"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 23:58:04 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:41:08 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Gulf Coast Tony" wrote in message
. com...
I agree it's high time to bust the non type accepted radio dealers.
CB
is most fun when using real CB stuff. Any idiot can run high power
to
clobber a channel. Whats wrong with using 4 watts and a nice
antenna?
I'm not a ham. I am a CB'er. There's nothing wrong with enjoying
this
hobby. Lets just do it the right way. Here's a few places that deal
in
10 meter radios and amps for 11 meters. I don't know what we the law
abiding CB community can do about it. The sooner the FCC does their
job the better for all of us. Then maybe the fools that scream
"AUDIO"
and cuss and foul up the channels will be gone !

73'3
Tony
http://www.copper.com/
http://wholesalecbradio.com/
http://www.gijoesradioelectronics.com/
http://www.geocities.com/macscbshop/CB_Equipment.html
http://www.bellscb.com/
http://www.rrcom.com/welcome.html

P.S......we should also do business with those honest dealers that
DON't sell modified radios and amps. Here's a couple.

http://www.universal-radio.com/
http://www.alfenterprises.com/

That won't stop the people from cussing and keying down to jamb
channels,
fools are fools regardless of the equipment, that's the same as saying
there
would be no murders if we outlaw guns.


Yes, assholes will be assholes regardless of the equipment that's
available. The problems started just after the Citizen's Band was
created, and they aren't going away anytime soon. But that's no excuse
to add to the problems with more amps.


I never stated we should add more amps.


You were defending the sale of illegal radio equipment which, if I'm
not mistaken, includes amps. The fact is that if there were fewer amps
there would be fewer idiots using them. Same with guns. But guns are
legal while CB amps are not. Neither are modified and 'export' radios.
But legal or not, the same rule applies -- the fewer that are in
circulation the fewer that will be in use.


Where did I state in this post that I defended the sale of exports or amps?
I stated that eliminating amps would not eliminate fools on C.B.

Sometimes 4 watts is not enough. When
I go mudding in my truck, sometimes I'm in places with no cell service
and
kicking on the amp saves me from walking 10 miles if I break down or
get
stuck.


Get a 3-watt cellphone. I have a Uniden SMS-316TSD in my truck and it
works great. Coverage is almost 100% (that is unless you are going
deep into the Bitterroots, in which case it pays to get a satellite
phone).

There are many places in my neck of the woods where a 3 watt cell phone
still won't work.


I don't know if where you live is anything like the Rockies or the
Cascades, but you don't have to walk far to find a spot that will work
even with a handheld cellphone. In the deep woods, CB seems to be more
reliable than cellphones anyway -- you can usually raise a logging
camp or ranger post no matter where you are. But if you plan to go
into such remote places where normal services don't work, it's your
responsibility to anticipate an emergency and provide for legal
communications.


In a perfect world, yes. But I guess you carry every part that fits your
vehicle when you leave the house.


And 4 watts on Ch. 9 will reach 10 miles without a problem if
you have a decent antenna because there is very little noise on the
channel. So I don't see your reasons as justification for an amp.


Channel 10 is our local channel in this area. A lot of the locals with
clipped limiters and amps can bleed enough that from 10 miles 4 watts
won't
always get me help, particularly when I'm in a river bottom surrounded by
bluffs.


If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


I also like to shoot skip on sideband and the best place for that is
the freebands.


The best place for that is the ham bands.

If your a ham which I am not. If the FCC would have allocated part of the
C.B. band to SSB only, maybe the freband would be less attractive.


It's not hard to get a license. It's been done by hundreds of
thousands -- maybe millions -- of people around the world.

I never stated that it was hard. I have looked at the sample test questions
and have no doubt I can pass.

And the upper portion of the legal 40 is mostly used for SSB. The FCC
didn't declare this rule, but neither did they declare Ch. 9 as the
emergency channel. In fact, Ch. 9 used the be the 'calling' channel
while other channels were used for emergencies in different zones. It
wasn't until about 1970 that Ch. 9 was universally adopted by the CB
community as the emergency channel. Anyway, it doesn't take a
declaration from the FCC to work SSB anywhere on the legal 40. What
the FCC -has- declared is that operation outside the legal 40 -- i.e,
the so-called 'freeband' -- is illegal.

I have used the upper 40 on SSB. But found that many people talk AM on those
freqs. which makes it hard to use SSB for DXing. You can wave the illegal
flag all you want, I will still use the freeband.

The 'freeband' is attractive because many people want a license-free
ham band. They want the benefits without the responsibility or the
effort. It's that simple.


You can run illegally and still be responsible about it.


That's an old and tired excuse. You can't violate the law and be
responsible at the same time -- it's an oxymoron. Think about it:

"You can spit on the sidewalk and still be responsible about it."
"You can speed in the freeway and still be responsible about it."

When my 3 year old grandson drank a bottle of furniture polish, I felt
fully
justified exceeding the speed limit to get him to the hospital. I didn't
cut
anyone off or force them off the road to do so. I consider that a
responsible breaking of the law.


Ambulances (and other emergency vehicles) have lights, sirens and
reflective paints to provide a measure of safety while they drive
faster than the speed limit, and sometimes even those measures don't
work. So what makes you think you were being responsible by speeding
to the hospital without such measures? You endangered the life of your
son, yourself, and other people on the road. You took a chance with
other people's lives and you got lucky. That's not being responsible.

You can wait on the ambulance if you choose. I live in a rural area and by
the time the ambulance arives I can already be in the ER. I just hope you
are never in this situation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about your
family to expidite them to the hospital.

If you had called for emergency assistance they probably would have
sent out paramedics that could have treated your son at the scene, and
arrived faster than you made it to the hospital. Of course I expect
your next excuse is that you live in a remote location that takes too
long for emergency vehicles to respond, or that there's no place for a
helicopter to land near your home, or some crap like that. But those
are just excuses. The fact is that 911 can provide specific info over
the phone on whatever poison you have laying around your house, and
provide instructions that can render immediate aid. And because many
poisons work fast, that information not only saves lives but prevents
excessive injury when the poison is non-fatal. Now THAT would have
been the responsible thing to do instead of speeding to the hospital.


Yes a chopper could land in the field behind my house. The chopper happens
to be 40 miles from here. Again I can already be in the ER.

Unfortunately, most people don't think about those things until it's
too late.

And some people wait for EMS and they are too late.

