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

May 13th 05, 01:24 PM

On Thu, 12 May 2005 10:34:14 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:

There are criminal provisions in the
communications act of 1934.

We are speaking of freebanders on the eleven meter band.

Who are radio pirates, operating unauthorized
radio transmitters. The provisions in the
communications act of 1934 do not
differentiate which bands unauthorized
transmitters can incur criminal penalties. If the
FCC chose to do so, freebanders can be
charged criminally. The fact that they have not
chosen to do any more than sporadic
citations, does not diminish the fact that they
could if they chose to.

Whoaaa.....you are invoking what does not take place, only what you
pontificate can take place. Reality is,,it doesn't take place. End of
story.

Police do not usually cite people for Jaywalking, but they could at
any time. The point is that just because a law is not actively
enforced does not mean that it's ok to break it.

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.
*
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?

Societal responsibility goes far beyond CB
radio. It goes hand in hand with morality,
consideration, and just plain old fashioned
good manners.

Try again.....in regards to cb radio, please cite this non-existent
"societal responsibility" concept that has you confounded.

Not everything in life is codified, especially morality. If you need a
specific guide on how to be a responsible citizen and a good neighbor,
you can start with Miss Manners and work your way up from there.

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.

Please refer to the communications act of
1934 and related parts.

I went to the source. I see no criminal charges, merely civil charges.
Can you cite this exception of which you speak?

Start with Title IV, section 401 and work your way from there.

There is a mitigating difference between "can't" and "won't". Even
so...keeping with your claim,,..how is it you confront all freebanders
and lawbreakers regarding cb and freebanding?

I have, on occasion, prevented speeding by
paralleling someone in the right lane holding
the legal speed limit.

A massive ticket here in Florida, AND in Pa from what I read.

Based on what charge? A person is under no obligation, and in fact is
prohibited from exceeding the posted speed limit regardless of which
lane you are in.

A perfect
example of you hypocritically breaking the law to commit an act of what
you mistakenly believe upholds another.

I broke no law.

Besides, speeding is not a criminal offense,
it's a simple summary offense.

And the cb infractions are civil in nature, not criminal.

Until they become habitual and flagrant.

What it may or may not lead to is irrelevant,
and calls for speculation.

..except when you invoked the possibilities of cbers running huge power
interfering with emergency communications in a long ago conversation.

Which happens.

Speculation is acceptable only when invoked by yourself to suppport your
hypocrisy.

Nothing I have said is hypocritical. However you may wish to reexamine
the context of which you pull your information before making invalid
comparisons.

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.

Squatters rights. And interesting angle.

And a valid one.

And for it to apply, then you would have to concede that radio
spectrum is treated in the same way as "real" property.

I wonder if someone has tried that tactic on
the FCC in regard to the freeband area of 11
meters. The principle is similar.

Only to your misguided education or beliefs or whatever is responsible
for you not grasping such a concept. It has not been tried with the FCC
because even the lowly cbers seem to comprehend the spectrum is 1) not
owned by the FCC and 2) not tangible property.

Then the concept of squatter's rights does not apply to radio
spectrum. So I'm curious why you brought it up in that context.

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,

.... Freebanders. I see the similarities.

You really have a low opinion of yourself, Dave.

No, not me, only scofflaws.

I always said you had a serious ego and self-esteem problem. The mere
admittance that you held yourself in such company confirms such.

That was then, this is now. Everyone can repent, even you. It's not
too late to atone for the error of your ways.

See above for examples of a form of citizen eminent domain.

Yes, and I'm waiting to see someone attempt
to use this reasoning to obtain the legal
authorization of the freeband

Only you could.

I've seen far more ridiculous claims come forth by misguided citizens
against the government. So I would not be surprised if someone tried
the "squatter's rights" angle with respect to radio spectrum.

Then again, some people would rather just operate illegally rather
than going through the trouble to have an perceived unjust rule
changed. Those people are simply weak.

The only thing you have in your favor is that
the FCC is not motivated enough to do much
about it.

You have nothing in your favor. It's all blatant hypocrisy.

What have I said, that could be considered hypocritical?
Is operation on the freeband not illegal? Should the law not be
respected? How many more excuses are you going to invent to hide,
obfuscate, justify, or otherwise downplay the fact that you willingly
ignore a federal law?

It's not that it's any less illegal, it's only that
they don't care enough.

Because it is rightly a non-issue to the majority, of which you clearly
do not belong, leading to the fact that you are a minority wishing to
dictate your beliefs to the masses. Doesn't work that way.

Sort of like the democratic party trying to subvert the constitution
by an abusive application of a filibuster to block judicial
nominees......

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj