedom and human rights will be Canada soon . . . Time to close the borders? ;)
I'll just leave this here.
http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.txt
How would they get in? Do they have badges of some kind? Is there an FCC trained police force to execute these entries?
To really revisit the Communications Act of 1934 to will take someone getting hurt or killed during one of these entries.
Or due to the Supreme Court ruling in '67, FCC spokesman David Fiske will have to be educated on Federal Law the hard way.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
I know the Castle Docterine exists for some states (Or used to), I wonder if (Assuming one is in that state) could use that as a valid defense for shooting an FCC goon on your property...
... Florida's "Castle" doctrine, I reserve the right to shoot them as they walk thru the door.
There is a war going on for your mind.
Note that AT NO TIME, does the FCC guy interviewed actually say they can search your home without a warrant.
He says the FCC has total authority to inspect RF devices. Which they do, the article even cites the specific law that gives the FCC that authority. They can ask to see your router at home but they still don't have the authority to just bust into your house without a warrant.
So does this also mean they can search my home if I'm connected to the AC grid, have a microwave or have somehow acquired a quasar?
At a glance, the relevant laws regarding inspection seem to apply only to licensees and licensed (and presumably non-illegal) equipment. Thing is, routers etc. are unlicensed - ergo there is no legal basis for an inspection thereof (unless the equipment is operating in an illegal manner). Even if a law is being violated, a warrant is required.
Oh, BTW: anyone here notice that ammo sales are WAY up? probably not a good time to do an unannounced inspection of a lawfully unlicensed radio transmitter.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
In the meantime, pirate radio stations are adapting to the FCC's warrantless search power by dividing up a station's operations. For instance, Boulder Free Radio consists of an online radio station operated by DJs from a remote studio. Miles away, a small computer streams the online station and feeds it to the transmitter. Once the FCC comes and leaves a notice on the door, the transmitter is moved to another location before the agent returns.
Fscking awesome. Absolutely fscking awesome.
How 'bout we just get rid of the FCC?
Oh wait! All those important *cough* alphabet agencies...
how can we manage without them? *cough*
Stand back, sarcasm alert!
If I am not mistaken, in the U.S. there are these little stickers on almost every device that says FCC compliant, so they have already "inspected" the device and have no legal bearing for re-inspection without a warrant. Now in cases presented in the article it makes sense because chances are the rig is either non-certified or set-up improperly. Any individual that has ever operated a radio should understand the importance.
GO BLUE!
Is their power to search the PROPERTY, or to inspect the DEVICE?
If it's the latter (which would make sense), ask them specifically what they're looking for, and bring it to them at the front door.
Just like with the police - if they ask if they can come in, just say no. :)
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
In the US, our government has no rights. It only has powers delegated to it by We the People. It has no rights, not prerogative to reserve them.
There are some special constructs like "sovereign immunity" but those are not right, they are juris prudence constructs. The FCC can't just say "we're reserving the right to rape your children". Congress has to vote to give them that power. And with congress voting, due process is upheld.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Does anyone still say this?
You could argue this power is limited, and any evidence of any other illegal activity uncovered by FCC during this process of disabling non-compliant radiation emitter is not admissable in cases etc etc. That is all fine and good. But it is a stretch to claim the right to pollute the EM spectrum just because the device is inside a private property perimeter.
It is very easy to give FCC this power to enter premises in a constitutional way. The ability to detect RF emissions coming from the property itself is probably cause.
Dont like that? You dont want FCC to ever enter your home? Just build a Faraday's Cage around your home and you will be fine. Or may be upgrade your tin-foil hat to a tin-foil home.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Nope. Every device that emits a radio signal is licensed. Your wireless router has an FCC ID, does it not? Then it is a licensed piece of equipment.
My blog
What is so unreasonable in locating a device that is interfering with Air traffic control or FM radio broadcasts or GPS recievers? FCC does not have the right to go on fishing expedition in private homes, I agree. But if it has a quadrifiler antenna beeping away and pointing to a home that has RF emitter out of compliance, why should it not enter the property and disable it?
What about a private property from which you see diesel draining away? Or you smell catavarine around it indicating a leaking propane tank? You think the fire department needs a warrant to enter the property and plug the leak?
CAR ANALOGY: Can the fire department break the window and extract the injured accident victim from a car? Or do they have to file for a warrant and wait for a judge to grant it?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Im sure they will keep this one around. It could prove to be useful like tax evasion laws. Using the FCC the government could enter your house because they suspect a device inside is in violation of the law. Brilliant. I'm going back to the Stone Ages right after this post. You can reach me by courier pigeon.
I have a little bit of real-life experience dealing with an FCC engineer while he was hunting a suspected illegal transmitter. I was helping him locate it.
Basic story - someone had set up a cross-band repeater with it's output on 2m running about 100W. The main purpose of this thing was to act as a remote phone. The output was right in the middle of the 2m Satellite downlink band. The system would turn on intermittently, and he would talk to his girlfriend about Olive oil parties and such.
We found his input frequency and figured out how he turned the thing on and off.
FCC came down to track it - they asked us to turn it on for 30 seconds at a time. They took three readings to find the guy! The last reading was "which antenna!" They are VERY good at what they do. Turns out the guy DID have a license, and he was sited for no ID (which was pretty minimal..) He was later confronted about his activities personally and embarrassed into ceasing same. The fact that he was screwing up satellite operations AND a near by repeater he didn't know existed helped in that cause.
Anyway - to make this relevant. The FCC never went into his house. However, they DID confront him at his place of work to site him. (not sure how this occurred..)
As a Ham - they DO have the right to demand to enter my premises to inspect the radio gear. If I deny them access - they can take away the license. So it's a balancing act. If I want to keep the license I let them in. They won't be bringing cops to the door.
Have you compiled your kernel today??
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865 I wonder if it will change your thoughts on walking the straight and narrow and expecting your lawful action to protect you.
I know that sometimes in civil matters, people can bring a law suit to get a declaratory judgment saying that, for example, that they're not violating some particular trademark.
Can citizens preemptively sue the FCC to get a declaratory judgment regarding the constitutionality of their rule?
Or would we just get slapped down with that "no standing" bullshit, that means we have to take it in the a$$ at least once before the courts will protect us?
...the irony of having the RSS message I received for this article having a sponser link for a High Gain antenna for my wireless network.
I claim entrapment!
That's true, but it's not the issue being discussed there. The point is that the 1934 regulation didn't foresee the amount of unlicensed RF spectrum we use today. That rule is obsolete and should be reformed to keep up with the times, otherwise it's ripe for abuses of the "slippery slope" type.
How long until the MAFIAA gets the FCC to break into someone's house on the pretext that they are using a wireless router to transfer music and video files between a desktop and a notebook computer?
Sure, they shouldn't do it but nailing sharp nails so that the unsuspecting children would hurt themselves is just evil.
I'm pretty sure the blind children aren't hopping the fence to take a shortcut through your yard.
When a society makes other people responsible for your safety when you're doing something you're not supposed to do, it has failed... by which standard most of our societies are on the way out. Without personal responsibility you end up being a nation of useless bitches. (There are always exceptions. But most people are lame.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
...without a warrant is going to suffer some lead poisoning caused by a .30-06 bullet. And the law in my state allows you to shoot intruders so it'd be perfectly legal.
The Bill of Rights spells out prohibitions on government authority in general and on Congress in particular. The FCC is a creation of Congress and is run by the executive branch and CANNOT be given any authority by the legislation that created it if Congress doesn't have that authority to give in the first place.
Corporatism != Free Market
The FCC doesn't need to physically inspect your gear. All they need to do is park their white van in your driveway, turn on the spectrum analyzer, and make sure the emissions are coming from your house. Then they issue you a $10,000 fine. You can use whatever kind of unauthorized transmitters you want, as long as you keep everything inside a well-constructed Faraday cage with no detectable emissions.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
See Bodine v. Enterprise High School. Although an extreme case, this thief did successfully get ~1M dollars in 1984-present-value dollars out of the school for injuries sustained while stealing a floodlight from the school's roof. This case was a poster child for tort reform movements in the 80s and 90s, but I'm not sure the legal situation is much different these days.
