GMRS Enforcement

[Guest spd641]

I have just gotten off the phone with Marvin's Building Material and Home Builders about their use of GMRS.I was at one of their stores yesterday and listened to the employees use 462.675 for ordering lunch and general business activities.I notified corporate a few minutes ago and as luck had it reached the IT dept.

 

The gentleman I spoke with was unaware that they were operating illegally.I politely explain to him the rules regarding GMRS use and in turn he provided me with his email address where I sent him a copy of the FCC rules and also links from the FCC website of the latest fines issued to businesses that were caught using GMRS.

 

The IT representative in turned thanked me for the information and will be correcting the situation and I will notify every one as soon as I am updated on the situation....William

[Logan5]

Now your talking., Way to go William. I got a new BC125at scanner a few days ago and began monitoring the rest of our GMRS channels, not a single call sign announced since I got it. Ignorance is BLISS till they get caught.

[PastorGary]

Thanks, William... Tactfulness and polite communications with the unknowing public goes much farther than yelling. Good job... !!

[JohnE]

good luck trying to do that here. short of monitoring,recording, finding the location and then turning it over to the FCC.

I find construction co. to be the worst offenders, they buy radios off the net w/whatever freq's in them and royally screw up my week.

[Linus]

I heard Sonic over the radio across town years ago. They really had a good signal. I could not believe how well their bubble pack radios signal traveled. They had a grand opening and they were using GMRS to direct cars. I drove over and ordered a hamburger. While eating I explained to the manager that what was going on was not a good idea. FCC rules, etc. He was also unaware of the ramifications. They had just purchased the radios for the opening, I suggested that he have his staff change over to one of the FRS only channels. I showed him how and explained that 0.5 watts would work well in the parking lot. There was no need to paint the entire city with parking lot activity.

 

It worked out well. I never heard them on the air again. I visited often for a meal every now and then.

LPS

[PastorGary]

Licensed operators have an unwritten responsibility to be the courteous information source for persons who may not realize what the laws are.  The Commission's handling of GMRS originally was less than thoughtful and their oversight in properly separating FRS from GMRS has left the local education up to licensed GMRS operators. We are the Commission's proxy sub-contractors of education and we must deal with unlawful operators in a manner suitable for a good eventual outcome.

[Linus]

FCC enforcement is lax on GMRS and the Ham bands. Every now and then a serious offender is hit with a fine. This is sad, but it is reality. It is best to ignore those unlicensed users who play on the bands (unless they become a very serious problem). Business are different, they stand a better chance of being fined. They tend to be more reasonable when educated about the risk of operating unlicensed. Presentation of the facts is important. As suggested, a polite education goes a long way. If they ignore the advice and continue and it is confirmed that they are not operating on a grandfathered business license, well, it probably makes sense to involve the FCC.

 

Now if some joker gets on a public safety bands there is quite a rapid response in locating the offender. It makes sense. Enforcing the law to prevent someone from interfering with a fire department or police response is more important than the general public bands. There are exceptions. Interfering with E-communications during a disaster on any band should be swiftly taken care of.

 

The funny thing is, I would not have known about the Sonic opening if I had not heard the transmissions. 

[Shriekmau]

I totally agree. A few weeks back we had a local ARES group performing drills and training. Some joker decided to key up through approximately 30% of all net control transmits. Dispatched teams for Search & Rescue as well as shelter communications were having to repeatedly request re-transmits.

 

No one said anything about it, as is best and common practice when dealing with a malicious "keyer". Though we discussed the possibility of a secret Fox Hunt during the next ARES exercise at our local club meeting. Even though most of us were not participating in the ARES exercise, we were rather upset at the actions of the individual responsible.

 

Some were so peeved I think they might have lynched the person if they knew who it was. 

[Linus]

I often wondered what is done after said idiot "keyer" is located. I guess recording and documenting might help, but what would be next? Ordinary citizens start to enter a dangerous area.

[Shriekmau]

Recording, documenting, then turning it over to the FCC. The FCC doesn't take kindly to malicious interference, especially when it interferes with emergency preparedness. If we did something like that we would not take action against the person, we wouldn't even tell them we were doing it. They would just get a knock on the door from someone driving a black SUV with antennas all over it.

[JohnE]

you don't even see the antennas any more.

I have had several meets w/field agents over the yrs, the new stuff you don't see.

