[bigfatkitten]

Amazon doesn't even particularly care whether the items they sell are even legal in the country where they sell them.

FRS radios for example. Fine in the USA, not fine in Australia where those frequencies are used for public safety radio systems, and where they are illegal to possess because they don't comply with the applicable EMC standards.

[fc417fc802]

It's a bit off topic I guess, but I actually see that as a fringe benefit as opposed to a drawback. Other than some exceptional edge cases I'm opposed to item possession itself being illegal - it all comes down to usage. (To be clear, I'm not opposed to strict ID recording requirements in some not-quite-as-exceptional edge cases.)

[kbelder]

Honestly, I regard that as a plus.

[bigfatkitten]

Causing a mess for legitimate users of the radiofrequency spectrum, and exposing unwitting customers to prosecution is a plus?

To be clear, you can buy equivalent products on UHF CB frequencies locally, that you can use without interfering with ambulance services for the same price.

This is legislation that exists for a very good reason.

[serf]

buying the thing doesn't do that.

abusing the thing in the wrong region does.

question : why isn't this a matter of national import/export control? Why is that duty falling onto Amazon?

if Amazon was selling black-tar heroin I would have more questions than "Why is Amazon selling this? How dare they."

[bigfatkitten]

Because Amazon has a legal duty under consumer law to only sell goods which are fit for purpose, be of acceptable quality etc. It would be hard to describe a thing that is unlawful to use in the market it was sold as being fit for purpose.