RadioBanter - View Single Post

November 29th 04, 03:41 PM

From: (Leland=A0C.=A0Scott)
"Twistedhed" wrote in message
... But you MUST
consider the probability factor. What you propose is deviation from the
norm concerning the FCC.

Not really. Take a look at the other

enforcement actions for such things as tower

height and lighting etc.

Toward corporations and commercial stations only. The only deviation
from the FCC regarding enforcement is against commercial broadcasters.
The bar was raised.

You have a better chance of
hitting the lotto. Not going to happen. You are discounting the monetary
factor, here. I believe you are missing the monetary picture here of why
the huge companies stay in business year after year when only the
littles ones are closed and put out of business.

The FCC's aim is not to put anybody out of

business, but to bring them in to compliance

with FCC regulations.

Their aim is besides the point,,,heck, you should know that as long as
you have been around radio. Everyone knows they aren't truly concerned
with enforcement at this level,,,yet, that is supposed to be their
"aim". It's a wink-wink type thing and action is taken ONLY when
repeated complaints are lodged against individuals. IF their aim was
true enforcement, do you not believe for one second the FCC might have
some enforcement initiated on their own against such ops? After
all,,,one doesn't need look far. Large fines cripple small businesses,
the larger ones pay it and do business as usual. If you check the thread
properly you will find it wasn't I who initially mentioned the FCC
closing these businesses and putting them out of business or that it was
ever any "aim" of the FCC,,,I merely responded to the claim.
_
Cite a single case involving the FCC tossing a white collar exec in jail
for a similar charge.

I don't have any at my finger tips, but that

doesn't mean that there aren't any.

Giving the benefit of doubt to a negative that exists only in thought is
not logic nor scientific thought and thus is immediately discarded.

And if by chance there are non there is

always a first time. As they say with investing

"past performance is no indication of future

returns",

I always heard the opposite. In fact, that is exactly why blue chip
stock continues to be a recommended staple in anyone's portfolio who is
seeking safe, conservative investments. Ask any broker or financial
advisor WHY they recomment these stocks,,,,,,,,it's "based on past
performance".

I was referring to lost profits from removing the
product line from their travel centers.

Yes, that was understood and my reply stands. They will not remove the
product line. They will pay the fine and continue.
_
Your position is based upon suppositions, the "if" factor, and the
assumption the FCC is changing the manner in whcih they operate, as
opposed to reality,,..business-as-usual within the FCC and minimal
enforcement.

I remember comments being offered up a year
or two ago along the line that the FCC wasn't

going to do anything about 10m intruders.

And I say you are wrong. If anyone posted such a thing, it was a sock
puppet. Post it.

Looks like they are doing something now.

They have ALWAYS taken after unauthorized transmissions on the hammie
bands whenever they receive complaints. Only the unitiated to hammie
radio are unfamiliar with the inner going-ons at the FCC regarding radio
enforcement.

Assuming that the FCC won't get more

aggressive in the future is not being smart.

Assuming anything isn't smart.,,even the opposite.

All it takes is a change in the leadership of the

FCC. Imagine if a new FCC chairmen is

appointed, and is a Ham with an ax to grind

about the present situation?
=A0
The chairman yields no influence over the commission to which the the
others do not have access.

Hypothetically speaking, to answer your hypothetical juxtaposition
regarding the chair vs. the commission....such a person wouldn't be able
to rise to such prominence. If they had an ax to grind, they are clearly
are not in charge of their emotions. Such a person with a communication
deficit as you allude would never be in charge of the agency responsible
for governing such communcations.
_
=A0In fact, Riley has written the FCC considers many of these
complainants a pain-in-the-ass..he didn't come out and say those exact
words,

Well what exactly did he say?

You paraphrased him regarding hammies with an "ax to grind". He claimed
"these type are often worse than the offenders." Hell, ask Jerry what he
said,,,,,,,he knows it well because he and I discussed this exact ordeal
when Hollingsworth said it. He wasn't too happy with it then, either.
Google it,,,it's there.
JO took the same reaction to Riley's words that you are now, only he had
no choice but to not challenge it because he read the words for himself.

I'm sure others

would like to read the comments for

themselves and make their own

determination. I know I would. I have been to

ham fests where he was a

speaker, and I don't get the impression that

you got.

Others have read what he said AND heard it. He posted it on the
rainreport when he was addressing this subject a few years ago when he
was still doing the rainreport. In fact, a quick archive google search
will reveal this exact conversation and thread in this group regarding
his words back when he said them.

_
but DID say these type hammies (Oxendine)
are often worse than the offenders themselves. An incredible statement
from the head enforcement officer at the FCC.

And just what "type" is that?

Someone whose world is constructed upon failed agitation attempts and
using hammie radio as their personal tool of harassment.
Proof positive: Please point to the post in any of the hammie groups
where k4kwh posts hammie enforcements.
In fact, when the hammie busts are compared to the cb busts, it is no
small wonder the Oxendines of the world outnumber the cbers getting
busted for stupid behavior on a regular basis. Truth is in the numbers.
_
I'm not an apologist for Jerry but I see his

point.

Then by all means, explain his lack of interest in posting hammie
enforcements in the hammie groups. His actions, much like your views,
are based in personal emotive response and based upon personal likes and
dislikes..his dislike for cb, as well as your own.

If he has to be a thorn in the FCC's Butt, so

be it.

Sure,,and that's exactly what some freebanders may reply to you when you
demand an explanation of why they do what they do.

I have yet to see any government

agency that didn't perform better if wasn't for

some citizen getting on their case about doing

the job they are being paid to do.

Really? Here are but a few examples...the IRS (self-explanatory), NASA
(NASA's failure rate is at all time-high regaridng the space program),
Bureau of Land Management (millions of acres not accounted for (for
which money was allocated AND taken), millions more damaged because of
bureaucratic ineptitude despite mulitudes of scholars, scientists,
commissioned study groups, etc. complaining AND testifying before
congress to the incompetency of the government. The FDA (A pill
manufactured by Eli Lilly is sent to all parts of the world for
labeling. Many originate here in the US before being shipped off. The
same pill that is manufactured here, can end up in Canada, cheaper than
it is here in the US. The FDA does not permit the RE-importation of this
US-manufactured pill from Canada, and invoke a multitude of fraudulent
reasons of why one can not do this) has been under not only consumer
attack and complaints for years, but has absolutely zero supporters on
this specific matter, EXCEPT for the US government via the unAmerican
Bushwhacker. The INS, the CIA, and the FBI...again,,all
self-explanatory. See 911 related issues. But let's focus on the
incompetence of the FCC and those who have this ax to grind you speak
of, such as you astutely mentioned in replying to my comments concerning
Oxendine.
--
Leland C. Scott

KC8LDO

Wireless Network

Mobile computing

on the go brought

to you by Micro$oft