On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:03:40 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

I think I have been both, freebander/ham, all I think I have seen is that
the freebanders have more fun.

That depends on your definition of "fun".


Also, I think the radio spectrum is for the use of all, there needs to be a
good slice of radio spectrum set aside for freebanders, indeed, set aside
for "We the People!"

There is. 40 channels worth. There's also FRS and MURS too.


Unfortunately, the hams have just become a self-serving bunch holding much
of the spectrum to their hobby... they like nice clear spaces of spectrum
where they and a few buddies carry on conversations like old women around a
bridge table.

Are you a ham? If not, then where do you get your stereotypical
information?


Unless one feels himself a child who needs a parent telling them what they
CAN'T do--it is time for a change of thinking here...

Ah, another one who can't live under the rules of society.


I think the FCC needs to support radio use amongst the citizens of this
country, not a self-serving group who feel themselves more deserving and
special...

What do "the citizens" do to deserve such treatment?


I think we all need a better form of radio spectrum use--one
which conforms to the people, NOT makes the people conform to ridiculous
rules...

Making subjective value judgments is a flaw in your logic. Those
"ridiculous" rules are there for a reason. They're not there to ruin
your fun, they are there to ensure that all radio users have a fair
chance and equal access.



And, I think a whole lot more... but basically it all revolves around my
seeing hams as self-serving/control-freaks who have a good thing going--and
are getting away with it...


Well, lets see, hams do have to pass a test to prove some level of
technical proficiency. That is worth a lot more than simply doing -
Nothing! Hams earned the right to that "good thing". And it's not an
exclusive club either! You are welcome to earn the privilege and join
the ranks. The problem is that you want what they have, but don't want
to work to earn it. It's no different than a welfare slacker
complaining that their hard working neighbor owns a nice house and a
BMW, and laments that "they have a good thing and are getting away
with it". Yet he somehow feels that he deserves the same
considerations while doing nothing to earn it. You probably feel that
the rich don't deserve what they have either.

When you work for and earn a privilege (as opposed to crying and
whining for it) you tend to respect what it stands for. That is why
most hams are more aware of, and tend to follow more closely, the
rules of the radio service. Like your first car. If you earned the
money to buy your first car by years of paper routes and cutting
lawns, you will be more likely to take care of it, than if Dad just
gave the car to you.

The problem is that you want the privileges of ham radio, but do not
want to work for it. The test is not that difficult. Here is where
guys like you then claim that they could easily pass the test, but
they don't "want to", and then cite all sorts of "issues" about the
politics of ham radio that they find repulsive. Yea, hams don't use
roger beeps, noise toys, echo boxes, and they don't normally cuss
every other word. It's the difference between a broadway play and WWE
smackdown. Not that there's anything wrong with WWE smackdown. But
you don't expect those who want to watch a broadway play to have to
put up with the antics of the WWE. That's what choice is about.

So now, you want the privileges of ham radio, without earning them,
and without the presence of some people who may think and act a little
differently than you do. So you want the FCC to kick hams off the ham
bands and then turn the service over to a bunch of unlicensed, lawless
individuals to turn into the RF equivalent of the wild, wild west?
Does that about sum it up for you? Forgetting about the technical
issues that would certainly crop up, do you think this is a good plan?

Even if, hypothetically, the FCC were to create a "legal" freeband
service from say, 26-28 Mhz, there would still be those who would
venture outside of those limits. For those people, it's not about
having fun on a radio service, but about the thrill of breaking the
law, in much the same way that a 17 year old drinks. There's a certain
psychological thrill that comes with "getting away" with breaking the
law, or "sticking it to the man". For those who look at societal
rules as a personal affront, I can only tell you that you have a long,
hard, and uphill battle before you. Happiness will not be easy to find
either.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

Well, you are just ONE BIG argument for more control. The least gov't is
the best gov't, 400 million people need the radio spectrum more than a
handful of hams and the public servants we have hired to the people
business.

Write your congressman today! He will do nothing unless he knows there is a
problem!

