On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:03:40 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:
I think I have been both, freebander/ham, all I think I have seen is that
the freebanders have more fun.
That depends on your definition of "fun".
Also, I think the radio spectrum is for the use of all, there needs to be a
good slice of radio spectrum set aside for freebanders, indeed, set aside
for "We the People!"
There is. 40 channels worth. There's also FRS and MURS too.
Unfortunately, the hams have just become a self-serving bunch holding much
of the spectrum to their hobby... they like nice clear spaces of spectrum
where they and a few buddies carry on conversations like old women around a
bridge table.
Are you a ham? If not, then where do you get your stereotypical
information?
Unless one feels himself a child who needs a parent telling them what they
CAN'T do--it is time for a change of thinking here...
Ah, another one who can't live under the rules of society.
I think the FCC needs to support radio use amongst the citizens of this
country, not a self-serving group who feel themselves more deserving and
special...
What do "the citizens" do to deserve such treatment?
I think we all need a better form of radio spectrum use--one
which conforms to the people, NOT makes the people conform to ridiculous
rules...
Making subjective value judgments is a flaw in your logic. Those
"ridiculous" rules are there for a reason. They're not there to ruin
your fun, they are there to ensure that all radio users have a fair
chance and equal access.
And, I think a whole lot more... but basically it all revolves around my
seeing hams as self-serving/control-freaks who have a good thing going--and
are getting away with it...
Well, lets see, hams do have to pass a test to prove some level of
technical proficiency. That is worth a lot more than simply doing -
Nothing! Hams earned the right to that "good thing". And it's not an
exclusive club either! You are welcome to earn the privilege and join
the ranks. The problem is that you want what they have, but don't want
to work to earn it. It's no different than a welfare slacker
complaining that their hard working neighbor owns a nice house and a
BMW, and laments that "they have a good thing and are getting away
with it". Yet he somehow feels that he deserves the same
considerations while doing nothing to earn it. You probably feel that
the rich don't deserve what they have either.
When you work for and earn a privilege (as opposed to crying and
whining for it) you tend to respect what it stands for. That is why
most hams are more aware of, and tend to follow more closely, the
rules of the radio service. Like your first car. If you earned the
money to buy your first car by years of paper routes and cutting
lawns, you will be more likely to take care of it, than if Dad just
gave the car to you.
The problem is that you want the privileges of ham radio, but do not
want to work for it. The test is not that difficult. Here is where
guys like you then claim that they could easily pass the test, but
they don't "want to", and then cite all sorts of "issues" about the
politics of ham radio that they find repulsive. Yea, hams don't use
roger beeps, noise toys, echo boxes, and they don't normally cuss
every other word. It's the difference between a broadway play and WWE
smackdown. Not that there's anything wrong with WWE smackdown. But
you don't expect those who want to watch a broadway play to have to
put up with the antics of the WWE. That's what choice is about.
So now, you want the privileges of ham radio, without earning them,
and without the presence of some people who may think and act a little
differently than you do. So you want the FCC to kick hams off the ham
bands and then turn the service over to a bunch of unlicensed, lawless
individuals to turn into the RF equivalent of the wild, wild west?
Does that about sum it up for you? Forgetting about the technical
issues that would certainly crop up, do you think this is a good plan?
Even if, hypothetically, the FCC were to create a "legal" freeband
service from say, 26-28 Mhz, there would still be those who would
venture outside of those limits. For those people, it's not about
having fun on a radio service, but about the thrill of breaking the
law, in much the same way that a 17 year old drinks. There's a certain
psychological thrill that comes with "getting away" with breaking the
law, or "sticking it to the man". For those who look at societal
rules as a personal affront, I can only tell you that you have a long,
hard, and uphill battle before you. Happiness will not be easy to find
either.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj