ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions are
thus:
keyclowns:
are what some hams or whatever who kinda take it upon themselves to police
the airwaves call people who take part in keydowns and has become anyone
who talksabout amp use on 11 meters or cb channels or discusses more than
legal power on cb??
from what i understand some of them have had run-ins on air and/or in
person?
anti keyclowns:
are the ones who search for them and turn them in to the fcc by filing
complaints?
homosexual talk:
this is brought on by trolls and puppets of one or possibly both factions??

i enjoy posts by both sides when on topic
i dont take sides or care, its **** that happened long before i found the
newsgroup

if i have stepped on anyones toes i really dont give a damn cause no one
ever gives a true answer to the question when its asked, it usually jus
brings out a slew of trolls
jus my two cents
harv


"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...
From: (Legal Radio)
Who Is It? Who Is wrote in
:
What is this keyclown thing some are arguing about? What if any does it
have to do with cb radio? Why is there so much homosexual talk on a cb
radio group
?
Just killfile all the bad stuff. I have found 95%

of the discussion here just ends up being

automatically deleted.


You have "found"? LMAO,,the only thing you have found is a tail that
amuses you.

For any good info, just find a mailing list or

something.

Wrong..there is plenty of great information, contact addys, etc., to be
had here. You're just not in the loop because you have bleeding problems
concerning what you incorrectly feel is inappropriate topic material.
You must educate yourself and recognize the free exchange of information
is perfectly legal, even if such information may be construed illegal
when acted upon or put into play. You have no authority and this is the
manner in which you act out the frustration of not being in
control,,,,......of anything.

"harvey" wrote in message ...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions are
thus:
keyclowns:
are what some hams or whatever who kinda take it upon themselves to police
the airwaves call people who take part in keydowns and has become anyone
who talksabout amp use on 11 meters or cb channels or discusses more than
legal power on cb??
from what i understand some of them have had run-ins on air and/or in
person?
anti keyclowns:
are the ones who search for them and turn them in to the fcc by filing
complaints?
homosexual talk:
this is brought on by trolls and puppets of one or possibly both factions??

i enjoy posts by both sides when on topic
i dont take sides or care, its **** that happened long before i found the
newsgroup

if i have stepped on anyones toes i really dont give a damn cause no one
ever gives a true answer to the question when its asked, it usually jus
brings out a slew of trolls
jus my two cents
harv

Hello, Harv

I hate to tell you this, but you just bit on one hook, line, sinker,
bait and boat

Must be one of those frankenfish LOL

Don't sweat it; there are folks with legitimate questions and other
with legitimate answers. In between those posts are the 90% of the
junk that tends to fill this newsgroup. Don't worry; the ham
newsgroups aren't much better.

As far as the language and various sexual references, bear in mind
that you will be dealing with some 30, 40, 50, and 60 year old
adolescent minds in here )


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
om...
"harvey" wrote in message
...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions
are
thus:
keyclowns:
are what some hams or whatever who kinda take it upon themselves to
police
the airwaves call people who take part in keydowns and has become anyone
who talksabout amp use on 11 meters or cb channels or discusses more
than
legal power on cb??
from what i understand some of them have had run-ins on air and/or in
person?
anti keyclowns:
are the ones who search for them and turn them in to the fcc by filing
complaints?
homosexual talk:
this is brought on by trolls and puppets of one or possibly both
factions??

i enjoy posts by both sides when on topic
i dont take sides or care, its **** that happened long before i found the
newsgroup

if i have stepped on anyones toes i really dont give a damn cause no one
ever gives a true answer to the question when its asked, it usually jus
brings out a slew of trolls
jus my two cents
harv

Hello, Harv

I hate to tell you this, but you just bit on one hook, line, sinker,
bait and boat

Must be one of those frankenfish LOL

Don't sweat it; there are folks with legitimate questions and other
with legitimate answers. In between those posts are the 90% of the
junk that tends to fill this newsgroup. Don't worry; the ham
newsgroups aren't much better.

