RadioBanter - View Single Post - If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?

[email protected] · August 20th 06, 07:26 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 03:10:22 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

wrote:

Here's a suggestion: Drop the "outraged" act and start
thinking about the SUBJECT, not your own emotionalism.

Are you prepared to address the SUBJECT, Len? The subject is: "If you
had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?"

Go for it.
I will address it

certianly not

I myself with now skill at the mode could save a life if it came to
that

Mark, caution on Heil and his - usual - attempt at misdirection by
manufacturing a dispute over personalities. Heil does this
repeatedly as a means of attempting to discredit and humiliate
his "opponents."

This whole 500+ message thread was started by the usual
imaginative pipe-dream of morse code "saving lives" (as opposed
to any other mode) thereby "justifying" its existance as an
AMATEUR radio license test.

In the USA the amateur radio service is NOT specifically or
mainly involved in "life-saving" activities. The Public Safety
sub-parts of the PLMRS (Private Land Mobile Radio Service)
(non-amateur) define that. A look into Part 1 of Title 47 C.F.R.
will show that - for the safety of life - ANY mode of communication
on ANY part of the EM spectrum by ANYONE can be used for
the purposes of safety of life.

The "argument" over hypothetical scenarios formulated by someone
biasing their "proposed" condition is a pointless exercise. No one
can foresee the future clearly or definitively.

The morse code test was originally instituted in amateur radio
licensing testing after such testing was begun by the first
federal radio regulating agency in the USA. It was there because
that agency felt it was necessary for their radio-regulating
purposes (it was, essentially, the ONLY mode for amateurs at
the time). Morse code testing has remained in the USA
regulations concerning below-30-MHz amateur radio privileges
ever since the FCC was created in 1934...principally at the
lobbying of the ARRL to pacify their old-time membership.

Well before the WRC-03 beginning, the IARU had already taken
a position that morse code testing was NOT essential to obtaining
an amateur radio license. The ARRL refused to go along with that
position (it was the ARRL against the world). The ARRL still
refuses to take sides long after WRC-03 was finished, saying
(obliquely) that amateurs must obey regulations [in the USA]; good
words but they don't take any side in the code test v. no code test
issue.

That morse code skill is NOT considered essential to safety of life
should be evident on some international regulations (both via WRC
and with individual nations' radio regulations): Those radio
services
designated as Public Safety (as in medical as well as police and
fire services) do NOT require testing for morsemanship. The new
(relatively, since 1999) GMDSS (designed-specified by international
maritime SOLAS community) requires NO morsemanship skills or
demonstration of same to call for help at sea. The old 500 KHz
international distress and safety frequency (and morsemanship needs
to use it) were eliminated. The United States Coast Guard
announced (some years ago) that it had stopped monitoring 500
KHz. International airspace communications is carried out on HF
using voice modes (agreement by ICAO, a UN body like the ITU).

The long-time pro-coders' arguments to preserve code testing in last
year's FCC NPRM Comment period had only these essential
arguments to preserve it: Ability to communicate with the least
transmitter power; some kind of 'unbreakable' system to thwart
terrorists; some fancied that amateur (CW) communications would
be the 'only' possible means available during emergencies. All of
those are invalid and were shown as such by Replies to Comments.
All that was left was the EMOTIONALISM of the long-timers having
to take the test, their rising to the 'top' of the amateur ranking
by
means of that demonstrated ability, and a refusal to change from
their self-righteous views on amateur radio. Some long-timers
achieved rank-position-title-privileges under old rules (that were
lobbied for by ARRL) that gave the most privileges to morsemen;
they fear loss of 'prestige' and privilege if the morse code test
goes
away, yet are too proud to admit their fear (which is almost
palpable in some of these messages).

As a counterpoint to elimination of the code test, many of the more
'vocal' pro-coders have taken their 'side' to rather severe (and
highly misplaced) lengths. They accuse the 'no-coders' of
everything
from homosexuality to perversion to unpatriotic activies to
bestiality.
Most of the personal-insult pro-coder group use pseudonyms on
newsgroups, possibly afraid of revealing their true identity; none
the
less these 'anony-mousies" behave in immature fashion, more like
middle-school males trying to assert their machismo even though
they try to hide via anonymity.

---

Heil, a pro-coder, tries to misdirect things by attempting to make a
flame war about personalities:

How do you know how many see Al as an arbiter? How many do you believe
think you'd make a good arbiter in discussions of amateur radio?

"Arbeit macht frei" - sign over one of the entrances to Auschwitz.

["work sets you free"]

Let's everyone WORK for that amateur radio license!!! :-)