CH>RT>Again... how many crimes are you aware of that have been committed
  >  >where the perpetrator used police radio interception to avoid capture?
  >  >I don't believe that a driver using his scanner to avoid going through 

  >  >license check would qualify.  Robbery and burglary would seem to be the
  >  >most logical crimes to use scanners.... have you ever investigated any
  >  >that did?
CH>Use a little deductive reasoning.  Scanners are not a device that
  >has been hidden from the public.  Most people know about them.  Now,
  >if you were a burglar concerned about whether an alarm had sounded
  >and whether the police were on the way.................wouldn't
  >you consider a scanner?
If I were committing a crime, I would absolutely use a police receiver
as well as several other high technology devices that are available to
the public, but we are not talking about me.  Are you suggesting that
most criminals use anything close to common sense when they commit their
crimes.  I don't believe that deductive reasoning plays a very big part
in their plans.
It was a simple question that precluded deductive reasoning.  How many
times are you aware of that a criminal _likely_ used a scanner to avoid
capture?
---
 * QMPro 1.02 42-7029 * Please handle carefully, this tagline is fragile.
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
1:135/5.0)
---------------