I think the proper analogy would be to test applicants on how to
drive a
buggy or ride a horse to get a drivers license. There are plenty of
people who enjoy these equine hobbies, but they have little to do
with
driving a car. Of course, in an emergency, when no gasoline is
available
or the roads are washed out, those on horseback will have an
advantage
and save the day, but it would be foolish to restrict millions of
potential drivers because they realize it would be STUPID to make
them
learn to ride a horse!

Not a valid analogy at all. Try this one:

It's more like requiring all applicants to learn to drive stick shift
(manual transmission) cars, even if they only intend to drive automatic
transmission cars."

Of course the test in the USA basically equates to being able to get
the car moving, into second gear and back to a stop without stalling
out too many times, but it's still there.


I learned the code to get my general and haven't used it since. I did

it, but for me, it was an enormous waste of time.

How many technical subjects did you learn for that test which you have
never used since? Should they also be eliminated?

Another apt analogy is that code is a form of hazing to join the
fraternity of hams. Maybe we should carve our callsigns into paddles
and
whack all prospective hams until they copy 20 wpm.

Not at all.

After WWII, there was a huge pool of of veteran radio operators who
knew
and loved the code for what it was, the best and most reliable mode
OF
ITS TIME. Sadly these pioneers are dying out, but their legacy
persists.

Is something bad just because it is old?

Most hams I have met did not learn the code in the military - they
learned it in ham radio. And Morse Code use is alive and well in ham
radio.

Prospective hams are allowed to use newfangled calculators on their

exams. Shouldn't we demand that they use sliderules?

There's no math on the current exams that even requires a calculator.

If you are worried about our CB good buddies taking over the bands,
tune
into the 80 Meter band any evening. They are already there yammering
about their "legal limit" amps. That battle has already been lost.

Not on 80 meters. On 75 meters, maybe, but not 80. Believe it or not,
Part 97 lists them separately!

Note that what you describe isn't happening on CW.

As far as being able to fix my radio....I can't even fix my CAR
anymore!

So why should there even be a written test?

I could buy and drive and repair an old VW like I did for so many
years, but I've grown up and actually enjoy my 21st century ride! My
wife owns, rides, and maintains a beautiful horse, but when we need a

half gallon of milk, she doesn't saddle up and ride into town. She
gets
into our 21st Century car and DRIVES to the store.

Sounds like you're saying that there should be no requirements at all.

The arrow of time points in one direction. The clock ticks. So what
is
it going to be? Buggywhips or PSK? While we argue over buggywhips the

FCC will take back the hambands or destroy them with BPL.
How will dropping the code test defend against BPL?

73 de Jim, N2EY