Regards,
John

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:22:08 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

Well, you are just ONE BIG argument for more control.

No, I'm for reasonable control for the greater public good. At least
until people (and your examples aren't helping me to believe it) can
demonstrate that they can handle the responsibility alone. So far, in
every example, less regulation leads to chaos.

The least gov't is the best gov't,

To an extent, I agree. But a total absence of rules and laws is an
extreme that I cannot support.


400 million people need the radio spectrum more than a
handful of hams and the public servants we have hired to the people
business.

Why do 400 million people "need" radio spectrum? What spectrum "needs"
are not currently being addressed?

Ham radio is not an exclusive club. ANY one of those "400 million" are
welcome to join, provided they agree to follow the rules.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:03:40 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:
(I think I have been both, freebander/ham, all I think I have seen is
that the freebanders have more fun. )

That depends on your definition of "fun".

Actually, it depends on -your-definition of fun.

(Also, I think the radio spectrum is for the use of all, there needs to
be a good slice of radio spectrum set aside for freebanders, indeed, set
aside for "We the People!" )

There is. 40 channels worth. There's also FRS
and MURS too.

Yea,,those freqs are good, too.

(Unfortunately, the hams have just become a self-serving bunch holding
much of the spectrum to their hobby... they like nice clear spaces of
spectrum where they and a few buddies carry on conversations like old
women around a bridge table. )

Are you a ham?

Irrelevant. One needs not be a football player to note correct
observations of the game. One needs not be a baseball player, or even
know anything about baseball, in order to correctly state illegal drugs
(steroids) are rampant.

If not, then where do you get your

stereotypical information?

Perhaps the technique you claim to employ flawlessly to arrive at such
derivatives works for others, too. Empirical observation, you called
it.. Turn on the radio and give a listen.

(Unless one feels himself a child who needs a parent telling them what
they CAN'T do--it is time for a change of thinking here... )

Ah, another one who can't live under the rules

of society.

It's not a coincidence those whose views with which you disagree are
always referred by yourself as one who can not conform or love by the
rules of society. It's always the other person, never you, that has
problems with society, despite -your- position always being the
minority.
Taking into consideration your comments concerning cbers as federal
criminals, and that because one merely SPEAKS (or in this case, posts)
of talking dx, it somehow constitutes and equals the same as a guilty
plea in a court of law, and it has never been more crystal clear that
not only do you not have a clue concerning how the laws work, but you
clearly do not share the mindset of the majority, or in this case, as
you say "society".

(I think the FCC needs to support radio use amongst the citizens of this
country, not a self-serving group who feel themselves more deserving and
special... )

What do "the citizens" do to deserve such

treatment?

"Deserve" has nothing to do with it. Life isn't always fair and people
don't always get what they deserve. In fact, your bellowings above
reiterate your pompous and arrogant
position that hammies are somehow more "deserving" simply by virtue of
their sending a few bucks in to get a license. Newsflash: you are no
more "deserving" of the right to transmit than a cber.


(I think we all need a better form of radio spectrum use--one which
conforms to the people, NOT makes the people conform to ridiculous
rules... )

Making subjective value judgments is a flaw in
your logic.


LOL...yet, all those subjective judgements you make of others based on
nothing more than your mistaken perception and interpretation of
self-taught empirical observations, is not, somehow.


Those "ridiculous" rules are there for a reason.
Tell us the reason for the dx rule relating to cb.

They're not there to ruin your fun, they are

there to ensure that all radio users have a fair

chance and equal access.


Your claim that ALL radio users have a fair chance is not valid. Think
about it a few weeks and you may realize why.

(And, I think a whole lot more... but basically it all revolves around
my seeing hams as self-serving/control-freaks who have a good thing
going--and are getting away with it...

Well, lets see, hams do have to pass a test to

prove some level of technical proficiency.


What level of technical competence is gained by obtaining the nocode
license?


That is worth a lot more than simply doing -

Nothing! Hams earned the right to that "good

thing".


