"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...
Organized, long term freebanders are very aware where they
operate and take great measure to ensure against talking on an amateur f
requency or one that isn't heavily used on the freeband.
If the non-U.S. stations can operate ssb there, why shouldn't I,
especially if I want to have a nice DX contact with one of them?

I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely for DX.
The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for privacy
or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on the
allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel running
slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk 75-100
miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running through a 4
beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.

wrote:



I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely for DX.
The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for privacy
or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on the
allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel running
slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk 75-100
miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running through a 4
beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.


So how do you feel about being a law breaker?

wrote:
"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...

Organized, long term freebanders are very aware where they
operate and take great measure to ensure against talking on an amateur f
requency or one that isn't heavily used on the freeband.
If the non-U.S. stations can operate ssb there, why shouldn't I,
especially if I want to have a nice DX contact with one of them?


I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely for DX.
The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for privacy
or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on the
allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel running
slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk 75-100
miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running through a 4
beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?
better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not? if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding
there? do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc
says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....

"jim" wrote in message
...



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?

The frequencies that the US govt. says you can are those specific
frequencies that constitute the 40 standard CB channels. The distance away
from the center of any channel is tightly regulated, and you can't be more
than 0.005% away from that center (~1.3 KHz), which is actually pretty broad
when compared to say, broadcast AM, which is only allowed a 20 Hz leeway).

better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?

If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the constitution,
and by treaty.

if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding
there?

You would then be under the jurisdiction of whatever radio authority covers
Bermuda. Aren't they a British colony? The UK Radio Authority is much more
harsh than the FCC.

do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc
says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....

Actually, yes. The treaties for use of various frequencies are there to
protect all the various countries that are signatories to them. The
Canadians are pretty hard on pirates (though they also have some rules in
place to give greater latitude on some bands than we do). I don't know what
communications law is like in Mexico, but I imagine that they deal with
people operating out of band/off channel too.

Brenda Ann wrote:
"jim" wrote in message
...



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?


The frequencies that the US govt. says you can are those specific
frequencies that constitute the 40 standard CB channels. The distance away
from the center of any channel is tightly regulated, and you can't be more
than 0.005% away from that center (~1.3 KHz), which is actually pretty broad
when compared to say, broadcast AM, which is only allowed a 20 Hz leeway).


that is what the u.s. gov proclaims. my point is they have no say so
outside territorial waters. whether or not the gov abides by itu
standards on this matter is open.


better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?


If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the constitution,
and by treaty.


please point out the constitutional section you mentioned.

if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding

there?


You would then be under the jurisdiction of whatever radio authority covers
Bermuda. Aren't they a British colony? The UK Radio Authority is much more
harsh than the FCC.


right, the RA is tough. easier to monitor 65+/- million than appr 300
million

do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc

says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....


Actually, yes. The treaties for use of various frequencies are there to
protect all the various countries that are signatories to them. The
Canadians are pretty hard on pirates (though they also have some rules in
place to give greater latitude on some bands than we do). I don't know what
communications law is like in Mexico, but I imagine that they deal with
people operating out of band/off channel too.


treaties not withstanding have you heard 10 & 11 meters recently? the
developing world is looking for the cheapest way to communicate with
their expatriates (sp?) in the u.s. one way to do it is using a setup
that after an initial outlay for equipment is basically free. their
problem is propagation not the gov.

In , jim wrote:

snip
better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?


If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the constitution,
and by treaty.


please point out the constitutional section you mentioned.


Article VI.







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Frank Gilliland wrote:
In , jim wrote:

snip

better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?


If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the constitution,
and by treaty.


please point out the constitutional section you mentioned.



Article VI.







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

read the section you mentioned at the cornell website. it pertains to
the u.s. and its environs but no mention of people outside territorial
limits.
the world is a bigger place then what the u.s. dictates....

"jim" wrote in message
...


read the section you mentioned at the cornell website. it pertains to
the u.s. and its environs but no mention of people outside territorial
limits.
the world is a bigger place then what the u.s. dictates....

This is so, but you asked specifically what right the US government had to
set regulations, it was stated that if you were a US citizen, it was granted
by the Constitution, and by treaty.

Further, the ITU does have worldwide jurisdiction, and they are the ones who
write the treaties, and every country is a signatory.

In , jim wrote:



Frank Gilliland wrote:
In , jim wrote:

snip

better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?


If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the constitution,
and by treaty.


please point out the constitutional section you mentioned.



Article VI.







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

read the section you mentioned at the cornell website. it pertains to
the u.s. and its environs but no mention of people outside territorial
limits.
the world is a bigger place then what the u.s. dictates....


I shouldn't have to quote this twice:


If you are a US citizen......


And again with emphasis added:


=IF= you are a =US=CITIZEN=......


If you are still confused, call Twistedhed's imaginary shrink.






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

jim wrote in message
...


Brenda Ann wrote:
"jim" wrote in message
...



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i
can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?


The frequencies that the US govt. says you can are those specific
frequencies that constitute the 40 standard CB channels. The distance
away
from the center of any channel is tightly regulated, and you can't be
more
than 0.005% away from that center (~1.3 KHz), which is actually pretty
broad
when compared to say, broadcast AM, which is only allowed a 20 Hz
leeway).


that is what the u.s. gov proclaims. my point is they have no say so
outside territorial waters. whether or not the gov abides by itu
standards on this matter is open.

The fact is the US Govt HAS signed on with ITU and honors *most* treaties.


better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not?


If you are a US citizen, they are granted that right by the
constitution,
and by treaty.


please point out the constitutional section you mentioned.

Title 47, US Code and The Communications Act of 1934 voted upon by
Congress.

if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding

there?

Sure, but I doubt the British authorities would appreciate that!


You would then be under the jurisdiction of whatever radio authority
covers
Bermuda. Aren't they a British colony? The UK Radio Authority is much
more
harsh than the FCC.


Agreed.
right, the RA is tough. easier to monitor 65+/- million than appr 300
million

do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc

says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....

WRT to "freebanding" within the US and its territories, all I can say is to
go
ahead and do it. If you get popped, you have only yourself to blame.

J


Actually, yes. The treaties for use of various frequencies are there to
protect all the various countries that are signatories to them. The
Canadians are pretty hard on pirates (though they also have some rules
in
place to give greater latitude on some bands than we do). I don't know
what
communications law is like in Mexico, but I imagine that they deal with
people operating out of band/off channel too.


treaties not withstanding have you heard 10 & 11 meters recently? the
developing world is looking for the cheapest way to communicate with
their expatriates (sp?) in the u.s. one way to do it is using a setup
that after an initial outlay for equipment is basically free. their
problem is propagation not the gov.