RadioBanter - View Single Post - Beware of hams planting dis-information...

May 11th 05, 04:06 PM

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Tue, 10 May 2005 16:03:16 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
(So you have been mistakenly telling us for years, yet, there is no
damper affecting those of us who play on it regularly for free or a few
paltry bucks..)

Illegally. Just as there are people who

trespass on private or otherwise posted land,

and never get caught either.

Physical trespass can carry a *criminal* charge..talking on the freeband
can not.

There are criminal provisions in the

communications act of 1934.

We are speaking of freebanders on the eleven meter band.

But the point is that nothing will happen if you

are never caught. But the fact that you are not

likely to get caught does not diminish the

illegality

No one ever said it did.

and societal irresponsibility of

engaging in the acts.
=A0
In order for you to claim such a "societal irresponsibility" exists,
there first must exist a "societal responsibility" somehwere other than
your mind regarding such (cb radio)....can you cite it?
=A0Once again, this is the difference between
what constitutes a criminal act vs a civil act.
The penalties are not the same.

But it's still illegal.

(shrug),,,,which has -never- been contested by anyone here, yet, for
some curious reason unbeknownst to all but yourself, you have taken it
upon yourself to assume status and annoint yourself some sort of
imaginary right to confront others concerning their non-criminal act.

The FCC rules do carry criminal as well as

civil penalties should they choose to apply

them, if the case warrants it.

Please cite these criminal penalties referring the freeband or simple
dx.

_
I would hedge zero times have you actually confronted a real criminal or
law breaker in the act and in person.

I certainly would if the opportunity presented

itself.

It presents itself daily to you in the form of speeders,,a act that can
cause physical damage or death when violated, which carry real criminal
pealties, unlike dxing or freebanding. When was the last time you
confronted one and how was it done?

Ask any cell phone company

owner/administrator.

Your selection of cell phone admins does not discount the countless
freebanders, cbers or hammies who play on it for free or on the extreme
cheap.

Illegally,

And legally.

Hams and legal CB'ers perhaps. But not

freebanders.

Yuh,,

or on bands where public access is

set aside.

Or not. Don't forget many of the freqs that have been abandoned.

Abandoned does not mean "open".

Right,,,it means not being used.To use your analogy regarding physical
property,,,,if a lot or property is abandoned, and one tends the ground,
takes care of it, and pays the tax on it for x amount of years, the
often land becomes the property of the caretaker who has been taking
care of it and paying the taxes.

There are many abandoned buildings around.

But you are still not allowed to trespass there.

Yet, many people use these abandon buildings on a regular basis with
immunity. Bums,,,vagrants, crackheads, etc.
See above for examples of a form of citizen eminent domain.

_
I'll
reiterate what you already found in google on many
occasion,,,,,education is the key.

Much like a public park.

Nothing like a public park, as breaking the law you speak of (trespass)
can result in criminal charges, unlike talking on the freeband.

Look at FCC regs again. There are certainly

criminal penalties associated with them.

There is,,,but not with simple dx or freebanding.

Ask your buddy "Bob-noxious" about the

criminal penalties associated with pirate radio.

Another realm.
_
This
concept has proved nearly impossible for you to grasp. Perhaps it
because you so vehemently disagree with the law.

Your whole justification revolves around your

perception that unless a law has serious,

visible teeth, then it doesn't deserve our

respect, and we are justified in ignoring it.

What justification? The fact that you continue to incorrectly claim I
justified anything over the years has dogged you.

That is anti-social behavior.

So is the behavior of sports fanatics and religious zealots, both a very
real part of the fabric that weaves America. But most people understand
tolerance is a necessary gem to a successful America and certain acts
are placed in to proper perspective by the majority...a perfect example
is the majority of the populace do not consider speeders "criminals"
like yourself.

They are the ones authorized to sell spectrum

to people with a legitimate need. It's no

different than government owned land.

Again, it is very different for many reasons, several of which you were
already taught.

.Yes, it is different in some ways, but the ways
that are similar are what I am talking about.

But,,,,,,it's not.

It's a fact that the FCC sells off chunks of

spectrum to commercial interests, sometimes

for outrageous amounts. If the FCC was not in
the position to claim "ownership" of that

spectrum, how could they auction it off?

By virtue of administration. Auctions are held daily all over the place.
They do not own what they auction, but like the FCC, are merely charged
with the administering of such.

Semantics.

No,,facts. You can't call facts you disagree with "semantics".

You want to talk about facts? The facts are

that the FCC can and does auction off chunks

of spectrum to commercial entities to use.

They also regulate those chunks. They also

set aside some spectrum for "public use". Yes,
they administer it, as an arm and

representative proxy of the U.S. government.

Who is charged with administering what belongs to the public via their
tax dollars. Not much different than an auction.

So, while the FCC might not directly "own" the

airwaves, the U.S. government does.

Nope. The citizens of the US "own" the airwaves by virtue of their tax
dollars paying for all that is related to it.
_
Wrong again. The government has absolutey zero authority how I operate
my vehicle on my own lan and can not revoke my privilege to do so.

Right! On you own land. But venture out on .

the public street, and they have all the

authority. Same goes for radio.

Again,,,,,(sigh),,the analogy of the car is invalid as it can result in
criminal charges, while operating on the freeband does not.

Yes it can.

Only when combined with other acts. If you feel simple freebanding (the
context of which we speak) carries criminal charges, feel free to cite
the passage or an example,,even one.

If you can somehow prevent your signal from

escaping the borders of your property (Which

is covered by FCC Part 15), you could do

what you want.

Know of any test cases pushing the limit on this law?

Pushing which law and in what way?

Transmitting, albeit, under the guise of part 15, to a much broader
audience than permitted.

