[FedCom] Stingray legality

[bernieS]

The Wall Street Journal article says:

"The U.S. armed forces also use stingrays or similar devices, 
according to public contract notices. Local law enforcement in 
Minnesota, Arizona, Miami and Durham, N.C., also either possess the 
devices or have considered buying them, according to interviews and 
published requests for funding.

The sheriff's department in Maricopa County, Ariz., uses the 
equipment "about on a monthly basis," says Sgt. Jesse Spurgin. "This 
is for location only. We can't listen in on conversations," he says."


The U.S. Military can use whatever transmitters they like on whatever 
frequencies they like without FCC authorization.  But Local, State, 
and Federal law-enforcement  agencies would seem to need an license 
to operate these devices, which apparently transmit on cellular and 
PCS reverse control channels (RECC).

But then, what law-enforcement agency or government agency (FCC) is 
going to prosecute another law-enforcement agency for doing 
this?  It's typical selective enforcement--instead of enforcing the 
law, they ARE the law.  If there ever was a prosecution, the "good 
faith" excuse would probably be invoked.  Ignorance of the law is no 
excuse...unless you're a law-enforcement officer.

I wonder what FCC labeling appears on these Harris Stingray 
transmitter devices.  What FCC type acceptance do they have?  We'll 
never get to see one or the FCC authorizations...

-bernieS



At 10:17 PM 9/27/2011, you wrote:
>Gary;
>
>I believe you misread the article you referenced. The devices being
>discussed are CELL PHONE INTERCEPT EQUIPMENT. In order to intercept a cell
>phone continuously, the equipment has to talk to the cell site for hand over
>purposes. I am surprised that the federal government is allowing a state to
>intercept cell phone calls. In the past this was the private domain of the
>federal government.
>
>Bob, AD5LJ
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "gary" <lists at lazygranch.com>
>To: "Discussion of Federal Government Communications"
><fedcom at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:04 PM
>Subject: [FedCom] Stingray legality
>
>
> >> http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/48003.pdf
> >
> > I'm curious how such a device, which transmits on bands licensed to
> > wireless companies, is remotely legal for law enforcement to use.
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > FedCom mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fedcom
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:FedCom at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>FedCom mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fedcom
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:FedCom at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html