[Shriekmau]

Even better. The only downside is you don't get to see their face when the FCC shows up.

[Linus]

This makes you wonder why these people intentionally interrupt things. Someone has to be psychologically messed up to interfere with ecomm messages. I never understood it myself. I do not think I want to know what goes on in their minds.

LPS

[PastorGary]

There was a study over 15 years ago about that and the findings were a bit sad.  The psychology team doing the study found that the majority of interference was caused by persons who were 'left out' of the main activity because they had emotional issues or were otherwise not 'good enough' for joining the group in the opinion of organizers. That is a sad commentary on the administration of some first responder or 'assist' groups in passing over individuals who are interested in becoming part of a team but for one reason or another, were not asked to join. We are a society of 'differences' and we must all try to get along with everyone the best that we can and to make allowances. If a person is even somewhat qualified to do work for a team, that person should be given a chance to participate and if mistakes are made during exercises, the person should get a fair amount of mentoring to be able to participate and to feel welcomed... before an actual emergency takes place.

 

However, the psychology team also found that there are instances where interference was caused by down right spiteful individuals who don't want to join 'assist' groups and try to make it hard on the group by disrupting things. Those individuals are the ones that the LAW should go after aggressively because they can and do cost lives.

[WQZF786]

On 11/7/2013 at 6:07 AM, PastorGary said:

Licensed operators have an unwritten responsibility to be the courteous information source for persons who may not realize what the laws are.  The Commission's handling of GMRS originally was less than thoughtful and their oversight in properly separating FRS from GMRS has left the local education up to licensed GMRS operators. We are the Commission's proxy sub-contractors of education and we must deal with unlawful operators in a manner suitable for a good eventual outcome.

I agree but what if you are ignored or told to go censored yourself then what do you suggest?

[Lscott]

3 hours ago, WQZF786 said:

I agree but what if you are ignored or told to go censored yourself then what do you suggest?

With the rule changes in 2017, effective in 2018, business use of the frequencies is legal so long as they use FRS compliant radios. No call signs are required. Anybody who monitors the simplex channels will likely hear all sorts businesses on the air using them. Just have to deal with it.

[WROZ250]

On 11/6/2013 at 11:13 AM, Guest spd641 said:

I have just gotten off the phone with Marvin's Building Material and Home Builders about their use of GMRS.I was at one of their stores yesterday and listened to the employees use 462.675 for ordering lunch and general business activities.I notified corporate a few minutes ago and as luck had it reached the IT dept.

 

The gentleman I spoke with was unaware that they were operating illegally.I politely explain to him the rules regarding GMRS use and in turn he provided me with his email address where I sent him a copy of the FCC rules and also links from the FCC website of the latest fines issued to businesses that were caught using GMRS.

 

The IT representative in turned thanked me for the information and will be correcting the situation and I will notify every one as soon as I am updated on the situation....William

It is quite and likely possible that they are NOT operating illegally.  Many businesses had their licenses grandfathered and so are still operating legally on GMRS frequencies.  Now that said, it is also possible they have let their former license lapse.  In any event, it is never a good idea to confront whoever you believe may be operating illegally.

[WRTT642]

Short of interference with medical or law enforcement, why does it matter if individuals are on a channel talking without a license? I understand that there are rules in place to have a license to use system, but at the same time if businesses or individuals are using the system then who cares? I personally don’t agree that we should even have to obtain a license to use this system, kind of a racket if you ask me, but whatever I’ll play along and I’ll even help people get one if they so choose, yet I have read a bit of all these forums and everybody says the same thing, all they hear are crickets in most places. If the FCC isn’t too interested in policing the system then why should it be upon us to do so? Im sorry but I do not have the time nor patience to try and track down individuals or to go to businesses to inform them that they need to have a license to use system. Personally I don’t think any of us should be doing that in any way and putting ourselves in a possible dangerous situation just to inform somebody that they shouldn’t use a radio or how to use one. And to be honest I would much rather have my taxes spent on something more important than to have some government official spending their time trying to track down some kid telling poop jokes or cussing over radio. 

[OffRoaderX]

43 minutes ago, WRTT642 said:

Short of interference with medical or law enforcement, why does it matter if individuals are on a channel talking without a license? 

It doesnt matter, and only the hall-monitors care - as you can see very clearly in this and other online forums..