As far as the language and various sexual references, bear in mind
that you will be dealing with some 30, 40, 50, and 60 year old
adolescent minds in here )


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim

Good response Jim............... Go RedSox's!

1 man out, 1 man on, bottom of the 12th.

Landshark


--
The world is good-natured to people
who are good natured.

"harvey" wrote in message
...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions are
thus:
keyclowns:

snip

The theory is that Keyclowns are illegal CBers, and Antikeyclowns
those who oppose illegal CB. However, that is all just a cover for
the truth. Some people are just hell bent against CB and those
who use it - as demonstrated by their inability to post CB related
messages, and their use of the term "keyclown" being aimed at anyone
they dislike - without any proof of any kind that they use any
illegal CB of any kind.

The homosexual hate messages are just the physical manifestation
of the mental problems within the minds of those who hate some
people so much that they will chase them around trying to anoy them.
Rather than trying to make their own lives better and more enjoyable,
they wish to make other people as unhappy and mentally unwell as
themselves.

Although they try to mask what they are with some claim to respect
for the law, they are often unmasked as their own criminal activities
or "brushes" with the FCC or police are made public.

That being said, there are some on this group who are pro-legal, some
who are against laws restricting freedom of communications, and others
who walk the line between - believing that the law is often an ass, and
may not always be technically correct.
For example, distance rules. In America, you have a "No DX" rule. If
you do not reply to a signal, does that mean it did not go over that
distance? This law is often seen as a technically unsound and legally
unenforceable law.

Here in the UK, when CB was first legalised, our Government opted to
restrict distance with tech spec rather than trust to some "no DX"
rule. What they did was to put in rules regarding antenna length and
height from the ground.
Those who stuck within the law were radiating 4 Watts of RF at a height
well below that of radio and TV equipment, and often caused interference.
It was soon worked out that, to avoid harmful interference and grief, the
way to go was NOT what the law said. The rule was broken everywhere, and
never enforced. Eventually, the government saw their error, removed the
height rule and relaxed the length rule, allowing us bigger homebase
antennas at any height within local planning rules.

Some say that stupid laws often needs a hard push before they will be
changed, and illegal action becomes necessary - would the RA have removed
that height rule if CBers had not proved it wrong by their illegal use?
Would the UK Government even be considering changing outdated and extremely
sexist family law if it was not for the illegal actions of Batman and Robin?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...bsection=world
http://www.itv.com/news/index_1789720.html
http://www.fathers-4-justice.org

I wouldn't have liked to be the person who had to make the call to the
queen...
"Sorry to bother you, your majesty... but Batman is on
your ledge, and he's asking to speak to you."
Aparently she watched it on TV.


Regards,

Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

"Peter" wrote
"harvey" wrote in message
...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions
are
thus:
keyclowns:

snip

The theory is that Keyclowns are illegal CBers, and Antikeyclowns
those who oppose illegal CB. However, that is all just a cover for
the truth. Some people are just hell bent against CB and those
who use it - as demonstrated by their inability to post CB related
messages, and their use of the term "keyclown" being aimed at anyone
they dislike - without any proof of any kind that they use any
illegal CB of any kind.

The homosexual hate messages are just the physical manifestation
of the mental problems within the minds of those who hate some
people so much that they will chase them around trying to anoy them.


Keyclown hypocrisy at it's finest. Ask Peter Analbuster about his
rec.radio.cb "humour" page. He and homosexual stalker mopeydopey are birds
of a feather. When they don't get their way, they start crying about what a
shame it is the NG is cluttered up with their own smelly turds.

The fact remains, keyclowns DO operate illegally and get called on it by
the anti boys. Illegal CB amp auctions DO get busted because they ARE
against the law and against ebay policy. Keyclowns DO act effeminately and
WILL be called gay, and rightly so.

AKC still runs the NG, Keyclowns are still off topic, mopeydopey is still
a whining sissy. The more things change the more they stay the same.

You can never stop the AKC and you can never stop N8.

You posted his personal info...HE LAUGHED!

You made obscene web pages about him...HE LAUGHED!