"You can burglarize a house and still be responsible about it."
"You can murder someone with a gun and still be responsible about it."
(and before you condemn me for that last analogy, remember that it's
the same analogy -you- used earlier in -your- post).

NO, I stated that eliminating guns would not stop murder. People were
killing each other long before firearms were invented. I simply used that
anology to point out that eliminating amps would not stop foolish
behavior
on the C.B.


Don't backpedal -- you equated illegal radio equipment with guns so I
did the same. You claimed that you violate laws responsibly, an excuse
that anyone can see is hogwash when using -your own- analogy. Don't
you understand that 'law' is a method of enforcing responsibility?
Basically, law -is- responsibility in a written form. The only way to
'responsibly violate' a law is if there is a more important (and
legally justifiable) responsibility. Rushing your son to the hospital
would have been such an example if there were no better alternatives.
Regardless, 'freebanding' hardly compares with a medical emergency.

Never stated that freebanding equals a med emergency.
You missed my point entirely. I could try to explain it again, but you only
see things in black and white.



It just doesn't wash.


And it still doesn't wash.


I do
everything I can to make sure I am not coming over phone lines and
bleeding
on several channels. I don't use junk export radios, I use low pass
filters
and I check my equipment with a scope. I don't run power unless I
really
need to. BTW, Copper no longer sells amps.


It's not just about RFI. It's also about the hogging of a channel by a
single dork with an amp. If you increase your power enough to double
your range, you are cutting off the channel over an area that could
accomodate at least six other people. Double your range again and you
cut off 36 -more- potential users. The numbers rise exponentially, and
so does the frustration of legal "mud-ducks" trying to talk to someone
just down the road.

If I am stranded I'm sure that the C.B. community would understand that I
had to break into the regular chit chit long enough to get assistance. I
rarely use an amp for AM regular 40. I do sometimes use it on freebands
to
shoot some skip on SSB. If they were legal mud-ducks, what are they doing
on
the freebands?


I was talking about amps, but we can talk about the 'freeband', too.
For example, the word 'freeband' is a misnomer. It is not 'free'. That
part of the spectrum has been allocated. Part of it is a buffer zone
above Ch. 40, and the rest is allocated for private and government
services. Freebanders use those freqs because they claim not to hear
any activity, which is a logical fallacy -- if freebanders are using
those freqs then it's impossible -not- to hear activity. The next
excuse is that none of the activity heard is from -licensed- users,
which is another fallacy because those freqs are licensed to be used
(or not used) as the licensed "mud-ducks" see fit. IOW, just because
you don't hear any licensed activity doesn't mean the freqs have been
abandoned. If that were the case, 121.5MHz would be a very popular
'freeband' freq.

Never stated that they were abandoned. I know who has legal access to the
freebands. And it is not licensed mud-ducks.

Using an amp is not just illegal; it's rude, inconsiderate, and it's
not how the CB band was intended to be used. If you can't resist the
temptation to play hammie then get a license and work the ham bands.

I don't consider it rude to use an amp to get help.


And that's another favorite excuse. The FCC determined that use of
illegal equipment for emergencies is only justified if there is no
other means available AND the emergency could not have been
anticipated and prepared for by other means. IOW, if you know you are
going into the deep woods where a cell phone won't work and a legal CB
won't work, it is your responsibility (yes, I said 'responsibility')
to anticipate the possibility of an emergency and have a plan for
legal communications. This was decided in response to a petition by
someone trying to void the 155 mile rule by using the same excuse. The
FCC didn't buy it, and I don't either. Cell phones cover most of the
US. Satellite phones work darn near anywhere except in caves. Ham
radio is available from 160m through microwaves, and they even have
their own satellite repeaters. There is no valid reason to plan on
using illegal radio operation for emergencies when better and legal
alternatives exist.

How much do you pay a month for your satt phone Frank? Must be nice to have
that much money to burn.

If more hams were to educate C.B.ers on the benifits of becoming a ham
instead of treating us like we are the spawn of Satan, maybe I would get
my
ham ticket. Most of the hams that I have met have been quite rude and I
don't wish to waste my time and money on a hobby I don't think I would
enjoy.


Not all hams are rude. On the contrary, most hams that I have met are
quite agreeable. They are people, just like everyone else. And I don't
know why you wouldn't like ham radio when that is basically what you
are doing already on the 'freeband'. The only difference is that you
would be doing it legally. Does that take the fun out of it for you?

No it doesn't. It may very well be fun. In fact there are a lot of good
things I would like about ham radio, mostly the tech side. I didn't state
all hams are bad, just the ones I have talked to, they tend to treat C.B.ers
as second class citizens and I won't be a part of that.


You do not sound as if you enjoy C.B., maybe you should get your ham
ticket
so that you can associate with your own kind.


I do enjoy CB. And it's because I enjoy it that I hate to see it get
messed up by idiots with amps, as well as get a worse reputation
because of 'freebanders' calling themselves CBers -- CB is legal;
freebanding is radio piracy and is a violation of federal law. I'm not
a ham, and I don't want a ham license because there is nothing in that
service that interests me. If ARRL-of-Borg ever convince the FCC to
assimilate the 1750m band, maybe then I'll think about getting a ham
license. Until then I'm just a responsible and legal CBer.

Good for you. I'll stick to freebanding.

"DR. Death" wrote in message
...
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 23:58:04 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
news On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:41:08 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Gulf Coast Tony" wrote in message
. com...
I agree it's high time to bust the non type accepted radio dealers.
CB
is most fun when using real CB stuff. Any idiot can run high power
to
clobber a channel. Whats wrong with using 4 watts and a nice
antenna?
I'm not a ham. I am a CB'er. There's nothing wrong with enjoying
this
hobby. Lets just do it the right way. Here's a few places that deal
in
10 meter radios and amps for 11 meters. I don't know what we the
law
abiding CB community can do about it. The sooner the FCC does their
job the better for all of us. Then maybe the fools that scream
"AUDIO"
and cuss and foul up the channels will be gone !

73'3
Tony
http://www.copper.com/
http://wholesalecbradio.com/
http://www.gijoesradioelectronics.com/
http://www.geocities.com/macscbshop/CB_Equipment.html
http://www.bellscb.com/
http://www.rrcom.com/welcome.html

P.S......we should also do business with those honest dealers that
DON't sell modified radios and amps. Here's a couple.

http://www.universal-radio.com/
http://www.alfenterprises.com/

That won't stop the people from cussing and keying down to jamb
channels,
fools are fools regardless of the equipment, that's the same as
saying
there
would be no murders if we outlaw guns.


