Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote: Anyway, I would pursue this much differently. Indian reservations are exempt from MANY of the rules, regulations and laws the rest of us non-indigenous peoples are subject too. I'd see if the above were not a factor in all this. JS Just think! Instead of the Indians having a monopoly on all gambling in California (yes, I know, it is really vegas using the Indians), they could now go ahead and get a monopoly on all broadcasting! JS Myself and a colleague discussed the number of permits and variances needed to launch real, orbital-type rockets and wondered how much would be required if you launched from a Native reservation. |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul W. Schleck wrote:
... I certainly hope Paul is an attorney, as if he speaks about the reservation, I hope he speaks with knowledge. Here is a paper which will demonstrate there is "quite a bit of controversy" over legality of 97 and 15 on reservations: http://www.fcc.gov/sptf/files/0801fcc.pdf Course, with some, an amateur license immediately makes them an authority in all areas ... Warmest regards, JS |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
ups.com... All, I have a situation, and would like some opinions rather than flames on how to handle it. My wife teaches at a public school just off the Eastern Arizona Navajo reservation. Lately, a junior school science teacher is starting up a science club and has asked me to provide for the amateur radio side of the club and be its control operator. She believes that the kids would be fascinated by the Morse code - DXing - Construction end of the hobby, even though Morse is no longer a required test element. The kids are mostly Navajo and thusly have a very limited technological background (hence the reason for the club to stir the interest), so I need something concrete with immediate payoff to keep their interest hooked while getting them as ready as I can to write their Technician exam. The nearest VEC is 4 hours away and I'd rather have as few fail as possible. The Navajo people have a proud heritage for their WW2 participation in usage of their language for communication in the Pacific (Japanese could not break it). See movie - Windtalkers (and a couple of others). CW may be of interest to some - in that it is also a human translated code -- that was a foreign to 19th century US citizens -- as Arabic is to many 21st century Americans today. You should contact the VEC to see what accommodations they could make -- to assist you for testing. Good luck with it. w9gb |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... I'm a bit more worried about having them memorize the Clapp, Colpitts, and Pierce Oscillators. Isn't that stuff still on Tech exam? The Eternal Squire Nope. It's not on either the Tech or General exams. It does show up on the Extra exam. Even at that a person might or might not get that question on their particular exam. Take a look at the Tech test pool on the ARRL set. You will see that it just covers basic stuff. Dee, N8UZE |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 In John Smith I writes: Paul W. Schleck wrote: ... I certainly hope Paul is an attorney, as if he speaks about the reservation, I hope he speaks with knowledge. I am not a lawyer. When faced with legal questions about my own operation, or when trying to help keep apparently honest and sincere people like "Eternal Squire" stay out of trouble, I defer to the true experts. Existing, compiled, and expert advice like that provided at the ARRL TIS site I previously mentioned would seem to be a good place to start. I also value the insight provided here by Usenet participants who are attorneys with experience in communications law. I would certainly defer to their input on this matter, if offered (*). I also ask myself if I am obeying the spirit as well as the letter of any law or regulation. I don't feel it's within the scope of good amateur practice, personal ethical conduct, or even just overall "good neighbor" guidelines to be focusing on alleged loopholes such as being on a Native American Reservation, in international waters, or an "educational project." Often such excuses are transparent, self-serving, and not borne out in actual legal practice, regulations, treaties, enforcement, etc. Unless I had a lot of legal resources at my disposal (pro bono counsel, etc.), I would probably not seek to try and make myself a legal test case, as some on the newsgroups seem bent on doing. I would hope that "Eternal Squire", whose post implies that he is a licensed radio amateur, is thinking along these same lines, also. I offered my layperson's advice in that context. Here is a paper which will demonstrate there is "quite a bit of controversy" over legality of 97 and 15 on reservations: http://www.fcc.gov/sptf/files/0801fcc.pdf I read the above transcript you provided. I note with interest that my friend, fellow ham, and Usenet peer Carl Stevenson (WK3C) was a member of this workshop. I'd certainly defer to his technical expertise. However, the gist I got from the transcript, and from asking legal experts, is that case law is mixed on the subject of whether what happens on a reservation is strictly an internal, tribal matter. That no one present at the workshop wanted to venture an authoritative answer doesn't meant that there aren't those involved in enforcement who could give one. Radio transmitters and casinos are given as principal examples where case law, practice, and jurisdictional agreements go against the assertion that on a reservation, U.S. law does not apply. Course, with some, an amateur license immediately makes them an authority in all areas ... It was a question about amateur radio, asked in an amateur radio newsgroup. I suggested that he