| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#21
December 30th 03, 12:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
"Jerry Oxendine" wrote in message . ..
"Richard Cranium" wrote in message om... "Jerry Oxendine" wrote in message ... "Richard Cranium" wrote in message om... (twistedhed) wrote in message om... You are being targeted for busts in 2004. You keykweenz are going to get nailed. Read below and get ready to feel the heat. We can't wait to post the FCC notices on the NG, it will be great fun. Make certain to laugh when one of your ham friends goes down, too. We might believe that you're unbiased if you do so. (that'll be the day!) FCC rule 2.815(b): After APR 27, 1978, no person shall manufacture, sell or lease, offer for sale or lease (including advertising for sale or lease), or import, ship, or distribute for the purpose of selling or leasing or offering for sale or lease, any external radio frequency amplifier or amplifier kit capable of operation on any frequency or frequencies between 24 and 35 MHz. Signed, Your Losers and Faggots, the AKC Equipment in and of itself and mere possession of such equipment is not illegal. Only certain uses of some equipment can be considered illegal. No matter what you would like to believe. I could have an entire house full of amplifiers and the FCC couldn't touch them without presenting PROOF of illegal use. Read the CB rules, Yes, (I'm not part of the antis-) I have never equated you with the morons who call themselves "akc". I may not completely believe that you are "unbaised", but you're head and shoulders above those cockroaches. you can have lots of illegal amps and not get cited. And you could "collect" them on a shelf to keep forever. If you have not committed some *other* infraction, then it is a moot point. You have to do something to get FCC's attention to start with. Then the rules (Rule 10 and 11) apply and *could* cause you a 'rathuh sticky wicket, eh wot" as the old Brit aristrocrats used to say. And the rule (and it has been quoted many times) states as follows: RULE 10 - Power Output {A} Your CB station transmitter power output must not exceed the following values under any conditions: AM [Amplitude Modulation] - 4 watts carrier power [CP] SSB [Single Side-Band] - 12 watts peak envelope power [PEP] {B} If you need more information about the power rule, see Part 95/ Subpart E. {C} Use of a transmitter which has carrier [CP] or peak envelope power [PEP]in excess of that authorized voids your authority to operate the station. RULE 11 - Linear Amplifiers {A} You may not attach the following items (power amplifiers) to your type-accepted CB transmitter in any way: [1] External radio frequency [RF] power amplifiers, also called linear amplifiers, or linears; or [2] Any other devices which, when used with a radio transmitter as a signal source, are capable of amplifying the signal. {B} There are no exceptions to this rule and use of a power amplifier voids your authority to operate the station. {C} The FCC will presume you have used a linear or other external [RF] power amplifier if- [1] It is in your possession or on your premises; and Make that AND (all caps), to be correct as per FCC Rule 95.411(C) That means there must be additional legal evidence, not simply possession. Something that Georgie-girl and DouGay deliberately will not understand. [2] There is OTHER EVIDENCE that you have operated your CB station with more power than allowed by CB Rule 10. {D} Paragraph C above in this section does not apply if you hold a license in another radio service (HAM, etc.) which allows you to operate an external RF power amplifier. So, you can see that it is Rule ll, sec 1 that could bring about that "sticky wicket". Not correct. BOTH sections have to be satisfied before any legal infraction has been committed, not just one part. In fact, it's sec 2 that might be a "sticky wicket". Sec 1 has no teeth by itself. By getting atten- tion called to *some* other activities, those ampli- fiers are now in FCC's headlights, so to speak, and are in danger of being seized, or causing you a fine. But, again, you are still right so long as you don't call attention to those "illegal" radios/amps. They could sit there forever----just as you said. J Yet you encouraged people to use amateur radios for their CB operations just a while back, Jerry. Those radios put out way too much power (100 watts PEP vs 12 watts PEP legal limit) and would cause even more interference if people took your advice! Would you point out where/when/how I encouraged the use of Amateur equipment on CB? I simply don't recall having done such--particularly since I never talk on CB except very rare occasions. If you have the archival evidence, I would LOVE to see it. I am not here to argue with you, just to set it straight and will readily admit it *IF* I said such a thing. Please provide the