You are assuming everyone shares your opinion that getting a hammie
license is something earned, like an accomplishment. For children or the
learning impaired, this may be true. For the (ahem), majority of
citizens, it is no accomplishment. Getting a driver's license takes more
studying. Most people do not feel obtaining a driver's license is any
major accomplishment (again, this makes exceptions for children, the
infirm or handicaps, or the learning impaired, foreigners, etc.) and is
simply another manner of paying a governmental fee for a privilege.

And it's not an exclusive club either!


Make up your mind..you first cite how this group "earned" something by
the simple process of paying a fee, whcih you claim makes one "entitled"
to benefits others are not, then you claim obtaining a license makes one
technically competent. If such were true (it isn't), all who held a
license would be "technically competent", equaling, by default, an
"exclusive" group (those licensed AND competent). Neither is true.

You are welcome to earn the privilege and join
the ranks. The problem is that you want what

they have, but don't want to work to earn it.


Most here recognized your problem for what it is. It is you that wants
what many of us have,,the ability to do both (cb, dx, and hammie-play),
only you screwed up your chance so now you cry about other's actions
concerning what you can no longer get away with..

It's no different than a welfare slacker

complaining that their hard working neighbor

owns a nice house and a BMW, and laments

that "they have a good thing and are getting

away with it".


Perfect analogy. When it was you that was on that welfare only a few
short years ago, it most certianly was different, as you have spent much
time trying to explain away why it is acceptable for you to participate
in such behavior when you saw fit, but no one else.


Yet he somehow feels that he deserves the

same considerations while doing nothing to

earn it.


You are projecting your own personal feelings. That you felt that way
during your illegal operations doesn't mean anyone else shares your
position. In fact, as has been demonstrated time and time again, no one
shares your position concerning this.

You probably feel that the rich don't deserve

.what they have either.


Again, what one deserves is irrelevant...try and remain focused and not
allow your hammie-induced dementia to cloud your already skewered
"subjective" judgements that you blame on others.

When you work for and earn a privilege (as

opposed to crying and whining for it) you tend

to respect what it stands for.


Here we go with your Rodey Dangerfield dilemma. You get no respect
because you have demonstrated you "deserve" none. Your licensure status
means ****, regarding respect. This is part of your problem that governs
your actions and bizarre behavior among these pages. You hilariously
cling to this mythical idea you conjured that you somehow are deserving
of respect because you have a license. You're not.


That is why most hams are more aware of,

and tend to follow more closely, the rules of

the radio service.



"Most hams"? Certainly you arn't invoking more of this "subjective
logic" you claim illegitimizes any point you are attempting.

Like your first car. If you earned the money to

buy your first car by years of paper routes and
cutting lawns, you will be more likely to take

care of it, than if Dad just gave the car to you.



But of course, More of your self-projection. Some of us comprehend value
and the origination of the item is irrelevant. In fact, just the
opposite is often true. If your mother gave you a car, would you not be
MORE apt to take care of it? Other's don't often share your personal
projections, Davie, you are a minority with your freaked up beliefs.
Many would be more apt to take care of something a parent gave, not
less.


The problem is that you want the privileges of

ham radio, but do not want to work for it.


Again, this is your projection of your personal
thinking regarding why -you- did such things,,mistakenly feeling you can
subjectively but correctly claim such subjective logic is valid only
when you utilize it is the joke and you are the punch line.


The test is not that difficult.

It's not at all difficult.

Here is where

guys like you then claim that they could easily

pass the test, but they don't "want to", and

then cite all sorts of "issues" about the politics

of ham radio that they find repulsive.


No one on this group has ever said they find hammie radio repulsive,
only elitist pricks like yourself that ruin hammie radio's reputation
for others..

Yea, hams don't use roger beeps, noise toys,

echo boxes, and they don't normally cuss

every other word.

It's the difference between a

broadway play and WWE smackdown.