seek expert advice, such as that summarized at the ARRL TIS web site I linked previously. No more, and no less. Warmest regards, JS (*) I did ask one of the experts in communications law that I know personally. He offered the following observations: "I would add something to the extent that you have been advised by a communications attorney with over 50 years' experience in FCC regulatory matters that unless there is a specific treaty granting a tribe authority to regulate amateur radio transmissions on a reservation, and there isn't, FCC law and jurisdiction prevail. There are agreements giving tribes authority to determine who may operate a broadcast station from a reservation, but the FCC must regulate the technical parameters (frequency, power, location) to be observed and grant the callsign and make all necessary international notifications. Similarly, in international waters or airspace, the country of registration of the vessel or aircraft retains jurisdiction, and any country may lodge a complaint of violation of the International Radio Regulations with the country of registration if that is the case. If the vessel or aircraft is 'unregistered', any country has the authority to blast it out of the water or the air, although that is a drastic measure. The International Radio Regulations do, however. oblige all countries to not condone or support any radio (or TV) broadcasting from international waters or airspace." As this seems to be drifting into a *.policy area, and not *.homebrew, I've set followups as appropriate. Feel free to override my default if you must. - -- Paul W. Schleck, K3FU http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/ Finger for PGP Public Key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS) iD8DBQFFuuMd6Pj0az779o4RAidgAJ4tmvrsIgefuGREQz/Eqw20LljowACfRg1f glmhM6RbiJJcbgT3quj9GmM= =Dai7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul W. Schleck wrote:
... Well, I must admit, anyone affiliated with the ARRL turns me off, as it does many. Although they cannot, possibly, be held directly and solely responsible for bringing amateur radio to the brink of disaster it now hangs at, they certainly have never helped much, well, other than themselves. However, I would strongly suggest anyone to investigate all of the options open to an Indian reservation, the laws which govern them are much different than those governing all other areas of the USA. If I read that paper correctly (mentioned in my earlier post), the FCC would seem to be mostly interested in the rf which left the borders of the reservation. I know ripples of shock went through the population of California when they were allowed to operate gambling casinos. Something most did not expect. I would not be surprised if further surprises along those same line do not await us ... Now, as to the rest, I am simply not impressed nor interested ... Regards, JS |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Higgins wrote:
... If you read that paper correctly all you saw was a few casual remarks on a topic that was dropped as fast as it arose and was never at any time addressed seriously in that document. To infer anything from what was said is, IMHO, foolish at best. As I remember, gambling on reservations had almost that/those humble beginnings ... It is clear, in my personal opinion, the FCC would have NO interest in rf levels on the reservation, and ONLY those leaving the borders of the reservation would EVER come into question ... Regards, JS |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Smith I wrote:
Jim Higgins wrote: ... If you read that paper correctly all you saw was a few casual remarks on a topic that was dropped as fast as it arose and was never at any time addressed seriously in that document. To infer anything from what was said is, IMHO, foolish at best. As I remember, gambling on reservations had almost that/those humble beginnings ... It is clear, in my personal opinion, the FCC would have NO interest in rf levels on the reservation, and ONLY those leaving the borders of the reservation would EVER come into question ... People living on the reservation have all the consumer electronics that can be interfered with that people living off the reservation have. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Smith I wrote:
Jim Higgins wrote: ... If you read that paper correctly all you saw was a few casual remarks on a topic that was dropped as fast as it arose and was never at any time addressed seriously in that document. To infer anything from what was said is, IMHO, foolish at best. As I remember, gambling on reservations had almost that/those humble beginnings ... It is clear, in my personal opinion, the FCC would have NO interest in rf levels on the reservation, and ONLY those leaving the borders of the reservation would EVER come into question ... Regards, JS Jim: Let me go a bit further on this. I happen to have a sister who works for Child Protective Services in California (CPS.) If you are Indian (even part) and CPS pays you a visit, and you ARE Indian, they must immediately back down and defer to the Indian Council on the reservation/tribe which the person in question is a member of ... that individual is NOT subject to the same laws you or I would be. Let me go a bit further: If you are Indian, the welfare agency will provide "different" benefits to you than some others. Indeed, the Washoe Tribe of California and Nevada "chip in" and provide you with "expanded" benefits and medical assistance. The above was/were gleaned though discussions with my sister over time .... anyone interested can investigate for themselves. I am intrigued by the fact the Indians care for their own so well; I would be interested in knowing more. Regards, JS |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|