exact quote where I said that. I must confess that I haven't yet found it, but you did say something to that effect. It's been a couple of months since that post. Perhaps "encouraged" is too strong a word, even "recommended" might be. IIRC, the thread was about either "splatterbox amps" or export radios (both of which have always been illegal for use on CB, of course) and you suggested (?) that folks use converted amateur radios; perhaps with the best of intentions, figuring that ham radios have better filtering than CBs, exports, and amps do. I made a comment at the time (wondering aloud whether 100 watts PEP might not cause even more interference than 12 watts PEP), but got zero response from anybody. I will continue searching and let you know what I find. The way I read the reg, again not to argue with you, there is nothing illegal about having questionable (?) equipment in one's possession. However, it states that if such equipment is found, it will be assumed to have been used in conjunction with your CB equipment. After all, FCC doesn't go around looking for "illegal" equipment; as long as it is not used (such as an amp), the question is moot. How are they to know *if* you have such equipment? It is not illegal until you USE it. Am I wrongly reading the following section? [1] It is in your possession or on your premises; That, of course, is predicated on "OTHER" evidence which, I am thinking, would be the use of a CB set with an amplifier. If they have this "evidence". it would be in the form of DF, spectral analysis, or other monitoring, in which case, is the "other evidence" that, IMHO, is meant by the additional paragraphs. Someone else have a better take on this? Jerry Can't quibble with that. The FCC generally doesn't have the manpower or the budget to send out "agents" to monitor anything but commercial broadcast stations (which is one of the reasons why amateur radio is allegedly [and ineffectively] "self policing"). But if they get complaints, they will check into things. |
|
#23
December 30th 03, 01:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#24
December 30th 03, 02:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Richard Cranium" wrote in message om... Richard, I believe I DO remember the conversation ! (See there, I told you I would admit it) and I *think* it had to do with using the Galaxys and Connex's on the regular 40. (now since I don't have the correct text, I think (?????) I was trying to say that if you use the Galaxy and other export rigs within the 40 channels you would not be likely to run afoul of FCC in light of the current emphasis on 10 Meter incursions. I don't even think the fed is even concerned with the activity within the 40 channels so long as that activity doesn't call attention to it. Usually it happens when a neighbor complains.. OH well, whatever I said, I didn't mean to encourage using ham equipment on the CB bands, etc etc. I hope you can find that thread; I'd like to read it myself to see what trouble I've got myself into! LOL! 73 Jerry |
|
#25
December 30th 03, 02:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jerry Oxendine" wrote:
"Richard Cranium" wrote in message om... Richard, I believe I DO remember the conversation ! (See there, I told you I would admit it) and I *think* it had to do with using the Galaxys and Connex's on the regular 40. (now since I don't have the correct text, I think (?????) I was trying to say that if you use the Galaxy and other export rigs within the 40 channels you would not be likely to run afoul of FCC in light of the current emphasis on 10 Meter incursions. I don't even think the fed is even concerned with the activity within the 40 channels so long as that activity doesn't call attention to it. Usually it happens when a neighbor complains.. OH well, whatever I said, I didn't mean to encourage using ham equipment on the CB bands, etc etc. I hope you can find that thread; I'd like to read it myself to see what trouble I've got myself into! LOL! 73 Jerry An HF rig with a good ground and antenna makes less waves than a golden screwdiver'd CB, any-day. |
|
#26
December 30th 03, 03:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"jim" wrote in message ... thats a lot of ifs jerry. doesn't it sound bizarre when one talks about 'agents' monitoring? 