RadioBanter - More Truckers Busted Using Modified CB's on Ham 10m Band

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Mon, 24 May 2004 11:46:01 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
Someone may take pity on you, a self-professed Extra

My license class is a matter of public record.

There is no "self professing" about it.

All hammies license "class" is a matter of public record. You're not
special, you're an abherration.
You need email the FCC, as
your ignorance will not be quenched by any other excepot the source. A
roger beep fits neatly in part "b" of what you presented, and is not
illegal on cb. Again, email the FCC for clarification, don't be so lazy
and ignorant.

Riddle me this then Batman,

LMAO,,,gee, to watch you freak out and say it, needs regurgitated.
Google that wonderful little phrase and the abusive sock puppets behind
that phrase.....you always chew on the rusty razor blades when tossed
your way.

Judging from the response that export radios

get with these little sound effects, that these

gimmicks would be a big hit with the toothless,
trailer park, welfare set in this country. _

Now, Davie, no need for your family bio,,remain focused and try not to
"judge",,it has always been part of what ails you.

The fact that they are not being produced is

pretty much a de-facto ruling that they are, in

fact, illegal.

The only thing "de-facto" is your flawed logic and mind numbing but
extremely entertaining and amusing misinterpretations. So YOU need to
get a clarification from the FCC. Go ahead, call them!

The FCC had already made this clarification

over 20 years ago, long before you were

involved in the hobby.

Post it. Show the clarification where the FCC holds a roger beep not
only as a sound effect, but illegal. Your answer to every single claim
you have ever presented when asked for proof is the entertaining, but
the very sad, "Prove me wrong". An ongoing beg of having one disprove
your claim, leaving absolutely nothing but your empty words and pleas to
take you at your word,,,time after time after pathetic time..LOL.
The self-professed claim you have been in the hobby for over thirty
years coupled with your added ignorance concerning another's personal
life and time in radio, is nothing but indicative of the elevation you
place upon one's time involved in radio, meaning you arrogantly feel the
longer one has been in radio, the "better" or somehow, more
knowledgeable one must be,,,,I love when you spout such ignorance.
Thirty years is not all that long in radio,,,some of us were exposed to
radio as soon as we could key the mic,,,much longer than what you
arrogantly, disainfully, and incorrectly hold as your qualifications
over another. The results are those of us who know better, correct
ignorant hammielids such as yourself that spew disinformation about,
whether through intentional ignorance or otherwise.

A roger beep is considered a sound effect,

and as such is illegal. Prove me wrong if you

can, but I won't hold my breath.

Again, some of us have no need to prove you wrong and are quite content
watching you scream ignorance proudly. Watching you hold steadfastly to
such an issue is rather amusing. I'd rather leave you out to bloody
yourself a bit more. Your arrogance is too self-limiting to cross with
your brusied ego at such a time as this.

[6] to transmit music, whistling, sound effects

or any material to amuse or entertain;

The FCC does not consider a roger beep to be a sound effect for
"amusement" or "entertainment",

Prove it!

(Translation: Wahhhhhhhhhhh)

We have only your heresay.

The heresay is all yours. You claimed the FCC holds a roger beep as a
sound effect. The burden of proof is always on the one who makes =A0the
claim. Of course, you bleeding all over the place attests to just that.

Provide the link

or we'll all conclude that this is yet another of

your lies.

LOL,,,,there is no "we:,,you are all alone in this lost, laughable claim
of yours, N3CVJ. Even the your hammie buds of Lelnad and Geogre and
Gillinad know the facts of this matter. It's why you're all alone on
another claim you made with nothing to back you but "Waaaaaaaaaa".

but rather a signal to signify the the

end or beginning of a transmission.

Superfluous on CB. Especially on AM, where

a very distinct carrier dropping, signals the

end of transmission.

[7] to transmit any sound effect solely to

attract attention;

And that's exactly what a roger beep is.

An echo box is a "sound effect" device and as

such is prohibited by the above rule.

Watching your scramble to argue with yourself has always been
pleasurable to some of us, Davie-son. None took pleasure with the
legality of an echo box. Merely more of your bull****.

I'll take that as an acknowledgment of your

inability to disprove my statement.

LOL,,,,go right ahead and take it any way you please, You're being
forced to argue with yourself. No one took issue with that statement.

Same goes for roger beeps. Since they do not
facilitate communication,

But they do facilitate communication.

The FCC would appear to think otherwise.

No,*you* appear to think otherwise, not the FCC.

If

not, then every last little Cobra 19 wannabe rig
would have them installed by the factory.

The FCC is not in the habit of manufacturing radios, so the link you
attempt to present between Cobra and the FCC is non-existent. Another
little gem to spear this poor analogy through its black little heart is
the fact that many microphones for cb have roger beeps, including Cobra
brand, but pointing out such information to you has resulted in overload
of your gray matter, as such has been met with a return of off-topic
hostility.

Here's another self-esteem killer
for you Davie,,in addition to emailing the FCC to ascertain what
EVERYONE else aready knows concerning roger beeps,,,,,ask around on this
group,,in fact,,ask around on the hammie groups,,,see if ANY other
hammie agrees with you,,,,,,anywhere. Bet you can't find any to agree
with you.

