From: on Mon, Jan 1 2007 8:28 am

John Smith I wrote:
Len don't give a chit about children having fun ...

Well, actually he does - and not in a positive way.

There's never been a minimum age requirement for a US amateur radio
license.

Len thinks there should be such a requirement. He thinks no one under
the age of 14 years
should be able to get any class of US amateur license, regardless of
their ability to pass the license tests.

That's not just from his postings here - he put such a proposal into
one of his official comments to FCC.

Oh, you poor thing...you just CAN'T LET GO of that
subject, can you? :-(

Actually, what I wrote in a Reply To Comments on NPRM
98-143 can be viewed in its entirety at the FCC website.

Instructions for anyone else:

Just go to www.fcc.gov and click on Search, then ECFS
(Electronic Comment Filing System). Click on Search at
the right again to get the standard form for searching.
In the upper right corner box enter 98-143. The ECFS
will search ALL of the documents (many of them) and
present a long list. To save time, just enter my
name (Leonard H. Anderson) OR enter date 13 January 1999.
That will bring up my Reply to Comments (on Comments
of "Michael P. Deignan, et al") in regards to the
Notice of Proposed Rule Making 98-143. [note the "et
al" following Mikey's name]

There are 14 pages in my Reply To Comments (page
numbers at the bottom), preceded by my cover letter
to the FCC, followed by an FCC notation (their page
16) that a "diskette was received" (the full electronic
system was not yet in place for January 1999).

On Page 12 of 14 is my suggestion on age
requirements which had its specific origin in the
ARRL Letter, Volume 17, Number 12, 20 March 1998.
In the middle of that reference (duly noted in a
footnote on my Page 12) is a darling story entitled
"Youngest Hams in the US?" The photo going with that
story has two charming FOUR YEAR OLDS, clad in their
Sunday finest, being hugged by a grandfatherly-
looking VE.

To anyone who wants to see for themselves, all they
need do is go to www.arrl.org, enter "youngest hams"
in the Search box, a short list will be presented,
then click on the Letter for 20 March 1998.

FOUR YEARS OLD! They supposedly "passed" their
written test...with all the English language
comprehension of FOUR YEARS OLD. Yeah, surrrre they
did. The VEs "passed them" didn't they? :-(

FOUR YEARS OLD!

That was in 1998. That was NINE YEARS AGO...
come February or March of this year.

My Reply To Comments on 98-143 was dated as received
on 13 January 1999. In a week from now that will be
EIGHT YEARS AGO!

That SINGLE comment page has been the only one that
garnered any comment...and that mostly the vilest
bile that the pro-coders could conceive. But, the
one with the continuing woodie on the subject is
Miccolis, James. He can't stop on that.

One can find out why. My ARBITRARY age limit on my
Reply To Comments was 14 years old (not exactly
arbitrary, it is one year after Bar Mitzvah).
Surprise, surprise, Gomer! Miccolis got his first
ham license at age 14!

Poor Jimmie, he done feel "personally insulted"
somehow from the age similarity. He got 'wounded'
in the Great Word War here. Tsk, tsk.

Every so often, there's a mention of some youngster who earned an
amateur radio license at a very early age. One such news item caused
Len to claim here that there must have been some kind of fraud at the
VE session, because he somehow knew that the youngsters pictured could
not have passed the license tests honestly.

Damn straight, Gomer! Those CHILDREN were FOUR
YEARS OLD. "Full English comprehension" to 4-year
olds? NO WAY. "Fraud?" You betcha. What kindly
grandfather could say no to such charming CHILDREN?

Yet those CHILDREN, having "passed" their license
test and receiving confirmation from the FCC, would
now be LEGALLY AUTHORIZED to transmit RF to anywhere
in the world...ALL BY THEMSELVES. Legal. No problems.

FOUR YEAR OLDS. There's not one damn thing in Part 97
saying that "adult supervision is required." In 1998
or now in 2007.

---

Hay, no problemo wiz me, senior. I'll just consider
that all legal US radio amateurs have the attitudes and
aspirations and skills of FOUR YEAR OLDS. The ARRL
proved it is okay...and we don't want to naysay the ARRL
do we? [they know what is good for ham radio...]

Oh, by the way, the ARRL used the term "HOBBY" in that
charming 1998 ARRL Letter. Gosh, its not the "national
service" or "service to the nation" that all the fantasy
livers want, is it? HOBBY. ARRL said so.

To Jimmie Miccolis: Put this OLD SUBJECT to rest, it's
been warmed up in here twice before and everyone else
has put it aside. Quit your transgender-wannabe Nun of
the Above act and DROP IT. Bring it up again and all you
will do is make others irritated. None of us care one
whit WHY you have such a woodie for bringing back old,
old, old subjects...but you consistently do that.

Now KMA, 4Q and the hearse you rode in on...

LA