1984 anyone??? seperately, this whole talk of trying to dictate 11 meter usage is fine but unenforceable. listen to the nickel. does anyone really think u.s. laws will make a difference? in the current climate where most of the planet says stuff it to the u.s. 11 meters is the least of anyones worries... All I was trying to do was to get a correct interpretation of the US regulations regarding spectrum management within its own territory. Naturally, we cannot tell other nations what to do, BUT *certain* issues can be negotiated thru treaties. Essentially, it is 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch your'n'. For example, some little-known country wants grain from the US and that country is jamming broadcast signals with a powerful transmitter which messes up domestic stations. Whatcha gonna do? You negotiate. Agents monitor everyday--we just don't know it. It's been going on since the FCC was created. One of the radio services that has given them the most trouble has been 11 Meter CB. What happens on "the nickel" can't be regulated internationally by US law; common sense would tell us that. But US law DOES apply to US citizens within Conus. If our laws pertaining to radio, or anything else for that matter, are unenforceable, then we are in far more trouble than we know. What people don't realize is that radio HAS to be regulated, and people have to have *some* training in its use for it to be effective. All one has to do is look at 11 meters within the USA, not what happens outside, to see what a mess it is. Regulation, licensing, and enforcement should never have been done away with. Many of those who think the regulations can't, wouldn't , shouldn't apply are the ones who truly can't see the harm that can come to their OWN use of radio, and, indeed, think we should just do away with any rules and just talk anywhere we want to. Again that is because they simply don't know. That is the same atmosphere that existed in the early days before the Communications Act of 1934; i.e., it's been in that mess before. Now back to the the rules we were discussing. The regulation we were studying was the one about whether one can be cited for having alleged illegal equipment in one's home in conjunction with a CB-particularly ampli- fiers. It says that (paraphrased) "if such equipment is found on one's possession or on the premises, then it will be presumed to have been used provided that OTHER evidence is found." To me, that means that the "OTHER" evidence is prior monitoring, spectral analysis, or other means of inspection) is grounds for warning, citation, or fine as the case may be. While "to you", Jim, 11 meters is of no concern, it has caused some problems to other services. However, *some* operators are more and more bringing attention to themselves by not respecting the boundaries, rules, or "fences" and operating where they will. Suffice it to say that, inspite of those who scoff and say otherwise, there are initiatives being considered--some Congressional, some within FCC itself, some ARRL-sponsored, and some encouraged by individuals--to curb the abuses brought on by the "unimportant" 11 Meter issue. And some of the people complaining are those OUTSIDE the USA who are being interfered with. Eleven Meters is not important because of its own constituency that WANTS it to remain unimportant lest action be taken to place sanctions upon it. The rules ARE enforceable within the USA and I can tell you that, thanks to the issue of 10 Meter intruders, there are things I know of even as I write this. But let's not get into a flame war and character asassinations. It is an emotional issue and only time will tell what comes about. Jerry |
|
#27
December 30th 03, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jerry Oxendine" wrote in message ...
"jim" wrote in message ... thats a lot of ifs jerry. doesn't it sound bizarre when one talks about 'agents' monitoring? 1984 anyone??? seperately, this whole talk of trying to dictate 11 meter usage is fine but unenforceable. listen to the nickel. does anyone really think u.s. laws will make a difference? in the current climate where most of the planet says stuff it to the u.s. 11 meters is the least of anyones worries... All I was trying to do was to get a correct interpretation of the US regulations regarding spectrum management within its own territory. Naturally, we cannot tell other nations what to do, BUT *certain* issues can be negotiated thru treaties. Essentially, it is 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch your'n'. For example, some little-known country wants grain from the US and that country is jamming broadcast signals with a powerful transmitter which messes up domestic stations. Whatcha gonna do? You negotiate. Agents monitor everyday--we just don't know it. It's been going on since the FCC was created. One of the radio services that has given them the most trouble has been 11 Meter CB. What happens on "the nickel" can't be regulated internationally by US law; common sense would tell us that. But US law DOES apply to US citizens within Conus. If our laws pertaining to radio, or anything else for that matter, are unenforceable, then we are in far more trouble than we know. What people don't realize is that radio HAS to be regulated, and people have to have *some* training in its use for it to be effective. All one has to do is look at 11 meters within the USA, not what happens outside, to see what a