[sbe-eas] Question for the group about the new MEP EAS Code

[mlangner at swcp.com]

Hello everyone !

Please allow me to ask a question about the new MEP EAS code.

A New Mexico father is angry and is complaining that the media didn't carry
alerts about his missing adult son.

There is no evidence that the missing adult son is endangered in any way.

So, here's my request for clarification.

Is MEP designed for:

            (1) persons who are simultaneously missing and endangered, or

            (2) persons who are missing but may or may not be endangered?

The crux of my question revolves around whether the word "and" is truly
conjunctive, requiring both conditions, or may be interpreted as disjunctive
(as "or") calling for an MEP to apply if either condition exists.

Many thanks in advance - this may sure sound trivial, but it's bound to come
up since relatives of missing and/or endangered persons tend to approach the
issue emotionally rather than just rationally!

The State of New Mexico wrote extensive laws about how Amber Alerts are to
be handled in New Mexico - regulations not for broadcast media, for which
federal pre-emption takes precedence, but for alert issuing agencies.

I expect the State to do the same for MEP alerts.  I'd like to make certain
that the correct interpretation makes it into state regulations!

Appreciatively,

Mike

_______________________________
Mike Langner, Chair
SECC-NM
929 Alameda Road NW
Albuquerque, NM 87114-1901

(505) 898-3212 home/home office
(505) 238-8810 cell
mlangner at swcp.com <mailto:mlangner at swcp.com> 



 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/sbe-eas/attachments/20240817/e4754dc3/attachment.htm>