Yes, assholes will be assholes regardless of the equipment that's
available. The problems started just after the Citizen's Band was
created, and they aren't going away anytime soon. But that's no excuse
to add to the problems with more amps.


I never stated we should add more amps.


You were defending the sale of illegal radio equipment which, if I'm
not mistaken, includes amps. The fact is that if there were fewer amps
there would be fewer idiots using them. Same with guns. But guns are
legal while CB amps are not. Neither are modified and 'export' radios.
But legal or not, the same rule applies -- the fewer that are in
circulation the fewer that will be in use.


Where did I state in this post that I defended the sale of exports or
amps?
I stated that eliminating amps would not eliminate fools on C.B.

Sometimes 4 watts is not enough. When
I go mudding in my truck, sometimes I'm in places with no cell
service
and
kicking on the amp saves me from walking 10 miles if I break down or
get
stuck.


Get a 3-watt cellphone. I have a Uniden SMS-316TSD in my truck and it
works great. Coverage is almost 100% (that is unless you are going
deep into the Bitterroots, in which case it pays to get a satellite
phone).

There are many places in my neck of the woods where a 3 watt cell phone
still won't work.


I don't know if where you live is anything like the Rockies or the
Cascades, but you don't have to walk far to find a spot that will work
even with a handheld cellphone. In the deep woods, CB seems to be more
reliable than cellphones anyway -- you can usually raise a logging
camp or ranger post no matter where you are. But if you plan to go
into such remote places where normal services don't work, it's your
responsibility to anticipate an emergency and provide for legal
communications.


In a perfect world, yes. But I guess you carry every part that fits your
vehicle when you leave the house.


And 4 watts on Ch. 9 will reach 10 miles without a problem if
you have a decent antenna because there is very little noise on the
channel. So I don't see your reasons as justification for an amp.


Channel 10 is our local channel in this area. A lot of the locals with
clipped limiters and amps can bleed enough that from 10 miles 4 watts
won't
always get me help, particularly when I'm in a river bottom surrounded
by
bluffs.


If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and
bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


I also like to shoot skip on sideband and the best place for that is
the freebands.


The best place for that is the ham bands.

If your a ham which I am not. If the FCC would have allocated part of
the
C.B. band to SSB only, maybe the freband would be less attractive.


It's not hard to get a license. It's been done by hundreds of
thousands -- maybe millions -- of people around the world.

I never stated that it was hard. I have looked at the sample test
questions
and have no doubt I can pass.

And the upper portion of the legal 40 is mostly used for SSB. The FCC
didn't declare this rule, but neither did they declare Ch. 9 as the
emergency channel. In fact, Ch. 9 used the be the 'calling' channel
while other channels were used for emergencies in different zones. It
wasn't until about 1970 that Ch. 9 was universally adopted by the CB
community as the emergency channel. Anyway, it doesn't take a
declaration from the FCC to work SSB anywhere on the legal 40. What
the FCC -has- declared is that operation outside the legal 40 -- i.e,
the so-called 'freeband' -- is illegal.

I have used the upper 40 on SSB. But found that many people talk AM on
those
freqs. which makes it hard to use SSB for DXing. You can wave the illegal
flag all you want, I will still use the freeband.

The 'freeband' is attractive because many people want a license-free
ham band. They want the benefits without the responsibility or the
effort. It's that simple.


You can run illegally and still be responsible about it.


That's an old and tired excuse. You can't violate the law and be
responsible at the same time -- it's an oxymoron. Think about it:

"You can spit on the sidewalk and still be responsible about it."
"You can speed in the freeway and still be responsible about it."

When my 3 year old grandson drank a bottle of furniture polish, I felt
fully
justified exceeding the speed limit to get him to the hospital. I didn't
cut
anyone off or force them off the road to do so. I consider that a
responsible breaking of the law.


Ambulances (and other emergency vehicles) have lights, sirens and
reflective paints to provide a measure of safety while they drive
faster than the speed limit, and sometimes even those measures don't
work. So what makes you think you were being responsible by speeding
to the hospital without such measures? You endangered the life of your
son, yourself, and other people on the road. You took a chance with
other people's lives and you got lucky. That's not being responsible.

You can wait on the ambulance if you choose. I live in a rural area and by
the time the ambulance arives I can already be in the ER. I just hope you
are never in this situation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about
your
family to expidite them to the hospital.

If you had called for emergency assistance they probably would have
sent out paramedics that could have treated your son at the scene, and
arrived faster than you made it to the hospital. Of course I expect
your next excuse is that you live in a remote location that takes too
long for emergency vehicles to respond, or that there's no place for a
helicopter to land near your home, or some crap like that. But those
are just excuses. The fact is that 911 can provide specific info over
the phone on whatever poison you have laying around your house, and
provide instructions that can render immediate aid. And because many
poisons work fast, that information not only saves lives but prevents
excessive injury when the poison is non-fatal. Now THAT would have
been the responsible thing to do instead of speeding to the hospital.


Yes a chopper could land in the field behind my house. The chopper happens
to be 40 miles from here. Again I can already be in the ER.

Unfortunately, most people don't think about those things until it's
too late.

And some people wait for EMS and they are too late.

"You can burglarize a house and still be responsible about it."
"You can murder someone with a gun and still be responsible about it."
(and before you condemn me for that last analogy, remember that it's
the same analogy -you- used earlier in -your- post).

NO, I stated that eliminating guns would not stop murder. People were
killing each other long before firearms were invented. I simply used
that
anology to point out that eliminating amps would not stop foolish
behavior
on the C.B.


Don't backpedal -- you equated illegal radio equipment with guns so I
did the same. You claimed that you violate laws responsibly, an excuse
that anyone can see is hogwash when using -your own- analogy. Don't
you understand that 'law' is a method of enforcing responsibility?
Basically, law -is- responsibility in a written form. The only way to
'responsibly violate' a law is if there is a more important (and
legally justifiable) responsibility. Rushing your son to the hospital
would have been such an example if there were no better alternatives.
Regardless, 'freebanding' hardly compares with a medical emergency.

Never stated that freebanding equals a med emergency.
You missed my point entirely. I could try to explain it again, but you
only
see things in black and white.



It just doesn't wash.


And it still doesn't wash.


I do
everything I can to make sure I am not coming over phone lines and
bleeding
on several channels. I don't use junk export radios, I use low pass
filters
and I check my equipment with a scope. I don't run power unless I
really
need to. BTW, Copper no longer sells amps.