You whined to ISP's about him...HE LAUGHED!

You threatened violence against him...HE LAUGHED!

You call him names...HE LAUGHED!

You call him everything in the book...HE LAUGHED!

You keep trying......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

You keep failing.........HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

You are outta your league with N8wwm.......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

He has sworn to never stop because of what you guys have done, he is
laughing at you keyclowns.......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

He won't ever stop, you won't ever win......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

"Cry_Keyclowns_Cry" wrote in message
lkaboutradio.com...
"Peter" wrote
"harvey" wrote in message
...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions
are
thus:
keyclowns:

snip

The theory is that Keyclowns are illegal CBers, and Antikeyclowns
those who oppose illegal CB. However, that is all just a cover for
the truth. Some people are just hell bent against CB and those
who use it - as demonstrated by their inability to post CB related
messages, and their use of the term "keyclown" being aimed at anyone
they dislike - without any proof of any kind that they use any
illegal CB of any kind.

The homosexual hate messages are just the physical manifestation
of the mental problems within the minds of those who hate some
people so much that they will chase them around trying to anoy them.


Keyclown hypocrisy at it's finest. Ask Peter Analbuster about his
rec.radio.cb "humour" page. He and homosexual stalker mopeydopey are birds
of a feather. When they don't get their way, they start crying about what
a
shame it is the NG is cluttered up with their own smelly turds.

The fact remains, keyclowns DO operate illegally and get called on it by
the anti boys. Illegal CB amp auctions DO get busted because they ARE
against the law and against ebay policy. Keyclowns DO act effeminately and
WILL be called gay, and rightly so.

AKC still runs the NG, Keyclowns are still off topic, mopeydopey is still
a whining sissy. The more things change the more they stay the same.

You can never stop the AKC and you can never stop N8.

You posted his personal info...HE LAUGHED!

You made obscene web pages about him...HE LAUGHED!

You whined to ISP's about him...HE LAUGHED!

You threatened violence against him...HE LAUGHED!

You call him names...HE LAUGHED!

You call him everything in the book...HE LAUGHED!

You keep trying......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

You keep failing.........HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

You are outta your league with N8wwm.......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

He has sworn to never stop because of what you guys have done, he is
laughing at you keyclowns.......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!

He won't ever stop, you won't ever win......HE KEEPS LAUGHING!





And he speaks in the 3rd person about himself. Delusional? You be the judge.

"U Know Who" wrote in
message ...

And he speaks in the 3rd person about himself. Delusional? You
be the judge.

As long as people will listen and respond, he will keep playing his
playground games in this group.
Do yourself a favor, killfile the poor sad bar-steward.


Regards,

Peter
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:49:09 +0100, "Peter"
wrote in :

"harvey" wrote in message
...
ok after a few monhts of reading here and some digging, my assumptions are
thus:
keyclowns:

snip

The theory is that Keyclowns are illegal CBers, and Antikeyclowns
those who oppose illegal CB. However, that is all just a cover for
the truth. Some people are just hell bent against CB and those
who use it - as demonstrated by their inability to post CB related
messages, and their use of the term "keyclown" being aimed at anyone
they dislike - without any proof of any kind that they use any
illegal CB of any kind.


Don't they allow an admission of guilt as evidence in the UK?


The homosexual hate messages are just the physical manifestation
of the mental problems within the minds of those who hate some
people so much that they will chase them around trying to anoy them.
Rather than trying to make their own lives better and more enjoyable,
they wish to make other people as unhappy and mentally unwell as
themselves.


True story.


Although they try to mask what they are with some claim to respect
for the law, they are often unmasked as their own criminal activities
or "brushes" with the FCC or police are made public.


Are you speaking of "they" or just Doug?


That being said, there are some on this group who are pro-legal, some
who are against laws restricting freedom of communications,


Whoa there, Peter! Who in this group -- Doug included -- has ever
-supported- any law that restricts the freedom of communication? Or
the right to freedom of speech? Nobody, as far as I can remember. If
you are suggesting that the laws governing radio communications are a
violation of the right to free speech then you are WAY wrong because
that has already been thrown out in both the courts -and- in this
newsgroup.