[neosmith20]

On 11/6/2013 at 11:13 AM, Guest spd641 said:

I have just gotten off the phone with Marvin's Building Material and Home Builders about their use of GMRS.I was at one of their stores yesterday and listened to the employees use 462.675 for ordering lunch and general business activities.I notified corporate a few minutes ago and as luck had it reached the IT dept.

 

The gentleman I spoke with was unaware that they were operating illegally.I politely explain to him the rules regarding GMRS use and in turn he provided me with his email address where I sent him a copy of the FCC rules and also links from the FCC website of the latest fines issued to businesses that were caught using GMRS.

 

The IT representative in turned thanked me for the information and will be correcting the situation and I will notify every one as soon as I am updated on the situation....William

And how do you know they were using GMRS freq.s when FRS is literally the same freq... Many businesses just go out and buy a couple of bubble pack radios for their employees and off they go. What proof is there that GMRS was actually being used? Did you test the wattage coming out of their radios? Where they using a repeater freq.? Where they using radios with detachable antennas? If you can't prove they were using something beyond a bubble pack radio, then you have no case and was a complete waste of their time.

"Although they are two separate radio services, the FRS and GMRS co-exist within 462-467MHz frequency range of the UHF band. Both services share the same 22 simplex channels and frequencies. These channel and frequency assignments are standard across the industry. This means that channel 1 on a Midland FRS or GMRS radio is the same as channel 1 on a Motorola Talkabout, or a Cobra MicroTALK, or a DeWALT, Uniden, or Wouxun KG-805F and 805G. Channel 2 is the same, channel 3 is the same, and so on. For this reason, someone with an FRS radio can converse directly with someone who has a GMRS radio and vice-versa."

https://www.buytwowayradios.com/blog/2021/10/the-difference-between-frs-and-gmrs-radios.html

[TNRonin]

It doesnt matter, and only the hall-monitors care - as you can see very clearly in this and other online forums..

I had hoped this wouldn't happen, but we get to see sad GMRS operators on display. Tho not to the degree of sad hams. Yet!

Sent from my SM-T860 using Tapatalk

[OffRoaderX]

3 hours ago, TNRonin said:

I had hoped this wouldn't happen, but we get to see sad GMRS operators on display. Tho not to the degree of sad hams. Yet!

If you look close, 99% of them are actually sad-hams, disguised as GMRS operators.

[MichaelLAX]

The solution to a sad-ham with a Midland is a happy-ham with a Midland! 

[marcspaz]

@OffRoaderX, I think TNRonin needs a link in order to fully understand... LOL

 

 

[dosw]

I think the reason people care is because they paid and someone else didn't. It's just a matter of them feeling that if they are keeping the rules, why is nobody else?

 

Yes, hall monitor mentality.

 

I've thought about it. I paid my $35. I hear no call signs being uttered except for when there is a net in operation, or people working a repeater. And I do mean none. Nobody. Never. I never hear another person using a call sign on the GMRS / FRS frequencies except in formal nets or repeater use. Even some nets aren't identifying with call signs.

 

There's nothing that can be accomplished by being grumpy about it.  There are tens of thousands of GMRS or FRS radios that have been sold in the past few years within a 25 mile radius of me... of any of us. Maybe more than tens of thousands. One or two grumps are not going to stem the tide. Not even a few hundred.

 

Remember the Internet around 1993-1994? It was well behaved (or at least conformed to a consensus standard). Spam was almost unheard of.  Then ever fall a new set of students would get their school-issued accounts, and Usenet would blow up with stupidity for awhile until they were flamed into submission or departure from the medium. And then everything changed: The Internet became popular. AOL started sending out hundreds of million of CDs. There were news stories on the Internet. Books. Magazines. Globally the world was racing to get online. And these newcomers had no idea about, or no interest in stodgy convention. The net-police could flame all they wanted, but there was no stemming the tide of dumbing-down of the Net.

 

All was not lost. It turns out that the Internet became a whole lot more useful when there were droves of people using it. It expanded into use-cases none of the old guard could have dreamed of.  And of the unwashed masses? They're fine, it turns out. The real issue is the fraudsters, scammers, and hackers. So enforcement focuses in those areas.

 

All this to say, there's really no point for an end user trying to enforce a policy that not even those who made the policy have any  interest in enforcing. Let the FCC spend its time dealing with truly awful abuses, and leave the blister-pack kiddies and hard working businesses alone unless they're really, really causing harm.