It's not just about RFI. It's also about the hogging of a channel by a
single dork with an amp. If you increase your power enough to double
your range, you are cutting off the channel over an area that could
accomodate at least six other people. Double your range again and you
cut off 36 -more- potential users. The numbers rise exponentially, and
so does the frustration of legal "mud-ducks" trying to talk to someone
just down the road.

If I am stranded I'm sure that the C.B. community would understand that
I
had to break into the regular chit chit long enough to get assistance. I
rarely use an amp for AM regular 40. I do sometimes use it on freebands
to
shoot some skip on SSB. If they were legal mud-ducks, what are they
doing
on
the freebands?


I was talking about amps, but we can talk about the 'freeband', too.
For example, the word 'freeband' is a misnomer. It is not 'free'. That
part of the spectrum has been allocated. Part of it is a buffer zone
above Ch. 40, and the rest is allocated for private and government
services. Freebanders use those freqs because they claim not to hear
any activity, which is a logical fallacy -- if freebanders are using
those freqs then it's impossible -not- to hear activity. The next
excuse is that none of the activity heard is from -licensed- users,
which is another fallacy because those freqs are licensed to be used
(or not used) as the licensed "mud-ducks" see fit. IOW, just because
you don't hear any licensed activity doesn't mean the freqs have been
abandoned. If that were the case, 121.5MHz would be a very popular
'freeband' freq.

Never stated that they were abandoned. I know who has legal access to the
freebands. And it is not licensed mud-ducks.

Using an amp is not just illegal; it's rude, inconsiderate, and it's
not how the CB band was intended to be used. If you can't resist the
temptation to play hammie then get a license and work the ham bands.

I don't consider it rude to use an amp to get help.


And that's another favorite excuse. The FCC determined that use of
illegal equipment for emergencies is only justified if there is no
other means available AND the emergency could not have been
anticipated and prepared for by other means. IOW, if you know you are
going into the deep woods where a cell phone won't work and a legal CB
won't work, it is your responsibility (yes, I said 'responsibility')
to anticipate the possibility of an emergency and have a plan for
legal communications. This was decided in response to a petition by
someone trying to void the 155 mile rule by using the same excuse. The
FCC didn't buy it, and I don't either. Cell phones cover most of the
US. Satellite phones work darn near anywhere except in caves. Ham
radio is available from 160m through microwaves, and they even have
their own satellite repeaters. There is no valid reason to plan on
using illegal radio operation for emergencies when better and legal
alternatives exist.

How much do you pay a month for your satt phone Frank? Must be nice to
have
that much money to burn.

If more hams were to educate C.B.ers on the benifits of becoming a ham
instead of treating us like we are the spawn of Satan, maybe I would get
my
ham ticket. Most of the hams that I have met have been quite rude and I
don't wish to waste my time and money on a hobby I don't think I would
enjoy.


Not all hams are rude. On the contrary, most hams that I have met are
quite agreeable. They are people, just like everyone else. And I don't
know why you wouldn't like ham radio when that is basically what you
are doing already on the 'freeband'. The only difference is that you
would be doing it legally. Does that take the fun out of it for you?

No it doesn't. It may very well be fun. In fact there are a lot of good
things I would like about ham radio, mostly the tech side. I didn't state
all hams are bad, just the ones I have talked to, they tend to treat
C.B.ers
as second class citizens and I won't be a part of that.

I'm sorry I razzed you about St. Louis. :-)

"U Know Who" wrote in
message ...

"DR. Death" wrote in message
...
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 23:58:04 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
news On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:41:08 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Gulf Coast Tony" wrote in message
. com...
I agree it's high time to bust the non type accepted radio
dealers.
CB
is most fun when using real CB stuff. Any idiot can run high
power
to
clobber a channel. Whats wrong with using 4 watts and a nice
antenna?
I'm not a ham. I am a CB'er. There's nothing wrong with enjoying
this
hobby. Lets just do it the right way. Here's a few places that
deal
in
10 meter radios and amps for 11 meters. I don't know what we the
law
abiding CB community can do about it. The sooner the FCC does
their
job the better for all of us. Then maybe the fools that scream
"AUDIO"
and cuss and foul up the channels will be gone !

73'3
Tony
http://www.copper.com/
http://wholesalecbradio.com/
http://www.gijoesradioelectronics.com/
http://www.geocities.com/macscbshop/CB_Equipment.html
http://www.bellscb.com/
http://www.rrcom.com/welcome.html

P.S......we should also do business with those honest dealers
that
DON't sell modified radios and amps. Here's a couple.

http://www.universal-radio.com/
http://www.alfenterprises.com/

That won't stop the people from cussing and keying down to jamb
channels,
fools are fools regardless of the equipment, that's the same as
saying
there
would be no murders if we outlaw guns.


Yes, assholes will be assholes regardless of the equipment that's
available. The problems started just after the Citizen's Band was
created, and they aren't going away anytime soon. But that's no
excuse
to add to the problems with more amps.


I never stated we should add more amps.


You were defending the sale of illegal radio equipment which, if I'm
not mistaken, includes amps. The fact is that if there were fewer amps
there would be fewer idiots using them. Same with guns. But guns are
legal while CB amps are not. Neither are modified and 'export' radios.
But legal or not, the same rule applies -- the fewer that are in
circulation the fewer that will be in use.


Where did I state in this post that I defended the sale of exports or
amps?
I stated that eliminating amps would not eliminate fools on C.B.

Sometimes 4 watts is not enough. When
I go mudding in my truck, sometimes I'm in places with no cell
service
and
kicking on the amp saves me from walking 10 miles if I break down
or
get
stuck.


Get a 3-watt cellphone. I have a Uniden SMS-316TSD in my truck and
it
works great. Coverage is almost 100% (that is unless you are going
deep into the Bitterroots, in which case it pays to get a satellite
phone).

There are many places in my neck of the woods where a 3 watt cell
phone
still won't work.


I don't know if where you live is anything like the Rockies or the
Cascades, but you don't have to walk far to find a spot that will work
even with a handheld cellphone. In the deep woods, CB seems to be more
reliable than cellphones anyway -- you can usually raise a logging
camp or ranger post no matter where you are. But if you plan to go
into such remote places where normal services don't work, it's your
responsibility to anticipate an emergency and provide for legal
communications.


In a perfect world, yes. But I guess you carry every part that fits your
vehicle when you leave the house.


And 4 watts on Ch. 9 will reach 10 miles without a problem if
you have a decent antenna because there is very little noise on the
channel. So I don't see your reasons as justification for an amp.