Then they can raid Cisco's corporate offices, not a private residence.
Oh no, the jackbooted thugs are coming for you!
We had a 100W Motorola base station malfunction (it was keyed up 100%) and take out a police department frequency 50+ miles away.
One FCC guy came out in a pickup truck with an RF scanner. We located and fixed the problem, apologized, shook hands and he left. End of story.
Relax people...
... or they'll be plugging holes in the FCC reps due to the 2nd amendment.
-BA
Ahh, Smith & Wesson. Did you know that they are into software development too? They invented the original Point & Click interface :)
This is incorrect. The FCC will ask you to allow them to inspect the RF device. You don't have to allow the inspection. There may be additional consequences as a result of your refusal however, most people who are not doing anything wrong will willingly allow the FCC agents to find a source of radio frequency interference.
... after all i thought as it's the U.S. of A. you still have the right to shoot the FCC Trespasser before he can identify her/himself, right? ;-)
"morning is a state of mind
I think this is what happened to Free Radio Austin when they got raided.
Police donâ(TM)t need a warrant either if they have probable cause â" you rob a bank and you are seen running into your house.
Likewise, if a transmission coming out of your house is interfering with emergency calls I canâ(TM)t imagine why a warrant should be necessary. If they need to look in your house they already have irrefutable evidence that the troublesome transmission emanates from your abode.
I got 3 pitbulls!
...Wi-Fi Antenna and it is causing interference with my home Wi-Fi network you don't need to worry about the FCC, but I would advise you to shield your house against EM bombs.
If your "over powered wifi antenna" exceeds legal limits, radiates outside your property lines, and interferes with local emergency communications, your neighbors medical equipment, overhead air traffic communications, and/or etc., one certainly hopes that FCC authorized agents can break in and take down this illegal interference before someone gets hurt.
just make sure you house is a good Faraday cage, and the public need not worry.
For the truly paranoid you'll worry about the NSA or the FBI piggy-backing with the FCC to get around such happy things as the Constitution and Due Process. It's just one more tool for them to use to justify the fact they are doing things out of due process and breaking the laws of the land. If they do all this to protect the land, is it really worth saving? *sad sigh*
Not precisely true. Read the bottom of that device, and then go read Part 15 of 47 CFR.
Basically, if you use that unlicensed device, you have certain responsibilities, one of which is to cease operation when told. FCC shows up at the door, says, "turn it off". You tell them to pound sand. They say, fine, we'll turn it off for you, and enter and do so. By your use of the device, you've essentially given them permission to do so.
Please see the thread on Usenet group ba.broadcast.
A former FCC field office chief has stated that while someone may try to convince a resident to let him in, he can't legally use force to gain entry without a U.S. Marshal and a warrant.
This is exactly what I've been thinking ever since I moved to the U.S . All those small print, multipage contracts written in legalese that everyone is supposed to read and understand are an absurdity. You need them to rent a house, buy a car, get insurance, enroll in school, install software, using websites, ad nauseam...
The problem is that the world is so complex nowadays, what with technology and global trade, that the amount of laws required seems to greatly surpass the memorization capabilities of any human (or even lawyer) in any country. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if so many laws are passed daily that it is simply impossible to keep up. Not enough hours in the day.
So, what is the solution? Is there a solution? I don't think so. We're pretty much stuck with the current system which relies on faith, trust, common sense and dumb luck. All of which fail at some point or another, making the whole lot of us into criminals. Thus the whole "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" argument is wrong and, in fact, can be evil.
Absurd eh?
I think my second amendment rights may prevent that from happening.
I'm pretty sure the blind children aren't hopping the fence to take a shortcut through your yard.
Without knowing how the nails were placed we can't say if there was a risk of injury for the children (or anybody else walking by, for that matter).
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
No law overrides the Constitution...
There's a pretty good-sized gap between 'responsible for your safety' and actively trying to injure someone.
