The purpose of the restriction is to keep people from using hacked baofengs to chat on bands a) they're not allowed to use unlicensed b) could potentially already be in use by another service eg EMS/fire/police.

▲

ianburrell 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The big problem used to be that people would buy unlocked Baofengs and accidentally use them on licensed services thinking there were generic walkie talkies. The current locked down rules prevent that. They can still get amateur handhelds and use without ham license, but hams police that. It is also easier to get FRS/GMRS handhelds for pubic use, many the same models reprogrammed.

Unlocking handhelds is less of a problem because it requires deliberate action to break the rules. There are fewer people willing and able to do that.

▲

sc68cal 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are older UV-5R Baofengs that are in demand because they didn't have the software restriction that newer ones have. It's not that they're hacked, it's that they were not locked from the factory

	▲	Manuel_D 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Are newer baofengs locked down? I thought you can still just hold down 3 buttons while power cycling the radio to unlock TX from 400 to 520 MHz. Regardless, the Quansheng UV-K5 is largely supplanting the Baofeng as the go-to entry level HT, the 3rd party firmware for that radio is pretty impressive.
	▲	antonymoose 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I haven’t bought a UV-5R since 2024. That one is as unlockable with a trivial sequence of inputs. Are modern varieties truly locked or just “locked ;)” ?
	▲	seany 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Almost all "real" ham radios can be unlocked anyway, and have much better RF performance.

▲

devin 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I know nothing about this stuff. Is it only chatting on bands that is considered problematic? Are you allowed to listen on any frequency?

▲

ThinkingGuy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Licensed US amateur operator here. In general the FCC regulations allow you to listen on whatever frequencies you like, EXCEPT the cellular frequencies (This dates back to the analog era, before cellular traffic was encrypted). Some jurisdictions may also have restrictions on, for example, using a police scanner in a vehicle, that would restrict listening (even though most of that traffic is now also encrypted).

▲

mindcrime 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Don't quote me on this, but I believe there's some more nuance to the cellular band issue. What's restricted, AFAIK, isn't simply receiving traffic on those frequencies in and of itself, but:

1. Decrypting those communications if they are encrypted

and

2. Selling equipment designed to receive on those bands.

Of course there's not much purpose in sitting around listening to the digital chirping noises of encrypted traffic, but as I understand it, if that's your hobby, that part is actually legal.

(Also a licensed US ham, not not an expert in anything in particular and definitely not a lawyer)

▲

skinfaxi 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I would be surprised if it were illegal to tune into something being broadcast in public over the air. Decryption is a different story.

	▲	kmeisthax 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Get ready to be surprised, because the 800Mhz band used for AMPS (1G / analog cellular) was explicitly carved off as a no-receive zone by Congress because AT&T was pissed[0] anyone could just listen in on any cellphone conversation. I'm told the law actually makes it really difficult to legally sell fully open software-defined radios (SDR), even though nobody uses analog cellular anymore, because you still have to design the SDR to be tamper-proof against attempts to receive 800Mhz. [0] Wikipedia also mentions the existence of cloning tools that would let you copy any AMPS subscriber ID and program another phone with the same number, stealing the subscriber's account. I suspect AT&T was more angry about that.

▲

4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]