Channel 10 is our local channel in this area. A lot of the locals with
clipped limiters and amps can bleed enough that from 10 miles 4 watts
won't
always get me help, particularly when I'm in a river bottom surrounded
by
bluffs.


If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and
bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on
in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great
cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


I also like to shoot skip on sideband and the best place for that
is
the freebands.


The best place for that is the ham bands.

If your a ham which I am not. If the FCC would have allocated part of
the
C.B. band to SSB only, maybe the freband would be less attractive.


It's not hard to get a license. It's been done by hundreds of
thousands -- maybe millions -- of people around the world.

I never stated that it was hard. I have looked at the sample test
questions
and have no doubt I can pass.

And the upper portion of the legal 40 is mostly used for SSB. The FCC
didn't declare this rule, but neither did they declare Ch. 9 as the
emergency channel. In fact, Ch. 9 used the be the 'calling' channel
while other channels were used for emergencies in different zones. It
wasn't until about 1970 that Ch. 9 was universally adopted by the CB
community as the emergency channel. Anyway, it doesn't take a
declaration from the FCC to work SSB anywhere on the legal 40. What
the FCC -has- declared is that operation outside the legal 40 -- i.e,
the so-called 'freeband' -- is illegal.

I have used the upper 40 on SSB. But found that many people talk AM on
those
freqs. which makes it hard to use SSB for DXing. You can wave the
illegal
flag all you want, I will still use the freeband.

The 'freeband' is attractive because many people want a license-free
ham band. They want the benefits without the responsibility or the
effort. It's that simple.


You can run illegally and still be responsible about it.


That's an old and tired excuse. You can't violate the law and be
responsible at the same time -- it's an oxymoron. Think about it:

"You can spit on the sidewalk and still be responsible about it."
"You can speed in the freeway and still be responsible about it."

When my 3 year old grandson drank a bottle of furniture polish, I felt
fully
justified exceeding the speed limit to get him to the hospital. I
didn't
cut
anyone off or force them off the road to do so. I consider that a
responsible breaking of the law.


Ambulances (and other emergency vehicles) have lights, sirens and
reflective paints to provide a measure of safety while they drive
faster than the speed limit, and sometimes even those measures don't
work. So what makes you think you were being responsible by speeding
to the hospital without such measures? You endangered the life of your
son, yourself, and other people on the road. You took a chance with
other people's lives and you got lucky. That's not being responsible.

You can wait on the ambulance if you choose. I live in a rural area and
by
the time the ambulance arives I can already be in the ER. I just hope
you
are never in this situation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about
your
family to expidite them to the hospital.

If you had called for emergency assistance they probably would have
sent out paramedics that could have treated your son at the scene, and
arrived faster than you made it to the hospital. Of course I expect
your next excuse is that you live in a remote location that takes too
long for emergency vehicles to respond, or that there's no place for a
helicopter to land near your home, or some crap like that. But those
are just excuses. The fact is that 911 can provide specific info over
the phone on whatever poison you have laying around your house, and
provide instructions that can render immediate aid. And because many
poisons work fast, that information not only saves lives but prevents
excessive injury when the poison is non-fatal. Now THAT would have
been the responsible thing to do instead of speeding to the hospital.


Yes a chopper could land in the field behind my house. The chopper
happens
to be 40 miles from here. Again I can already be in the ER.

Unfortunately, most people don't think about those things until it's
too late.

And some people wait for EMS and they are too late.

"You can burglarize a house and still be responsible about it."
"You can murder someone with a gun and still be responsible about
it."
(and before you condemn me for that last analogy, remember that it's
the same analogy -you- used earlier in -your- post).

NO, I stated that eliminating guns would not stop murder. People were
killing each other long before firearms were invented. I simply used
that
anology to point out that eliminating amps would not stop foolish
behavior
on the C.B.


Don't backpedal -- you equated illegal radio equipment with guns so I
did the same. You claimed that you violate laws responsibly, an excuse
that anyone can see is hogwash when using -your own- analogy. Don't
you understand that 'law' is a method of enforcing responsibility?
Basically, law -is- responsibility in a written form. The only way to
'responsibly violate' a law is if there is a more important (and
legally justifiable) responsibility. Rushing your son to the hospital
would have been such an example if there were no better alternatives.
Regardless, 'freebanding' hardly compares with a medical emergency.

Never stated that freebanding equals a med emergency.
You missed my point entirely. I could try to explain it again, but you
only
see things in black and white.



It just doesn't wash.


And it still doesn't wash.


I do
everything I can to make sure I am not coming over phone lines and
bleeding
on several channels. I don't use junk export radios, I use low pass
filters
and I check my equipment with a scope. I don't run power unless I
really
need to. BTW, Copper no longer sells amps.


It's not just about RFI. It's also about the hogging of a channel by
a
single dork with an amp. If you increase your power enough to double
your range, you are cutting off the channel over an area that could
accomodate at least six other people. Double your range again and
you
cut off 36 -more- potential users. The numbers rise exponentially,
and
so does the frustration of legal "mud-ducks" trying to talk to
someone
just down the road.

If I am stranded I'm sure that the C.B. community would understand
that
I
had to break into the regular chit chit long enough to get assistance.
I
rarely use an amp for AM regular 40. I do sometimes use it on
freebands
to
shoot some skip on SSB. If they were legal mud-ducks, what are they
doing
on
the freebands?


I was talking about amps, but we can talk about the 'freeband', too.
For example, the word 'freeband' is a misnomer. It is not 'free'. That
part of the spectrum has been allocated. Part of it is a buffer zone
above Ch. 40, and the rest is allocated for private and government
services. Freebanders use those freqs because they claim not to hear
any activity, which is a logical fallacy -- if freebanders are using
those freqs then it's impossible -not- to hear activity. The next
excuse is that none of the activity heard is from -licensed- users,
which is another fallacy because those freqs are licensed to be used
(or not used) as the licensed "mud-ducks" see fit. IOW, just because
you don't hear any licensed activity doesn't mean the freqs have been
abandoned. If that were the case, 121.5MHz would be a very popular
'freeband' freq.

Never stated that they were abandoned. I know who has legal access to
the
freebands. And it is not licensed mud-ducks.

Using an amp is not just illegal; it's rude, inconsiderate, and it's
not how the CB band was intended to be used. If you can't resist the
temptation to play hammie then get a license and work the ham bands.

I don't consider it rude to use an amp to get help.