Losing all sense of proportionality and responsibility is another sign of a failing society (pot - meet kettle).
This is patently ridiculous, and it is a troll.
To my knowledge, the FCC has never gone door kicking without other federal law enforcement agencies present, and there was always a warrant, and it was always for egregious violations.
The FCC might come around your home or business, and politely ask to see some of your gear if there is a reported interference or regulatory compliance issue. They do have the right to do this, and it is certainly reasonable. If you do not cooperate and let them finish their interference or compliance investigation, they may take legal action against you, and in severe cases, could result in the SWAT team at your door. But that would not be without warning and due process, including registered letters, attempted service of legal notices, etc.
I've read about FCC enforcement actions, and they definitely prefer the carrot to the stick...
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
all the CB (citizen's band) radio operators of the 70's that built or acquired linear amps and bumped their power up from the legal maximum of 10W to more than 100W. Many homes got invaded without warrants in those years. Most amplifiers made were cheap, and bled over into other frequency ranges, even at the IF level. I know of one CBer with a huge amp that the local church asked not to transmit on Sunday morning. His signal was so strong that 2 blocks away, it overdrove the church's PA system, and in the middle of the sermon the congregation would hear his transmissions at tremendous volume. "Yeah, meet you at the choke-n-puke good buddy!"
Just because it's on the books doesn't mean anyone will follow it, ever.
Did you know there is a law in Chester, England allowing you to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow if found inside the city walls at midnight?
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
...because if someone not in a uniform bursts into my home unannounced they're going to be leaving with a few more bullet holes in their body than they walked in with.
you think these guys work alone?
never wear a vest?
when the call goes out that a federal officer is down - and it won't much matter whether he is FCC or Border Patrol -
there is a very good chance you will be making your departure in a body bag as well.
the geek's trust in the gun is adolescent.
Just try it mother fuckers!
I'm sure the old lady was being hilariously nefarious and hiding some sharp nails where only someone jumping the fence would get hurt, if they weren't paying attention that is. But why is it so wrong to expect the little peckers to not jump her fence? We have a social contract that allows people to carve the land up and put up fences, is it wrong to expect them to be respected? I think you either have to let people put spikes on their fences (it's not like we're talking about land mines here — I do think you have to draw the line someplace) or just accept that we should be tearing down all the fences and giving up on the idea of property ownership entirely.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Getting a HAM license requires taking some tests, and knowing what the policies are before you put your radio gear up. You know, should know, and can know what you're responsible for. If you're transmitting against the rules, and the FCC calls you on it - you stop doing it and/or get fined.
You know it's going to happen.
Now if some $80 POS Linksys goes haywire and the FCC tells me about it, I'll shut it off and get a new one. But no way, no how, am I going to let those fucks in to 'inspect' - if they want to come in, then go swear out a warrant describing the particulars of what they're looking for and bring a cop with you. If the warrant's valid, I'll let you in FOR THAT and nothing else. If you don't want to swear out a warrant, then fuck off - I'm not letting you in. And if you shove your way in, you WILL be put down on the ground as a trespasser - I don't want to shoot you, but I will if I have to - so long as you sit there quitely and wait for the Police to show up to arrest you, the trespasser, you'll have no problems.
Now bring a warrant, and we're good. But unless and until you do that - you're a trespasser. US Sup Ct. rulings back that up. I've been involved in a few court cases in IL where that's been backed up - no warrant, no entry. No probable cause? No warrant, no entry.
The gas company tried this bullshit under the guise of complying with some half-assed regulation promulgated by the Federal DOT, and which the IL ICC adopted. They allegedly had to inspect meters INSIDE houses for atmospheric corrosion, etc every 5 years (when they first adopted the policy), then every 3 years (a year after they adopted the policy), who knows how often next year... I told them to fuck off after ignoring 15 of their notices. Finally had my lawyer call them up and threaten to sue them. That got them to move the meter outside for free - yeah, I had to let them in to do the work, but that was a one-off thing, and the entry/area they could go to was highly restricted... Now I'll never worry about it again...