Well, look into any "low power" pirate

broadcaster. Some have tried to claim that

their power is legal (even if their antennas are

not).

Once one is pirating, any legal guise under Part 15 vanishes.

Once those signals escape into the public

venue, they are under the control of the

federal government.

How is such defined? If a church camp own 2500 acres and broadcasts over
such, and I sit on the public lake adjourning their property and can
tune in their broadcast..is it now simply approached as a public
broadcast?

Most of those situations employ carrier current
transmitters which radiate only a short

distance from their "antenna" wires, thereby

limiting range beyond the intended service

area. The biggest uses for this technique is on
.college campuses, travel, and road alert

systems.

Yes,,,but my question remains and is still valid.

The reality is that even a carrier current

system needs to be authorized by the FCC.

So a radio system capable of covering a 2500

acre church camp would need FCC

permission to operate.

Sure,,,,,but again,,,if one was to zero in and receive the signal from
property not owned by the entity transmitting under Part 15, what then?
Isn't this a technical violation?

As you know, RF degrades gradually and it is

impossible to "brick wall" stop a broadcast at

the limits of physical property. But unless you

are very close, you will likely not hear a carrier
current transmission.

Or on an unobstructed waterway with a visual on the proper/transmitter.

.Another way to look at it, You own your car,

but not the roads you drive on.

Public means owned by the public,,,paid for by tax dollars.

And administered by the government.

You may own your radio, but not the airwaves

you broadcast on.

Neither does the FCC like you mistakenly believe.

For all practical purposes, yes they do in this

country.

You do not have a "right" to transmit beyond

the confines of your own property.

That is what the cb does.

Yes, but the authorization to operate a CB is a
"privilege", not a "right".

You are granted a "privilege" to do so by the government in the proxy of
the FCC.
This "privilege" is availabe to anyone, so how can it be referred a
privilege?

=A0=A0Not true. You have to be a U.S. citizen, and

not convicted of other FCC rule violations.

Ok,,proverbially "everyone".

But it's not "everyone". Even though the CB

radio service is authorized by rule, there are

still restrictions (albeit small) on its use. It's not
a "right", it's a "privilege".
=A0
I know you elitist hammies believe this to be true about your ticket,
but it simply does not apply to cb, as practically any American citizen
is granted the "right" to broadcast, via a cb, simply by ownership of
one. This does not exactly equate to any "privilege".

Instead of arguing with me, try looking into the
rules governing each service, and find out for

yourself. Despite the relative ease by which a

person may operate a CB radio, it is still not a

"right" to do so, it is a privilege granted by the

FCC, as the service is authorized by rule,

even if a license is not required.

And if that law were serious, one would NOT be able to buy, plug and
play. What stops an immigrant from using a cb? Nothing,,they all se them
in the fruit fields.

This is true, the FCC isn't checking the

immigration status of every CB operator,

The immigration use was but one example. There are countless more of how
anyone can use a cb simply by purchasing one off the shelf or from
anotehr party.

and it won't come up unless the person is

cited for other rule violations. It's sort of like

the seatbelt law in many states. You can't get

stopped for it alone, but if you are stopped for

another violation, they can cite you for failing

to wear a seatbelt at the same time.

Yea,,well they just changed the law here,,they can pull one over for not
wearing it,,it's no longer a secondary offense (in Fl) , but a primary
offense.

Again, it seems that you justify ignoring rules

based on the unlikelihood of being cited.

When I began selectively ignoring specific rules for a specific purpose
(which happens to be THE definition of civil disobedience), most weren't
even aware such rules existed, which nullifies any possible position
presented by yourself regarding ignoring rules on the unlikelihood of
not being cited. In fact, when cbers were sliding up one or in between
to "channel 22a", most had no clue it was illegal.

As a

condition of that privilege comes your

responsibility to abide by the rules set fort in

various FCC parts depending on which

service you are using.

You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

Actually, I love the manner in which the FCC enforces radio law right
now and have said so on many occasion.

Sure. The FCC is not as effective as they

should be,

The country disagrees with you, simply by virtue of what the FCC
enforces.

and freeload.... er, freebanders get away with

trespassing on other government administered
frequencies with little chance of getting

caught.

Because it's ractically a non-issue with the majority of Americans.

But that doesn't mean that it's legal or proper.

Again, not one person ever made such a claim in all my years of visiting
thse pages. Just who is it you are trying to convince?

But you guys who are operating illegally are

using all sort of excuses to justify or downplay

this illegality.

Then you should have no problem illustrating substance concerning your
accusations, but you have failed to do so to date regarding any of these
"guys" you incorrectly invoke.

The fact that the FCC isn't actively pursuing

freebanders, is not a justification or a silent

nod allowing you to operate there.

They rightly and deservedly go
after those they deem the most important and damaging to our hobby.

You mean those who project the highest

profile, or those who impact operators who

paid dearly for the right to use their part of the

spectrum.

Those who present a direct safety issue.

Very few people fall into this category.

All hammies who jam repeaters and talk where they are not permitted (on
the hammie band) fall into this category.
It
is yourself that does not like the "way it is" nor agree with it.

Well, that's true. I do wish the FCC had more

teeth.

They have plenty of teeth. Their bite is interested in chomping away
with censorship of television.

It's much easier for them to enforce.

Actually, the hammies are much easier to enforce.

They don't have to track down anyone.

"Tracking down" in the manner you believe is a thing of the past. The
High Frequency Directional Finder in Laurel, Maryland pinpoints
transmissions anywhere in the country immediately with no effort. Ask
Scott about it.

They can administer from their offices.

Yet,,they choose not to concerning all but those deemed the most
important regarding enforcement.

Dave

"Sandbagger"

n3cvj