And that's another favorite excuse. The FCC determined that use of
illegal equipment for emergencies is only justified if there is no
other means available AND the emergency could not have been
anticipated and prepared for by other means. IOW, if you know you are
going into the deep woods where a cell phone won't work and a legal CB
won't work, it is your responsibility (yes, I said 'responsibility')
to anticipate the possibility of an emergency and have a plan for
legal communications. This was decided in response to a petition by
someone trying to void the 155 mile rule by using the same excuse. The
FCC didn't buy it, and I don't either. Cell phones cover most of the
US. Satellite phones work darn near anywhere except in caves. Ham
radio is available from 160m through microwaves, and they even have
their own satellite repeaters. There is no valid reason to plan on
using illegal radio operation for emergencies when better and legal
alternatives exist.

How much do you pay a month for your satt phone Frank? Must be nice to
have
that much money to burn.

If more hams were to educate C.B.ers on the benifits of becoming a ham
instead of treating us like we are the spawn of Satan, maybe I would
get
my
ham ticket. Most of the hams that I have met have been quite rude and
I
don't wish to waste my time and money on a hobby I don't think I would
enjoy.


Not all hams are rude. On the contrary, most hams that I have met are
quite agreeable. They are people, just like everyone else. And I don't
know why you wouldn't like ham radio when that is basically what you
are doing already on the 'freeband'. The only difference is that you
would be doing it legally. Does that take the fun out of it for you?

No it doesn't. It may very well be fun. In fact there are a lot of good
things I would like about ham radio, mostly the tech side. I didn't
state
all hams are bad, just the ones I have talked to, they tend to treat
C.B.ers
as second class citizens and I won't be a part of that.

I'm sorry I razzed you about St. Louis. :-)

LOL that's quite allright. Don't think I wouldn't be gloating if we won.

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:50:06 -0600, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

snip
I never stated we should add more amps.


You were defending the sale of illegal radio equipment which, if I'm
not mistaken, includes amps. The fact is that if there were fewer amps
there would be fewer idiots using them. Same with guns. But guns are
legal while CB amps are not. Neither are modified and 'export' radios.
But legal or not, the same rule applies -- the fewer that are in
circulation the fewer that will be in use.


Where did I state in this post that I defended the sale of exports or amps?
I stated that eliminating amps would not eliminate fools on C.B.


Your statement was in opposition to the OP who suggested that the sale
of illegal equipment should be curbed. To me that sounds like you are
defending the sale of those items.


snip
I don't know if where you live is anything like the Rockies or the
Cascades, but you don't have to walk far to find a spot that will work
even with a handheld cellphone. In the deep woods, CB seems to be more
reliable than cellphones anyway -- you can usually raise a logging
camp or ranger post no matter where you are. But if you plan to go
into such remote places where normal services don't work, it's your
responsibility to anticipate an emergency and provide for legal
communications.


In a perfect world, yes. But I guess you carry every part that fits your
vehicle when you leave the house.


.....huh? The law isn't perfect and neither are people. But that's not
a valid excuse to violate the law. Yet you go one step further and
justify the expense and effort of illegal operation as a forethought
towards an emergency situation. Well, if emergency communications is
important enough to demand that much thought and effort, illegal
operation is probably the -worst- choice. As I stated before, there
are other methods that are both better and legal, and not suprisingly
enough they require less effort and expense than illegal operation.
Add to that the practical uselessness of the freeband as an emergency
communications channel -- it's no better than CB in that communication
with emergency services is, at best, a bucket-brigade. You can get
direct comm to emergency services using satellite and cell phones, and
even using ham radio via skip or satellite. This saves not only time
(which can be critical in an emergency situation), but also prevents
the miscommunication that usually accompanies "human repeaters" (you
played that 'pass-the-message' game in grade school, didn't you?).


snip
If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


On the contrary, it is -you- that is making excuses to run illegally.
If you are in a radio dead-zone then how does your signal get out at
all? It won't.

I live in Spokane, WA. I have worked with a couple logging companies
in both the Cascades and Rockies (which is why I mentioned those two
mountain ranges previously). You can bet that there are places where
comm sucks. There are large areas where there is no cell phone
coverage, at least not officially. But at those altitudes, all you
need to do is climb up to a peak with a 3-watt phone and you can
easily hit a cell tower 50 miles away. If you don't believe me, take
note of a recent incident on Mt. Rainier where a climber was rescued
after contacting a hunter 40 miles away with his FRS.

And if you are in a canyon or deep valley, it doesn't matter how much
power you run, there's nothing you can do on radio unless you have VLF
or satellite.


I also like to shoot skip on sideband and the best place for that is
the freebands.


The best place for that is the ham bands.

If your a ham which I am not. If the FCC would have allocated part of the
C.B. band to SSB only, maybe the freband would be less attractive.


It's not hard to get a license. It's been done by hundreds of
thousands -- maybe millions -- of people around the world.

I never stated that it was hard.


I never stated you did.


I have looked at the sample test questions
and have no doubt I can pass.

And the upper portion of the legal 40 is mostly used for SSB. The FCC
didn't declare this rule, but neither did they declare Ch. 9 as the
emergency channel. In fact, Ch. 9 used the be the 'calling' channel
while other channels were used for emergencies in different zones. It
wasn't until about 1970 that Ch. 9 was universally adopted by the CB
community as the emergency channel. Anyway, it doesn't take a
declaration from the FCC to work SSB anywhere on the legal 40. What
the FCC -has- declared is that operation outside the legal 40 -- i.e,
the so-called 'freeband' -- is illegal.

I have used the upper 40 on SSB. But found that many people talk AM on those
freqs. which makes it hard to use SSB for DXing.


In case you hadn't noticed, the ham bands have much more spectrum and
MUCH better DX conditions. Seems to me that ham DX would be much
easier than freebanding.


You can wave the illegal
flag all you want, I will still use the freeband.


That pretty much sums up your argument -- you'll do it because you
want to. No valid reasons, no legal justification, and no regard for
better alternatives. It all boils down to the fact that you want the
benefits without the license. Am I wrong? If I am then at least
provide a -legitimate- reason for violating the law because your other
excuses are bogus.


snip
Ambulances (and other emergency vehicles) have lights, sirens and
reflective paints to provide a measure of safety while they drive
faster than the speed limit, and sometimes even those measures don't
work. So what makes you think you were being responsible by speeding
to the hospital without such measures? You endangered the life of your
son, yourself, and other people on the road. You took a chance with
other people's lives and you got lucky. That's not being responsible.