I don't care if it's "Administrative" or "Criminal" - a search is a search, no matter who does it. No warrant, no entry. WE, THE PEOPLE, granted certain privileges to the Government, and WE reserve the rest - not the other way around. The price of Freedom and Liberty is eternal vigilance - it's worth fighting for, so do it and stop being pussies.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What if the trespasser is illiterate/dyslexic/doesn't understand the language the sign is written in?
Won't you still be held at fault if they get hurt?
"When a society makes other people responsible for your safety when you're doing something you're not supposed to do, it has failed..."
Tresspassers have no rights
Terrorists have no rights
People who we think are terrorists have no rights
Let's open Gitmo.
The fact that people are doing something they are not supposed to do, does NOT give you a carte blanche. It doesn't.
If a burglar breaks his hip by tripping over a skateboard in the dark can not be construed as your fault since your intentions were not malicious and the place was safe when entered in a normal situation(lit chamber). However, if you transform your house into a deathtrap each night and somebody falls into a pit with spikes(think Prince of Persia ;) ), you can be considered responsible since you knew that something like that would happen and the trespasser had no idea.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
Not true. There are unlicensed portions of radio spectrum. 2.4Ghz is one of those bands. The manufacturer is required to make the device compliant with the regulations so that buyers of the equipment can use it that way.
The device has a sticker on it that certifies the compliance with FCC rules for unlicensed use.
If you change the equipment so it does not meet the specification, you may need a license (like amateur radio operators using higher power in the 2.4 band).
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. --Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition, Section 177
however if you're wrong, or ruled to be wrong, then you're finished
You're implying that only blind children wouldn't notice the nails and I can think of a dozen scenarios in which they wouldn't be noticeable and still be very dangerous.
Setting out to harm people is wrong. Get over it.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
And me without my mod points...
It's in your rental agreement.
lanlords can enter once/twice a year, scheduled and announced ahead of time,
for when its convenient for you, not whenever they want.
FIREMEN CANNOT enter!!!
They are not landlords.
Now a lanlord can get firemen to come help with inspection (firemen do this kind of thing),
but unless you've agreed that today is the scheduled day etc etc, they cannot enter
unless there is actual fire.
They say, fine, we'll turn it off for you, and enter and do so.
We can follow the Fourth Amendment, or the Second Amendment. Pick one.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Ah yes, another person who thinks that someone saying any public figure not having the best intentions of God, the universe and puppies in mind is somehow the very same type of person to grab the hem of your coat as you pass, begging you to look up and see the lizards coming out of the giant eye of the pyramid or something.
People who blow off any thought of a public figure with power abusing that power are fools, not serious. History is chock full of small groups of people doing things against public interest for their own benefit. Now that we're in an age of instantaneous secure communication, all of the sudden nothing like that is going on and thinking that it might is grounds to have you mental health examined, or at least derision?
No wonder middle class is dying, it's too easily led away from noticing the people who are killing it, and all it takes is some mindless drivel and a snide remark, usually about tinfoil clothing...
So Much for a "government by the people for the people" If my cellphone, portable phone, WiFi Radio, BT-Radio are physically harming you, or in some other way interfering with your life drastically, go ahead and search my house and EVERYONE else's who has any wireless/or wired broadcasting device starting with the Radio station at on the corner that makes half the AM band on the radio come in like sh*t, or not at all. Until I am interfering with any one else more than the next guy stay the eff out of my life FCC(Government) and I won't get into your "business." Thank you and have a nice day.
So they must also have the right to inspect anyone's brain. At least those with detectable brainwaves. A tin foil hat is starting to make sense now.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
"My reasoning would be that being sued is a very stressful and emotional circumstance"
Limit or alleviate the stress (caused by overstepping official, frivolouos lawsuit filers, bus-taggers, petty thieves, overbearing bosses/teachers/ just about anyone who gets on and GRATES your nerves, hehehehe...
What is stress?
Stress: That confusion created when the mind override the body's desire to kick the living shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Moreover, there are Men with Guns who will force you to comply with their point of view, until you are (you hope) vindicated.
