On Jul 22, 6:04 pm, wrote:
DougS wrote:
wrote in message
...
DougS wrote:
wrote in message
...
Tina wrote:
Does anyone know if it's legal to interfere with nav sat reception? It
would be interesting to know, for example. if there were known outages
when the president was at his father's estate in Maine.

In the US, it is illegal to deliberately cause interference to any
radio service.

However, the the US government is not bound by this.

Actually, it is in a theoretical sense. Otherwise the US would be a
police
state.

The topic is interference with radio services.
*And* the legality thereof.
Premise: It is illegal to deliberately cause interference to any radio
service.
Premise: The US government is bound by its own laws.
Conclusion: The US government cannot legally cause interference to any radio
service.

The FCC doesn't write laws.

The FCC writes regulations.

The Congress writes laws.

I doubt you understand the difference and I have no desire to either
educate you or get into a long drawn out discussion on something not
at all related to piloting based on your dislike for the current
crop of government officials, all of which will change with the next
election anyway.


That's a bull**** strawman argument, and you know it. The regulations
(written by FAA or FCC or other executive branch and codified in the
CFR) have the force of law in the United States. The authority of an
executive agency to establish the regulations is granted by the US
Code. (Hint: the FAA's authority is established in 49 USC). Why do
you think there are exceptions written into TFRs for military
aircraft? If you don't think the CFR applies to government entities,
then those exceptions wouldn't be required, would they?

The penalities for violating the regulations are civil in nature,
however they are peanalties nonetheless, and are spelled out in 49 USC
463. Included in that section is the authority granted the FAA to
impose penalties for violation of its regulations. I am sure that
other agencies (including the FCC) have been granted similar powers
through the USC. Otherwise, I could hop into Travolta's 707 and fly
around willy-nilly in U.S. airspace while blocking radio signals
without any fear of any repurcussions. Those regulations are just
regulations and not law after all.

Regardless of what you may think about the applicability of a
government's ability to circumvent its own laws/regulations, it can be
a relevant point for all those who are bound by those regulations (ie
pilots).

BTW, your conclusion that I dislike the current crop of government
officials is a red herring and irrelevant to the discussion of whether
or not the selective (or unselective for that matter) suspension of a
regulation or law by a government is "right." That is beside your
presumption that it (the government's disregard for its own laws) will
change with the next election is flawed to say the least.