"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! =-----

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.

Brenda Ann wrote in message ...

The UK Radio Authority is much more
harsh than the FCC.


Sorry, but I have to disagree.

Even at the height of CB, when 100s of thousands of people were running
illegal CB in one way or another, the yearly "bust" figures were just into
double digits - it has remained in the 20s and 30s.

Most illegal CBers get ignored, some get a "Please don't do that" verbal
warning, some may get a written warning,.
So, what do the very few big busts get... £1000s in fines? Prison?
No... a couple of hundred pound fine if any - and the illegal equipment
snatched.

If the RA were "harsh", they would consider illegal CBers as "Pirates"...
and give them the very large Pirate fine. Those using Amateur illegally
would be hunted down like dogs and given the punisment available under UK
law - prison.

When nearly everyone was using illegal antennas, they changed the antenna
rules to make those antennas legal.
When CBers were illegally using the American frequencies, they legalised the
band for CB use.
When they wanted American CBs out of the hands of CBers, they made it legal
for Amateurs to convert the sets to 10 Metre - so they would buy them from
CBers, make them legal, and save the RA the bother of chasing people.

If they were harsh, they would have put "No DX" and "no talking to
foreigners" rules in place. They would ban the import and sales of the
illegal CBs marked as "Amateur". They would ban the ownership or use of
Amplifiers that work on CB.
America does all those - The UK does none of them.
I would say that our CB service has very few rules, and enforcement only as
a last resort.

A few years back, a group of people set themselves up as self-appointed CB
police. They went around looking for CB antennas and CBers - sending a list
to the RA, for them to catch the licence dodgers.
You would think that the "bust" figure would have shot through the roof -
but the RA couln't be arsed to do the chasing.
They now plan to remove the licence next year - so reducing the amount of
illegal CBers even further.



Regards,

Peter.

"jim" wrote in message
...


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....


There are international treaties also that regulate such things. So just
floating out to Bermuda doesn't help.

jim wrote:

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....

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.

I take it you haven't heard of transmitter fingerprinting then?
http://www.motron.com/TransmitterID.html

"joseph mcdavid" wrote in message
...


jim wrote:

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....

Quick comment to Jim from above:
Actually, they just might. Treaties are sometimes used as
bargaining chips. If a problem arises such as radio interference, then an
aggrieved country can take it up with
the offending country. Where the US is concerned, it may be that a country
that needs loans, etc. will agree to
abate the RFI in exchange for said loans, grants, or other concessions. And
of course, it can be taken up with ITU.

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.


People don't realize that illegal activities *CAN* cause adverse actions
such as the above. Sometimes it may hurt the innocent as well as the guilty.
In 1978, during the peak of CB's popularity, CB amplifiers became one of the
sought after "options" in many operators' stations. All of a sudden, every
garage, it seems, was pumping out splatterboxes by the hundreds. FCC then
passed a regulation that required that no amplifiers be built or imported
into the US capable of operation between 24 and 30 MHZ. The manufacturer
could provide the enabling modification upon proof of license. Who did that
hurt? Not the illegal amp makers; they kept on sneaking their junk under the
radar to the detriment of hams. Not a major thing to the hams, but it
caused *some* inconvenience to the Amateurs who had to take time to make the
mod.

Who knows what "freebanding" could cause? Not me. I only know about some
things I hear from time to time--like the transmitter fingerprinting
mentioned, or, maybe, areturn to more aggressive enforcement, or amendments
to the local enforcement law. I know only one thing; when enough people get
annoyed, like the people being interferred with on 10/12 Meters, eventually
something will be done. Sure, the people who "freeband" think their "hobby"
is harmless and see no reason why they shouldn't be able to just pick up a
mike and start talking anywhere, anytime, and with a bazillion watts. It
boils down to training, discipline, and safety. Training teaches the
discipline to know what and why to use a radio, and said discipline makes
certain their operation causes no harm toothers (safety); it all goes hand
in hand. Those regulations that seem to chafe "freebanders" are like
fences; one can move from one boundary to the next, but the fence prevents
the "cows" from getting into someone else's pasture.

Finally, I mentioned that "freebanders" can see no harm in going above or
below the 40 CB channels, or in between. It depends on whose cow is being
gored. If it were legal for you to operate on 6620 MHZ USB (international
avation HF band), how would you like to be aboard a flight that couldn't
find its way because someone was chatting on the "channel"? What if the
aircraft was experiencing mechanical trouble and couldn't talk to the
company engineers for help?

It used to be that people didn't 'dare' to "freeband" AND they had more
civility and respect for others to do it. If the break in the fence isn't
mended, the "freebanders" will breach the gap like a broken dam.
Eventually, OTHER bands and frequencies will be violated (Hello? Is anyone
here? I think I will occupy this "room" and sit a spell) and as each band is
screwed up, the rightful users are stepped on, another band is "stolen",
more illegals rush in, and so on. Think not? Well, who'd a-thunk it that
10 and 12 Meters would be violated with truckers beeping and squeaking their
way along while the digital modes (per ITU convention) were interferred
with?


Jerry

Jerry Oxendine wrote:
"joseph mcdavid" wrote in message
...


jim wrote:


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....


Quick comment to Jim from above:
Actually, they just might. Treaties are sometimes used as
bargaining chips. If a problem arises such as radio interference, then an
aggrieved country can take it up with
the offending country. Where the US is concerned, it may be that a country
that needs loans, etc. will agree to
abate the RFI in exchange for said loans, grants, or other concessions. And
of course, it can be taken up with ITU.


jerry you may be right with the treaties as I am not up on international
law. point is if there are such agreements has anyone ever been
prosecuted by their governing bodies or hell have any nations been notified
by another that one of their citizens is causing harm? I dont know the
answers but at this point it still won't stop people freebanding. Its
human nature to nonconform especially concerning something as trivial as
this.