Go ahead, let them try. If they don't "knock and announce," I am going to treat them as invaders. In Arizona, there are laws allowing you to defend your home. I believe they call them, "Home as Castle" laws and they should be prepared to meet whatever force I deem necessary to protect my domicile. Ain't a prosecutor in the shady side of the desert that won't side with me as long as I don't shoot them in the back and give them a reasonable chance to retreat.
"If an ATF officer enters your home without a valid Search Warrant, aim between the eyes, or between the legs". Naturally, Mr. Liddy was not loved by many ATF Career Staffers after that...
You know, she could just have told the kids to stop jumping or attached a sign to the fence (or made the fence higher if the height was what made them jump). In this society we're supposed to talk to people instead of using violence.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
There's about four posts above this AC's that don't seem to see any distinction between kids and adults or criminal intent and lack thereof. The AC should have posted with a name and should be modded up. The real sign of a failing society is people who think they are good citizens yet try to reduce an issue to such a simple, single principle that other principles such as public safety get totally omitted from their reasoning, and horrible actions get 'justified'.
Drinkypoo, you're creating a false argument by excluding a few middles. The social contract doesn't let you put nails in fences for several reasons.
First, you have other alternatives - Starting with talking to the kids, their parents or even the police if needed. Beyond that you have legal action.
Second, the society has always made other people responsible for KIDS safety when KIDS are doing things they are not supposed to do, simply because no society ever has been able to get KIDS to act responsibly by themselves. That's why we have laws against presenting an attractive nuisance, such as an unfenced swimming pool.
Third, in the vast majority of situations such as you describe, there are other people the homeowner legally has to give access to or has agreed to give access to who can blunder into those nails, i.e. a cop patrolling on foot, a fireman responding to an emergency at the home, or just a meter reader. If the case you have in mind actually didn't have any such problems associated, that would be highly unusual.
Forth, sharpened nails will quickly rust, and may not be very visible at all seen on end against a wood fence, so your substituting the word 'blind' for 'unsuspecting' is verbal trickery at best. Many people of normal vision might fail to see such nails until an accident occurred. What, did your homeowner paint red concentric circles around each one? Imagine paramedics responding to an emergency call from the home? It's night, they are trying to set up field equipment, including erecting a wheeled stretcher to transport a probable patient, and they maybe have a cop with a flashlight to help them avoid obstacles in the yard, if they are lucky. That cop is likely to point the light at the ground rather than the fence-line, as it's more normal to have trouble with inadvertently placed obstacles such as garden hoses or plants than a deliberate trap. What's likely to happen there?
Who is John Cabal?
Have it written in every language, including a button with a highly recognized symbol of "listen" that audibly plays back said warning(s) in all languages.
from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
It's called "due process". In a nutshell: Do they have the right to inspect your equipment? Probably. Do they have the right or authority to circumvent Constitutional protections and the due process thereof? Not a chance in hell.
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
I think it was the FCC who actually visited my house when I was in 4th grade. I had a NES and the RF adapter was messed up, so I mucked around with it with some aluminum foil and got it working again. One day a couple of guys in suits visited our house and said that there was a signal interfering with airplane radios and we had to disconnect the device... My parents were amazed at the time how the government was able to track down our one house in the huge neighborhood. So I'm proud to say I had a run in with feds in elementary school!
Yes, people still say this. We need a good counter slogan.
Ideas:
And NASA can condemn your real property (ie. home and land), throw you off of it, and proceed to use it in any way they see fit.
And the FDA has a swat team, and uses it.
I swear these are true. The first is in NASA'a charter, the second came to light when FDA raided a doctor (74 years old) associated with the old Oxytherapy web site. They then confiscated his property and attached his funds. He later got back about US$3000 of his much greater retirement account. That was 10 years ago. The FDA SWAT team hasn't gotten any better at this: http://wholefoodusa.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/1058/
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Try to get the FCC for anything outside its 9-5 hours...
That is all.
There is a slight EM field produced by the human brain. Do they have the right to inspect the inside of my head?
The FCC just doesn't barge into people's houses in a manner suggested by TFA. They don't have a fleet of yellow trucks like in "Pump Up The Volume."