mess it is. Regulation, licensing, and enforcement should never have been done away with. Many of those who think the regulations can't, wouldn't , shouldn't apply are the ones who truly can't see the harm that can come to their OWN use of radio, and, indeed, think we should just do away with any rules and just talk anywhere we want to. Again that is because they simply don't know. That is the same atmosphere that existed in the early days before the Communications Act of 1934; i.e., it's been in that mess before. Now back to the the rules we were discussing. The regulation we were studying was the one about whether one can be cited for having alleged illegal equipment in one's home in conjunction with a CB-particularly ampli- fiers. It says that (paraphrased) "if such equipment is found on one's possession or on the premises, then it will be presumed to have been used provided that OTHER evidence is found." To me, that means that the "OTHER" evidence is prior monitoring, spectral analysis, or other means of inspection) is grounds for warning, citation, or fine as the case may be. While "to you", Jim, 11 meters is of no concern, it has caused some problems to other services. However, *some* operators are more and more bringing attention to themselves by not respecting the boundaries, rules, or "fences" and operating where they will. Suffice it to say that, inspite of those who scoff and say otherwise, there are initiatives being considered--some Congressional, some within FCC itself, some ARRL-sponsored, and some encouraged by individuals--to curb the abuses brought on by the "unimportant" 11 Meter issue. And some of the people complaining are those OUTSIDE the USA who are being interfered with. Eleven Meters is not important because of its own constituency that WANTS it to remain unimportant lest action be taken to place sanctions upon it. The rules ARE enforceable within the USA and I can tell you that, thanks to the issue of 10 Meter intruders, there are things I know of even as I write this. But let's not get into a flame war and character asassinations. It is an emotional issue and only time will tell what comes about. Jerry jerry didn't you used to be a truck driver when you were working? i was just wondering because it does seem like you are always bagging on truckers.....please explain.... |
|
#28
December 31st 03, 02:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"gw" wrote in message om... Jerry jerry didn't you used to be a truck driver when you were working? i was just wondering because it does seem like you are always bagging on truckers.....please explain.... Gladly! Yes, I was a truck driver in the 70's for a private company that manufactured filtering equipment for the textile industry. I was laid off in 1976, decided not to return, and eventually entered the railroad industry from which I retired. It proved to be a good move for me. WRT radio, I have been involved in radio since I was 10 years old. I was/am into several facets of radio and got my license(s) at 16. Much of that experience was in a structured environment--mostly military protocol-- and very little of that time was spend engaging in foolish- ness. I got my first CB radio at 18 during the years when there were callsigns, rules, and courteous operators. The environment was very different around 1966-70. When the Energy Crisis came along and CB erupted like a volcano, I was appalled at the abandonment of the previous era's orderly, controlled way of communicating and was dismayed at the "outlaw" atmosphere that took its place. Therefore, I did not install or use CB equip-ment in my own truck(s). By 1979, I had moved away from trucks and was fully engaged in the rail industry. I also obtained my Amateur ticked in 1989 figuring that since I already had much of the equipment in another legal service, I might as well fully utilize it ! Please realize(inspite of the hopes to the contrary)I neither even picked up a CB mike, nor even listened to CB, much less "interferred" with any communications whatsoever. Nor would I ever interfere with truck drivers within the legal boundaries of CB (or outside it for that matter for fear of getting into trouble on my own). Only when I learned that truck drivers (and others) were encroaching on 10 and 12 Meters, did I raise my periscope and take a peek. These incursions beg the question, "OK, how long will it be before 10/12 Meters are not enough and they then begin using 17 Meters?" Certainly, this is not something that would happen right away, but it could become an issue in the future. Thus, I, along with many hams, began to watch for these drivers and turn reports of what we heard/saw. Many of them don't know that what they are doing is illegal, and all that is needed is one gentle warning from the Fed to cause them to stop. *Most* of them would quit it if they knew they were intruding onto the