Get this straight, Peter: You have freedoms, but those freedoms are
limited to the extent that you don't violate the rights of others. You
have freedom of movement -provided- you don't tresspass on someone
else's property. You have the freedom of speech -provided- you don't
cause a public nuisance. You can drive a car -provided- you stay in
your own lane. Etc, etc. Your freedoms, including the freedom to
communicate, are not restricted except to the extent needed to provide
those same freedoms to everyone and not violate the rights of others.
If there -is- such a law, US or UK, I invite you to post it.


and others
who walk the line between - believing that the law is often an ass, and
may not always be technically correct.


And that's very true -- some laws are, for the lack of a better term,
stupid. But there are ways to change laws. Legal ways. Ways that
neither require nor justify violating any 'stupid' law.


For example, distance rules. In America, you have a "No DX" rule. If
you do not reply to a signal, does that mean it did not go over that
distance? This law is often seen as a technically unsound and legally
unenforceable law.


The FCC has made it quite clear that the law applies only to the
-deliberate attempt- to exceed the distance limitations. I'll agree
that the laws governing the intended scope of CB radio are rarely
enforced. But that does not justify the violation of those laws.
Amateur radio is the proper service for the DX hobby, and is available
to anyone who can afford a happy meal and can memorize a few test
questions.


Here in the UK, when CB was first legalised, our Government opted to
restrict distance with tech spec rather than trust to some "no DX"
rule. What they did was to put in rules regarding antenna length and
height from the ground.
Those who stuck within the law were radiating 4 Watts of RF at a height
well below that of radio and TV equipment, and often caused interference.
It was soon worked out that, to avoid harmful interference and grief, the
way to go was NOT what the law said. The rule was broken everywhere, and
never enforced. Eventually, the government saw their error, removed the
height rule and relaxed the length rule, allowing us bigger homebase
antennas at any height within local planning rules.


Was the law changed because of the de-facto standard? or because the
authority was presented with valid technical arguments that supported
the change? Was there an official explanation for the decision? If so,
got a link?


Some say that stupid laws often needs a hard push before they will be
changed, and illegal action becomes necessary - would the RA have removed
that height rule if CBers had not proved it wrong by their illegal use?


Hey Ghandi, see above.


Would the UK Government even be considering changing outdated and extremely
sexist family law if it was not for the illegal actions of Batman and Robin?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...bsection=world
http://www.itv.com/news/index_1789720.html
http://www.fathers-4-justice.org

I wouldn't have liked to be the person who had to make the call to the
queen...
"Sorry to bother you, your majesty... but Batman is on
your ledge, and he's asking to speak to you."
Aparently she watched it on TV.


Most politicians, like Michael Jackson, live inside a box and aren't
quite in touch with reality. Sometimes it takes an extreme act to draw
attention to an issue that is otherwise ignored. But the definition of
'extreme' doesn't include the word 'illegal'.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Frank Gilliland wrote:
Whoa there, Peter! Who in this group -- Doug

included -- has ever -supported- any law that

restricts the freedom of communication? Or

the right to freedom of speech? Nobody, as far
as I can remember.



Google for a memory jog. I remember comments being made by nocodes that
cb should be done away with. Such a law would restrict that freedom.


If you are suggesting that the laws governing

radio communications are a violation of the

right to free speech then you are WAY wrong

because that has already been thrown out in

both the courts -and- in this newsgroup.





Tell it to Howard Stern or Bubba the Love Sponge. Their recent RECORD
fines from the FCC are testament to the law restricting exactly what
speech may be broadcast and how screwed up the law actually is. A few
examples,,,, one radio station may use an offensive term, but another
radio station may not say the same thing,,,,,this dj can say this, but
that dj over there can't say it. It's ok to say this on late night
radio, but if you say it in the morning, we're going to fine
you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it's screwed up so bad and Stern took Powell to task
for it the other day. Now daddy Powell is ****ed at Stern.