You can wait on the ambulance if you choose. I live in a rural area and by
the time the ambulance arives I can already be in the ER. I just hope you
are never in this situation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about your
family to expidite them to the hospital.


......uh, yeah. right. You live xx miles from the hospital. If you
leave your home at the same time the ambulance leaves the hospital,
and you are both driving the same speed, you each get to your
destination at about the same time. But in the process you have risked
the lives of your son, yourself and others on the road by your urgent
driving, you have further endangered your son because he may not have
been in a condition stable enough to transport, and while you were
driving to the hospital you could have been administering first aid
from directions given by professionals over the phone. You can make
any excuse you want, you can try the what-if-it-was-your-kid sympathy
trip, you can plead the concerned-father routine, and you can even
justify your actions by the fact that you were lucky and nobody got
hurt. But the fact is it would have been better to stay home talking
with 911 and wait for emergency services to arrive.


If you had called for emergency assistance they probably would have
sent out paramedics that could have treated your son at the scene, and
arrived faster than you made it to the hospital. Of course I expect
your next excuse is that you live in a remote location that takes too
long for emergency vehicles to respond, or that there's no place for a
helicopter to land near your home, or some crap like that. But those
are just excuses. The fact is that 911 can provide specific info over
the phone on whatever poison you have laying around your house, and
provide instructions that can render immediate aid. And because many
poisons work fast, that information not only saves lives but prevents
excessive injury when the poison is non-fatal. Now THAT would have
been the responsible thing to do instead of speeding to the hospital.


Yes a chopper could land in the field behind my house. The chopper happens
to be 40 miles from here. Again I can already be in the ER.

Unfortunately, most people don't think about those things until it's
too late.

And some people wait for EMS and they are too late.


You are starting to sound like my grandma did when she talked about
seatbelts. She came up with every excuse in the book until it finally
boiled down to something like, "What if the car catches fire and I
can't undo my seatbelt because I'm unconscious?" Even my 80 yo granny
finally figured out that she was just making excuses because she
simply didn't want to wear a seatbelt. If my grandma can figure it
out, why can't you?


"You can burglarize a house and still be responsible about it."
"You can murder someone with a gun and still be responsible about it."
(and before you condemn me for that last analogy, remember that it's
the same analogy -you- used earlier in -your- post).

NO, I stated that eliminating guns would not stop murder. People were
killing each other long before firearms were invented. I simply used that
anology to point out that eliminating amps would not stop foolish
behavior
on the C.B.


Don't backpedal -- you equated illegal radio equipment with guns so I
did the same. You claimed that you violate laws responsibly, an excuse
that anyone can see is hogwash when using -your own- analogy. Don't
you understand that 'law' is a method of enforcing responsibility?
Basically, law -is- responsibility in a written form. The only way to
'responsibly violate' a law is if there is a more important (and
legally justifiable) responsibility. Rushing your son to the hospital
would have been such an example if there were no better alternatives.
Regardless, 'freebanding' hardly compares with a medical emergency.

Never stated that freebanding equals a med emergency.


You used the example of a medical emergency to justify your violation
of the law, and with respect to both speeding -and- amps.


You missed my point entirely. I could try to explain it again, but you only
see things in black and white.


No, I see things logically. And I see you making excuses instead of
valid arguments. I'm still waiting for a justifiable reason for using
amps and/or freebanding. Do you have one or not?


snip
..... IOW, just because
you don't hear any licensed activity doesn't mean the freqs have been
abandoned. If that were the case, 121.5MHz would be a very popular
'freeband' freq.

Never stated that they were abandoned. I know who has legal access to the
freebands. And it is not licensed mud-ducks.


Do you want a list?


snip
.... There is no valid reason to plan on
using illegal radio operation for emergencies when better and legal
alternatives exist.

How much do you pay a month for your satt phone Frank? Must be nice to have
that much money to burn.


I don't. I rent one when I need it. They don't cost that much to rent
when you are only going out for a week or so at a time. And the
expense is well worth the security, as I have found out more than
once. But ham radio has it's own satellites which don't cost a penny,
and the equipment isn't any more expensive than one of those 'export'
radios or a big amp. Also, in the past few years I have been playing
with LF and VLF. For example, the 1750m (lowfer) band is license-free,
and one watt will give you -reliable- comm for 30+ miles in -any-
terrain -- even better in the winter months (-despite- all the band
noise). And it's suprisingly cheap, comparable in cost to a legal CB
radio setup.

So -that- excuse doesn't wash, either.


If more hams were to educate C.B.ers on the benifits of becoming a ham
instead of treating us like we are the spawn of Satan, maybe I would get
my
ham ticket. Most of the hams that I have met have been quite rude and I
don't wish to waste my time and money on a hobby I don't think I would
enjoy.


Not all hams are rude. On the contrary, most hams that I have met are
quite agreeable. They are people, just like everyone else. And I don't
know why you wouldn't like ham radio when that is basically what you
are doing already on the 'freeband'. The only difference is that you
would be doing it legally. Does that take the fun out of it for you?

No it doesn't. It may very well be fun. In fact there are a lot of good
things I would like about ham radio, mostly the tech side. I didn't state
all hams are bad, just the ones I have talked to, they tend to treat C.B.ers
as second class citizens and I won't be a part of that.


I don't believe that attitude is required under Part 97. You might
check anyway just to be sure. Regardless, do you really think that
they should embrace you when you basically **** in their faces by
blatantly disregarding the reasons they got their licenses? If you do
then you are, at best, naive.


You do not sound as if you enjoy C.B., maybe you should get your ham
ticket
so that you can associate with your own kind.


I do enjoy CB. And it's because I enjoy it that I hate to see it get
messed up by idiots with amps, as well as get a worse reputation
because of 'freebanders' calling themselves CBers -- CB is legal;
freebanding is radio piracy and is a violation of federal law. I'm not
a ham, and I don't want a ham license because there is nothing in that
service that interests me. If ARRL-of-Borg ever convince the FCC to
assimilate the 1750m band, maybe then I'll think about getting a ham
license. Until then I'm just a responsible and legal CBer.

Good for you. I'll stick to freebanding.


I have no doubt you will. After all, you have invoked just about every
excuse ever used to defend it. I expected more from you on the amp
issue, but that's ok -- maybe next time. Anyway, I thank you for yet
another opportunity to debunk the standard lineup of lame excuses that
freebanders use to violate federal law. If you should ever go legit
and get your license, drop me an email and I'll send you plans to
build one damn fine amp!






