RadioBanter - View Single Post - Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?

Dave Heil · October 5th 06, 05:16 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm

wrote:
From: Nada Tapu on Sat, Sep 30 2006 2:23 pm

But you have never been "IN" amateur radio, Len.

Tsk, that old ploy once again...

That old ploy represents an accurate statement of fact.

Now, now, calm down, Jimmie.

Why don't you calm down, Lennie?

Amateur radio "differs" from other radio services
only in man-made regulations and the fantasies of
its licensees.

Fantasies? It has never really been about a morse test with you, has
it, Lennie?

If Miccolis' logic is "correct" in who is able to
talk about, govern, regulate, etc. amateur radio,
then the very first amateur licensee and the very
first radio regulating agency have been ILLEGAL from
the start.

That'd be fine if you hadn't drawn a false picture. You've talked.
You've commented. The FCC *must* accept your input. They are not bound
to agree with you at all.

If you write here, it is the equivalent of your standing on a street
corner addressing a crowd. No one in the crowd is required to listen,
to approve or to refrain from jeering or shouting you down. The crowd
has as much right to speak its mind as you.

Id est, the unlicensed would NOT have
been IN amateur radio, therefore they could not do
anything. You see the fallacy of your argument?
[you wouldn't admit it if it came up and bit your
butt]

You stated it. It was base upon a false premise. It came up and bit
*your* butt.

Your "IN" argument in reference to amateur radio is
therefore not only incorrect, it is nonsense.

*Ding!*

I'm sorry, Mister Anderson. That is incorrect. Thanks for playing and
please accept our consolation prize.

You wish to quibble word definitions in order to
score message points and thereby show your alleged
superiority? Id est, one must be "IN" amateur radio
in order to "do" something about it. Nonsense.

In amateur radio, dear Leonard, rank beginners are your superiors. You
are not involved.

In regulations that is also fallacious. None at the
FCC need be licensed "IN" the amateur radio service
in order to REGULATE it or any US civil radio service.
NONE. Not the Commissioners, not any of the staff.
Tsk, tsk, you do not negatively criticize the FCC yet
they are NOT "IN" US amateur radio. Why is that?

The FCC regulates. You do not. If anyone working for the FCC wants to
participate in amateur radio, he or she must pass the same exams that
any other candidate for an amateur radio license must pass.

Under the Constitution of the United States, citizens
may freely express their desires to the government of
the United States. [the formal wording is "petition
the government for the redress of their grievances"]
That includes ALL laws, legislation thereof, regulations
and rules imposed by the government.

You've done so. Now what?

Yet YOU wish to exclude the nearly 299 million citizens
who are NOT amateur radio licensees (your definition of
being "IN" amateur radio is being granted that license)
from doing anything at all except obeyance of YOUR
desires and ONLY those of other amateur licensees.
That is dictatorial, totalitarianism, and general
bull**** 'territory' thinking that is akin to some
neighborhood street gang.

You aren't 299 million citizens, Len. You've commented to the FCC,
where your input must be accepted. You've commented here where there is
nothing forcing anyone to accept, support or agree with your views.
Now what?

You do not "own" amateur radio nor do you have ANY
qualifications to "rule" on it.

You don't own it. You don't regulate it. You don't participate in it.
Now what?

You've NEVER been IN
any government regulating agency, indeed never been
IN government, yet you wish to exclude millions just
on YOUR "definition" of who can say what and to whom.

You aren't millions.

I'm convinced, Len.

Dave K8MN