LMAO,,you take this hobby way too serious. No wonder you are always
constipated when posting. According to you,posts on usenet equal a
guilty plea in a court of law, and now hammie radio equals a broadway
play. Your linkage needs adjusted, again.


Not that there's anything wrong with WWE

smackdown. But you don't expect those who

want to watch a broadway play to have to put

up with the antics of the WWE. That's what

choice is about.



Ahhh,,but you self-righteously feel those who enjoy the latter should
have respect for the other simply because you say so. Doesn't work out
that way, though, and the problem is manifested in your..complaints
concerning such.

So now, you want the privileges of ham radio,

More subjective logic from you...those privileges are already there for
many of us. Just because you never learned how to competently enjoy both
worlds, you mistakenly feel others are as ignorant as yourself.


without earning them, and without the

presence of some people who may think and

act a little differently than you do.



You are deluding yourself.

So you want the FCC to kick hams off the ham
bands and then turn the service over to a

bunch of unlicensed, lawless individuals to

turn into the RF equivalent of the wild, wild

west?



Poor poor David. You need do something regarding these continued
self-conjured hallucinations you continue to suffer. Try reading only
what is there and placing an end to your subjective assumptions of what
you think.

Does that about sum it up for you?


That summed it up for you. Only you mentioned such ignorance.

Forgetting about the technical issues that

would certainly crop up, do you think this is a

good plan?


Your proposition are incredibly shallow.

Even if, hypothetically, the FCC were to create
a "legal" freeband service from say, 26-28

Mhz, there would still be those who would

venture outside of those limits.

For those people, it's not about having fun on

a radio service, but about the thrill of breaking

the law, in much the same way that a 17 year

old drinks.



More self-projection based only on personal experience.

There's a certain psychological thrill


(snip)

Go back to your shrink, Dave. You have impressed no one with your
self-qualifications regarding your much invoked but always erroneous pop
psychology.


Dave

."Sandbagger"

N3CVJ

On 25 Apr 2005 07:16:18 -0700, "CB outlaw"
wrote:

I think you are absolutly right, John I think the "hams" are jeolous
of us CB'ers and freebanders cause we are PROFESSIONAL dx'ers while
they are just amateur dx'ers. What do you think?
Regards from
CB OUTLAW (beep as in roger)

I think you should stay away from those magic mushrooms.....

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:25:36 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
You can deny it to your little black heart's content, but the fact
remains many cbers get licenses (especialy the no-codes) only to return
to the cb and freeband.

That is exactly what happened to you, right Twistedhed?

Some of those who obtained licenses can never go
back because their voices are too easily recognized and their hammie
"friends" will report their ass for freebanding.

That is true in your case, isn't it, Twisted?

They end up being
****ed off (then issed upon) hammies.

That describes you to a T!

From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)

LOL there he goes again accusing innocent

people. why not come to my house pussy boy

Ill pay the gas

Off you go now,,disappear for a week and reappear the day Dave Hall
comes back, why don't you : )

From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in news:1918-4270FF3E-
:
From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
LOL there he goes again accusing innocent

people. why not come to my house pussy boy

Ill pay the gas

Off you go now,,disappear for a week and reappear the day Dave Hall
comes back, why don't you : )

get your stories straight tipsy you said I was

dave hall a few months ago then reniged, and

stevoe says I am chris busch... you both

havent the foggiest do you.

What scares the living hell out of you, is one of us is correct.

(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in news:1918-4270FF3E-
:
From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
LOL there he goes again accusing innocent

people. why not come to my house pussy boy

Ill pay the gas

Off you go now,,disappear for a week and reappear the day Dave Hall
comes back, why don't you : )

get your stories straight tipsy you said I was

dave hall a few months ago then reniged, and

stevoe says I am chris busch... you both

havent the foggiest do you.

What scares the living hell out of you, is one of us is correct.

Bagged and tagged.

So is the same dog biting your ass!
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Anyone know any of these guys? Is it just possible the hams are playing
you
all for fools, planting rumors to titillate you?
A dog chasing its own tail is a funny sight...

Regards,
John