RadioBanter - View Single Post

July 19th 03, 05:21 PM

In article ,
(K0HB) writes:

(N2EY) wrote

I agree with Carl 100% on this one.

I don't, and I don't agree with you either for that matter.

OK, fine, Hans.

We all seem to agree that the guy ought to be nailed, and nailed HARD.

Yep.

But under the heading of "unintended consequences", the notion of
requiring a ham to restore a radio to "factory spec" is first probably
outside the authority of the FCC. Even if it is within their
authority, it is a very troubling precedent to have lurking in
background. ARRL has gone to the mat with FCC on matters of far less
importance, but they seem to be looking the other way on this one.

I see the requirement to return it to factory spec as a plea bargain from
outright confiscation/seizure and eventual destruction. I know FCC has done
those things in the past.

K2ASP sez the fact that the guy is a ham has no bearing on his marine-band
activities. I would point out to m'learned friends that when the accused
applied for the ham license and signed the papers, he agreed to abide by *all*
FCC regulations, not just those in Part 97.

I don't think modification of factory-made amateur equipment for illegal
purposes should be defended by the ARRL.

73 de Jim, N2EY