licensed ham bands. I have heard hams (when the band was open) actually talk the drivers to warn that they weren't supposed to be there only to get told to go "F**k yourself" and other filthy things. Those hams that do that are actually making it worse because they themselves would get a warning letter for using AM on a band reserved for Morse and RTTY. I NEVER answer a call from a driver; I only listen. I am not "bagging" on truckers. All they have to do is not encroach onto bands that they are not authorized. I know truckers work hard. I know they are only trying to make a living. But they do not have to "steal" frequencies to do that. They earned a CDL, not a ham license (of course, they CAN do so and many have!). I know people don't believe me, but much of the things I told you are coming true. FCC was, in effect, AWOL WRT CB and Amateur Radio in years past.It is not true now: witness the increasing instances of enforcement actions (truckers, freebanders, and dealers like Pacetronics, Roper Electronics, et al). The solution is simple; just stay OFF bands and frequencies for which you have no authorization. Have respect for that has been earned by others. Nobody is going to "bag" on anyone when they do that. I never bother a trucker. Only when he keys up on 28 MHZ does he trip my "radar". Otherwise, he won't hear from me or most of the other hams that are being interferred with by those who think they have a "rah't" to 'tawk on this h'yar 10 meter reddio". Hehe. Jerry |
|
#29
December 31st 03, 02:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lancer" wrote in message ... On 28 Dec 2003 14:46:01 -0800, (twistedhed) wrote: (Richard Cranium) wrote in message . com... (twistedhed) wrote in message om... You are being targeted for busts in 2004. You keykweenz are going to get nailed. Read below and get ready to feel the heat. We can't wait to post the FCC notices on the NG, it will be great fun. Make certain to laugh when one of your ham friends goes down, too. We might believe that you're unbiased if you do so. (that'll be the day!) FCC rule 2.815(b): After APR 27, 1978, no person shall manufacture, sell or lease, offer for sale or lease (including advertising for sale or lease), or import, ship, or distribute for the purpose of selling or leasing or offering for sale or lease, any external radio frequency amplifier or amplifier kit capable of operation on any frequency or frequencies between 24 and 35 MHz. Signed, Your Losers and Faggots, the AKC Equipment in and of itself and mere possession of such equipment is not illegal. Only certain uses of some equipment can be considered illegal. No matter what you would like to believe. I could have an entire house full of amplifiers and the FCC couldn't touch them without presenting PROOF of illegal use. Read the CB rules, dum@$$. If you know how to read, that is. Wrong, fudgepacker. Ask the FCC. In their view, posession implies use. Ask them, then shut the **** up and go back to the truckstop. No, you ask the FCC, possession alone does NOT presume use. There has to be OTHER EVIDENCE that you had operated wirh more power. Get your facts straight, then shut the **** up, because you don't know what your talking about. If I might, the *other* evidence can be satisfied by the fact the amp is inline with the radio and antenna. |
|
#30
January 2nd 04, 07:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jerry Oxendine" wrote in message ...
"Richard Cranium" wrote in message om... Richard, I believe I DO remember the conversation ! (See there, I told you I would admit it) and I *think* it had to do with using the Galaxys and Connex's on the regular 40. (now since I don't have the correct text, I think (?????) I was trying to say that if you use the Galaxy and other export rigs within the 40 channels you would not be likely to run afoul of FCC in light of the current emphasis on 10 Meter incursions. I don't even think the fed is even concerned with the activity within the 40 channels so long as that activity doesn't call attention to it. Usually it happens when a neighbor complains.. OH well, whatever I said, I didn't mean to encourage using ham equipment on the CB bands, etc etc. I hope you can find that thread; I'd like to read it myself to see what trouble I've got myself into! LOL! 73 Jerry It took some digging, but I finally located the thread. The message in question was dated October 17, 2003. And I may have overstated your comment; what you said was that you had no objection to people using modified amateur radios on CB as long as they stayed out of the ham bands , which is quite different from "encouraging" people to use them. Mea culpa. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| rant: ads for illegal products | Broadcasting | |||
| Illegal CBers forging hams | Policy | |||
| CBers are not illegal! | CB | |||
| Freeband & Ham | CB | |||
Linear Mode