There is a very, very long history of FCC enforcement actions for things like CB operators using amplifiers, businesses using amateur radios for communications, amateurs abusing repeaters, etc.
Here's a smattering of recent ones.
Anybody who is so egregious as to actually come to the notice of the FCC generally has gotten to the point where "inspecting" their house wouldn't be necessary - there would already be ample evidence of the problem available simply by monitoring them from a distance.
Such is the nature of RF - you don't have to actually be inside the premises to detect it.
It's often not the FCC that visits folks anyway. This is a cute story about someone causing unintentional interference. In this case, it wasn't the FCC that got to the bottom of it, it was a bunch of hams.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Indeed.
The Wired article we're discussing makes me really suspicious. Note that the article does not report any instance of anybody in the FCC actually entering somebody's residence. The only actual case they cite involves the FCC imposing a $7,000 fine on a pirate radio operator who refused to allow them to inspect the premises (and whose home was not entered, because he refused). TFA very clearly implies that the guy admitted to be running a radio transmitter (the FCC guys left after he agreed to turn it off). So basically, he's been served a fine for refusing inspection of a transmitter that he admitted to operating.
It sounds to me like both of these are true: (a) you have 4th amendment rights against unreasonable searches; (b) you have an obligation to allow the FCC to inspect radio equipment that you operate. The real question is what's the correct balance between these. Clearly it's not allowing the FCC to conduct arbitrary searches of people's homes, but I haven't seen any materials at all that can be reasonably construed to say that the FCC claims that right for itself.
Are you adequate?
They can't get in unless you let them. The Wired article is giving an incorrect impression that the FCC claims that it has the right to enter homes at will to inspect radio transmitters. That simply is not the case. You have an obligation to allow the FCC to inspect your equipment, but that obligation does not eliminate your Fourth Amendment rights. So you can refuse to let them in. In that case, they have the authority to fine you for causing interference, or if they have evidence you have committed a crime, they can turn that over to a prosecutor.
Are you adequate?
There's another extremely important thing that we should mention in this context. The way the 4th Amendment is implemented in the USA isn't anything remotely like "you have the right to kill a police officer that is searching you unreasonably." The way it is implemented is "the prosecution cannot use evidence that was obtained through an unreasonable search." If a police officer insists on searching you, your property or residence, you are not required to consent, but you are also not allowed to use force to stop them. The dispute about the reasonableness of the search is supposed to happen at the court.
Are you adequate?
Um, take this scenario: the FCC has evidence that you're operating an unlicensed radio station at your home. They come to your home, knock on your door, and ask to inspect the equipment. You refuse to allow them to enter. At that point, they leave, and when they get back to the office, they fine you for $7,000 dollars.
The law in question gives the FCC the authority to do that. How was the 4th Amendment violated here?
Are you adequate?
But there is law that specifies when you must obey the commands of a police officer, and those laws are constitutional. For example, there exist constitutionally valid laws that prohibit you from using lethal force to resist an arrest by a police officer who's identified himself to you. Those laws remain applicable even if the police are arresting you for violating an unconstitutional law.
The principle stated earlier in this thread very much applies here: it's the courts decide whether a law is constitutional, not you, period.
Are you adequate?
Insurance companies too.
Those were the original unofficial snoop program, back during the cold war. Insurance companies don't really need whole buildings full of ex-military people in every city just to do paperwork, collect money, and pay claims. Hell, they even call them "agents".
Warren Buffet doesn't make shit-tons of money investing in Twinkies. He runs insurance companies more efficiently than those other hacks who are just arms of the federal spy bureaucracy.
Why do you think the US government is now bankrupting itself trying to bail out the insurance industry, after spending the last ten years spying on everyone they possibly could in the name of "terrorism"?
And I agree! My previous posts on this issue reflect that view.... rather directly....
I seek to point out the absurdities that are now being taken for granted...
And yet I refuse to get hoisted upon Hume's Guillotine,.... or his Fork.
You know, she could just have told the kids to stop jumping
And on your planet, children do as they are told?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"