----== 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 in message
...
snip
If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and
bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


On the contrary, it is -you- that is making excuses to run illegally.
If you are in a radio dead-zone then how does your signal get out at
all? It won't.

I live in Spokane, WA. I have worked with a couple logging companies
in both the Cascades and Rockies (which is why I mentioned those two
mountain ranges previously). You can bet that there are places where
comm sucks. There are large areas where there is no cell phone
coverage, at least not officially. But at those altitudes, all you
need to do is climb up to a peak with a 3-watt phone and you can
easily hit a cell tower 50 miles away. If you don't believe me, take
note of a recent incident on Mt. Rainier where a climber was rescued
after contacting a hunter 40 miles away with his FRS.

And if you are in a canyon or deep valley, it doesn't matter how much
power you run, there's nothing you can do on radio unless you have VLF
or satellite.

Well Frank, you know I off road a lot, and there are times
where both Ham & cb freqs will work, with a little extra help
and cells don't work worth the powder to blow them up.
I was at a Bronco event in Ariz, we were between canyon walls,
doing some serious rock crawling, one rig was trying to traverse the 6.5"
rock wall. Well he broke his spring perch, nobody had a portable
welder on them. Got on the radio, his rig was stock, another person
had a rig with a 100 watts, fired it up, got a hold a someone a couple
miles away. He wheeled in and welded up the spring perch. We
could've hiked up to a point and got a cell signal, but back at the
camp, cell signals were non existent, so the radio came to work
better.
Now I too am also fast becoming a believer in sat phones,
almost anywhere you can get a signal, just like the sat radio (XM)
which I subscribed too now.

Landshark


--
That does suck..sometimes you're the
windshield..sometimes you're the bug.

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 05:26:25 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
.. .
snip
If you are getting that much interference in a radio dead-zone then it
isn't much of a radio dead-zone, is it? And if the other end of your
comm can't seperate your fundamental from all the QRM then just how
'remote' is this place? Doesn't seem that remote to me. It sounds like
you are just making excuses.

Your more than welcome to go fishing, hunting, 4 wheeling with me and
bring
your cell. It might be usefull for telling time but useless to talk on in
some places that I frequent. You obviously live in an area with great cell
coverage. I do not. You are looking for excuses to argue.


On the contrary, it is -you- that is making excuses to run illegally.
If you are in a radio dead-zone then how does your signal get out at
all? It won't.

I live in Spokane, WA. I have worked with a couple logging companies
in both the Cascades and Rockies (which is why I mentioned those two
mountain ranges previously). You can bet that there are places where
comm sucks. There are large areas where there is no cell phone
coverage, at least not officially. But at those altitudes, all you
need to do is climb up to a peak with a 3-watt phone and you can
easily hit a cell tower 50 miles away. If you don't believe me, take
note of a recent incident on Mt. Rainier where a climber was rescued
after contacting a hunter 40 miles away with his FRS.

And if you are in a canyon or deep valley, it doesn't matter how much
power you run, there's nothing you can do on radio unless you have VLF
or satellite.

Well Frank, you know I off road a lot, and there are times
where both Ham & cb freqs will work, with a little extra help
and cells don't work worth the powder to blow them up.


I found that digital phones are far more fussy than their old analog
predecessors. And some services just plain suck for coverage.


I was at a Bronco event in Ariz, we were between canyon walls,
doing some serious rock crawling, one rig was trying to traverse the 6.5"
rock wall. Well he broke his spring perch, nobody had a portable
welder on them. Got on the radio, his rig was stock, another person
had a rig with a 100 watts, fired it up, got a hold a someone a couple
miles away.


Well now you have been reading this group long enough to know that
there could be a multitude of reasons why that is. I might be inclined
to believe that terrain was a factor if I knew that the stock radio
was working properly and had a good..... hold the phone: he busted his
suspension on a 6.5" rock wall? What were these rigs -- RC cars?


He wheeled in and welded up the spring perch. We
could've hiked up to a point and got a cell signal, but back at the
camp, cell signals were non existent, so the radio came to work
better.
Now I too am also fast becoming a believer in sat phones,
almost anywhere you can get a signal, just like the sat radio (XM)
which I subscribed too now.


I don't have much interest in XM -- takes the fun out of long trips. I
actually enjoy fiddling with the radio, finding local stations and
hearing what's going on in the town I'm passing through. But I'm
rapidly losing interest in that, too, now that most of the stations
are controlled by the broadcast monopolies and sound pretty much the
same.

Just curious, can you get AM local advisory stations with an XM radio?







----== 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 =---

"DR. Death" wrote in message
...
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
Not all hams are rude. On the contrary, most hams that I have met
are
quite agreeable. They are people, just like everyone else. And I
don't
know why you wouldn't like ham radio when that is basically what
you
are doing already on the 'freeband'. The only difference is that
you
would be doing it legally. Does that take the fun out of it for
you?

No it doesn't. It may very well be fun. In fact there are a lot of good
things I would like about ham radio, mostly the tech side. I didn't state
all hams are bad, just the ones I have talked to, they tend to treat
C.B.ers as second class citizens and I won't be a part of that.

S o your going to let a few hams who look down on cbers stop you from
getting a license? ,,you give up too easy is the real problem I think.

"Landshark" wrote:
Well he broke his spring perch, nobody had a portable
welder on them. Got on the radio, his rig was stock, another person
had a rig with a 100 watts, fired it up, got a hold a someone a couple
miles away.

WoW, I thought you were gonna say he used his amp to weld it. Ha!

(I Am Not George) wrote:
S o your going to let a few hams who look down on cbers stop you from
getting a license? ,,you give up too easy is the real problem I think.

Just curious, are you a ham operator?

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
I don't have much interest in XM -- takes the fun out of long trips. I
actually enjoy fiddling with the radio, finding local stations and
hearing what's going on in the town I'm passing through. But I'm
rapidly losing interest in that, too, now that most of the stations
are controlled by the broadcast monopolies and sound pretty much the
same.

Just curious, can you get AM local advisory stations with an XM radio?

I love my XM, Keep in mind your radio still works! You don't get AM
advisories but you CAN tune over to AM. XM has also instituted an emergency
channel for times when things get bad. CH 247. They did volcano coverage,
etc. I want to see what they do when the tornado belt gets rolling!

If you only listen to talk radio XM is not for you but to listen to music,
COMEDY (yes!), or anything else it's the best $10 a month I spend!

Chad