Get this straight, Peter: You have freedoms,

but those freedoms are limited


Limited equals restricted.

to the extent

that you don't violate the rights of others.



Freedom of speech will always be tested in the courts, thank God. What
you consider violating the rights of others, others may disagree. For
example, what may offend you may not offend another, especially where
speech and/or obscenity law is defined.



You have freedom of movement -provided-

you don't tresspass on someone else's

property. You have the freedom of speech

-provided- you don't cause a public nuisance.




No, the word "nuisance" is to be found nowhere in either of the recent
record fines against Stern and BTLS (btls.com).



You can drive a car -provided- you stay in

your own lane. Etc, etc.



..resulting in possible serious injury and/or death, none which can be
attained via what another may deem offensive or illegal speech.


Your freedoms,

including the freedom to communicate, are not
restricted except to the extent needed to

provide those same freedoms to everyone and
not violate the rights of others.



As noted above.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:33:03 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :

Frank Gilliland wrote:
Whoa there, Peter! Who in this group -- Doug

included -- has ever -supported- any law that

restricts the freedom of communication? Or

the right to freedom of speech? Nobody, as far
as I can remember.



Google for a memory jog. I remember comments being made by nocodes that
cb should be done away with. Such a law would restrict that freedom.


You are confusing the message with the messenger -- CB radio is not a
freedom. If CB radio is ever nixed (and I hope it isn't), you would
still be free to communicate, just not via CB radio.


If you are suggesting that the laws governing

radio communications are a violation of the

right to free speech then you are WAY wrong

because that has already been thrown out in

both the courts -and- in this newsgroup.





Tell it to Howard Stern or Bubba the Love Sponge. Their recent RECORD
fines from the FCC are testament to the law restricting exactly what
speech may be broadcast and how screwed up the law actually is. A few
examples,,,, one radio station may use an offensive term, but another
radio station may not say the same thing,,,,,this dj can say this, but
that dj over there can't say it. It's ok to say this on late night
radio, but if you say it in the morning, we're going to fine
you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it's screwed up so bad and Stern took Powell to task
for it the other day. Now daddy Powell is ****ed at Stern.


Again, there's the difference between the message and messenger. There
is a similar confusion whenever a radio station decides not to play a
particular song for whatever reason. When that happens there is always
a crowd that whines about censorship. But if their cries had any
validity, every station would be forced to play every song from every
artist since the beginning of time just so some Perry Como fan doesn't
throw a fit.


Get this straight, Peter: You have freedoms,

but those freedoms are limited


Limited equals restricted.


.....stay within context....


to the extent

that you don't violate the rights of others.



Freedom of speech will always be tested in the courts, thank God. What
you consider violating the rights of others, others may disagree. For
example, what may offend you may not offend another, especially where
speech and/or obscenity law is defined.


And that's why the rights of citizens are defined in the Constitution.
Yes, even the Constitution is subject to interpretation, but that's
the job of the judicial system. So far that system has done a pretty
good job. Not perfect, but pretty good.


You have freedom of movement -provided-

you don't tresspass on someone else's

property. You have the freedom of speech

-provided- you don't cause a public nuisance.




No, the word "nuisance" is to be found nowhere in either of the recent
record fines against Stern and BTLS (btls.com).


It was just an example, and it wasn't even intended to be specific to
radio. Radio is not the only venue for speech, as Howie has recently
learned.


You can drive a car -provided- you stay in

your own lane. Etc, etc.



.resulting in possible serious injury and/or death,


.....and therefore violating the rights of someone else.


none which can be
attained via what another may deem offensive or illegal speech.


It's not a matter of degrees. The right to free speech does not equate
to the right to life, or the right to vote, to freedom of religion, to
peaceably assemble, to keep and bear arms, etc. And most importantly,
the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Your freedoms,

including the freedom to communicate, are not
restricted except to the extent needed to

provide those same freedoms to everyone and
not violate the rights of others.



As noted above.



My compliments on your choice to adopt the generally accepted method
of Usenet quoting.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---