Anyone with a clear understanding of the rules
knows that they are illegal.

And that statement will haunt you for a time to come, once one of your
hammie buds of Lelnad or gillinad or n8 takes pity upon you and educates
you.

The rest? Well

even you might know a handful of people who

are as psychologically inept as you are and

would agree with you.

The mental hospitals

are full of people who thought they could fly.....

And the world is full of dads like yourself who are are only permitted
supervised visits with their children once a month.

And even more who would swear to it.

That's funny that you consider me having no respect for others merely
because of my freebanding activity.

It's not what you do, it's the tone you take

when you defend it.

"Tone"? LMAO,,,poor Davie,,here you go again opening the Hypocrite
Hall,,,In the first manner, whatever "tone" you feel I take, would be
better served by imitating yourself and initiating offtopic and personal
insults? That is the tone you set, Davie-son.
In the second place,,I don't defend my actions to anyone, but you go on
and continue to claim that YOUR inquiries directed toward my actions
soliticing a response is somehow "defending" such,,,,,merely more of
your poor communicative skills you never learned how to hone
properly,,,your communication deficit has rendered you unable to manage
an exchange of ideas with another who holds opposing views without
accusing the other of "defending"
ones actions. You are owed no explanation, which is why you have never
receieved one, ,,,something that galls you to the point of your
continually expressed incapacitance.

Your staunch defending of

freebanding even though it is illegal. Illegal

operation which amounts to breaking federal

law, which by logical definition makes you a

CRIMINAL.

Your point of view is not only lacking, but skewered, one-sided,
incorrect, misinterpreted, flawed, and steadfastly fixed on remaining
ignorant, especially when you selectively focus on freebanding, yet
defend N8WWM's felonious actions. You're a liar and a hypocrite which
makes you a lid.

I know you are, but what am I?

Acting aout ten years old.
Although your massive communication deficit has you hearing a stutter, I
assure you, such is not the case.

Actually the dictionary definition is:

1. Based on observation or experiment.

2. Guided by practical experience and not

theory.

Nowhere does it call for "proof".

There is only one standard among the media and it is the AP standards.
They utilize one source, not the lightweight junior high books you
refer. Try Websters Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary. See, Davie-son,
the abridged versions are for people like yourself that need spoon-fed
and not capable of correct interpretations. Again,,go to the source, as
it most certainly does use the term "proof". Quoted verbatim: "Provable
or verifiable by experiment or experience." Again,,your personal
experience may indeed sway your belief, but without tangible proof, it
is merely a theory. Attempting to educate you is futile, as you become
angry and begin lodging personal attacks,,another sure fire sign of your
lack of skill, intellect, self-control, tolerance, and ability to remain
on subject and hold rational debate with those who hold opposing
opinions other than your own, but then again, we have always known that
about yourself and such is what contributed to the demise of your
self-esteem and your reputation.

Thank you for being so predictable.

Your behavior doesn't change,,,,such is to be expected AND predictable.
When you're given a rusty razor blade, you invariably stick it in your
mouth to chew on. .

I'm sure I've hit a nerve. My job

here is done for the day......

LOL...once again, illustrating what a lid you are and your entire
agenda,,,,,once you
(mistakenly, albeit) feel
you have "hit a nerve", you feel victorious. The classic illustration of
only one small area that makes you a lid and detrimental pariah to
hammie radio and usenet.

Perhaps Im not worthy,

No "perhaps" about it.
=A0
but that doesn't change the subject matter that you have been unable to
provide for any of
your claims.

Unwilling, maybe. Unable?

Yes.

Only you are

unable to put your money where your mouth

is.

Of course, nothing but lipservice from N3CVJ crying "Waaaaaa believe my
claims, believe my claims and ifyoucantdisprovemyclaims then
theymustbetrue...waaaaa".
LOL.

Once again, you are simply not worth my

trouble.

My personal faith and believing in God has absolutely nothing to do with
not believing one who has failed to produce anything concerning any of
his claims, except angry diatribes,
off-topic obsessions, hearsay, and personal opinion..

Sounds like you're talking about (or is that to?)
yourself again.

It does sound like that, and that's only because you selectively snipped
the hilarious line where you begged me to explain why I have faith in
God but not you, a known liar. Starved for status, you are indeed.

Among your other psychiatric ailments, are

you also schizophrenic?

Dave

N3CVJ

It has come to my attention that all the manias you toss about as insult
are the ones from which you more than likely suffer. You typify the
classic projectionist and search for more insults as you angrily post
along,,,,,,,. It all makes sense when taken into consideration all but
the most supervised of visits were taken from you involving your child.
You realy should try and drop other's personal lives from your posts and
try attacking the post's view instead of the poster, but then again,
such is the reason you suffer from such a communication deficit...you've
never learned how to do so properly, and the hammie license only added
to your low self-esteem as it brought you none of the respect you demand
by sheer virtue of it Respect is earned as a person and must be given in
order to be received,,another concept that is foreign to your lowl self
due your deficits and learning disabilities.. One need only reflect on
your views on roger beeps being illegal for an afternoon chuckle of
monstrous but non-gregarious proportion.

N3CVJ

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cv