Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 15th 08, 01:32 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

(insert standard "I Am Not A Lawyer" disclaimer HERE)

On Jul 14, 4:18 pm, KC4UAI wrote:
On Jul 11, 8:45 pm, "KØHB" wrote:


I so wish that the FCC could be persuaded to reconsider us
hams in
their limited preemption of CC&R's and give us the same
standing as TV antennas and satellite dishes.


As K2ASP says, that action has to come from Congress.

IMHO, part of the problem is that CC&Rs are a different thing
than zoning ordinances and other govt. regs. Most anti-antenna
rules are essentially private contracts that you, the buyer, agreed
to when you bought the place. Asking for preemption means you
want out of that part of the deal. That's a tough sell!

It is my understanding that what drove the OTARD process for
satellite TV was that the satellite TV companies pushed the case,
and invested the sizable $$$ resources necessary to win. IIRC, their
argument was essentially that the no-TV-antennas CC&Rs effectively
created a cable-TV monopoly by making it impossible for some people to
choose satellite TV, since the dish has to have a clear view of the
sky where the satellite is. Regular broadcast TV was added to the mix
a bit later, basically on the same argument.

There was big money at stake because the satellite TV folks saw a huge
part of the TV market being off-limits to them because of
no-satellite-dish CC&Rs.

All I want is reasonable accommodation
here.


The problem is, who determines what's reasonable? In some places a
clothesline in the back yard is considered an eyesore!

As it stands I’m left to what ever I can cram into the attic
and nothing higher than the top of the roof on my single story
ranch.


Well, it's a buyer's market now....

---

Besides pushing Congress, one of the things I think we hams could do
to help the process is to never refer to amateur radio as "a hobby" or
even worse, "just a hobby". While most hams do radio simply as an
avocation, IMHO the word "hobby" carries with it a sort of meaning
that it's not a serious thing worthy of protection.

You'll never hear folks who do sports or art nonprofessionally refer
to those activities as "just a hobby". Nor will the term be used by
volunteers who donate their time and efforts to a variety of causes.

IOW, "hobbies" don't get the kind of respect we want amateur radio to
have. If we hams describe amateur radio as "just a hobby", the folks
who want to restrict us may think "well, if they say it's just a
hobby, what's the problem with a few restrictions?" and "there are all
sorts of hobbies that these homes don't accomodate, like raising
horses, target shooting, or pleasure boating with a boat that won't
fit in the garage. What's different about your radio hobby?"

You can be sure the satellite TV people pushing for the OTARD ruling
never, ever referred to watching TV as "a hobby", even though their
viewers don't get paid to watch TV.

73 de Jim, N2EY


If I could only put up a few supports and a 35’ vertical, what a
difference it would make.


  #2   Report Post  
Old July 15th 08, 09:29 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2007
Posts: 111
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:32:00 -0400, N2EY wrote:
IMHO, part of the problem is that CC&Rs are a different thing
than zoning ordinances and other govt. regs. Most anti-antenna
rules are essentially private contracts that you, the buyer, agreed
to when you bought the place. Asking for preemption means you
want out of that part of the deal. That's a tough sell!


Morally, I would suggest that when a given CC&R restriction is universal
- when *every* acceptable property in an area carries identical
anti-antenna restrictions - then that contract provision was NOT agreed
to. It was *forced* on a buyer who does not have the option of buying a
property 5x the size (and 5x the price) of anything else in the
neighborhood/living on a street with four crack houses/living 50 miles
from work/etc..

In a moral world, the amateur should be able to invalidate anti-antenna
restrictions by showing that no comparable property was available that
lacked those restrictions.

Of course, in the real legal and political world, no such right exists or
is likely to come into being...

It is my understanding that what drove the OTARD process for satellite
TV was that the satellite TV companies pushed the case, and invested th

e
sizable $$$ resources necessary to win. IIRC, their argument was
essentially that the no-TV-antennas CC&Rs effectively created a cable-T

V
monopoly by making it impossible for some people to choose satellite TV

,
since the dish has to have a clear view of the sky where the satellite
is. Regular broadcast TV was added to the mix a bit later, basically on
the same argument.


And, I would suggest, supported by a cable TV industry that wanted
to be deregulated, something that wasn't going to happen if a large
fraction of their customers had no alternative.

  #3   Report Post  
Old July 15th 08, 10:56 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 300
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:29:11 EDT, Doug Smith W9WI
wrote:

Morally, I would suggest that when a given CC&R restriction is universal
- when *every* acceptable property in an area carries identical
anti-antenna restrictions - then that contract provision was NOT agreed
to. It was *forced* on a buyer .... [snipped]

In a moral world, the amateur should be able to invalidate anti-antenna
restrictions by showing that no comparable property was available that
lacked those restrictions.


Both of those points were made in the League's last assault on the
problem and those arguments fell on deaf ears. That's when the
Commission made it clear that they will move if and only if The
Congress orders it to.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

  #5   Report Post  
Old July 17th 08, 01:46 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

On Jul 15, 8:16 pm, Dick Grady AC7EL wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:32:00 EDT, wrote:
one of the things I think we hams could do
to help the process is to never refer to amateur radio as "a hobby" or
even worse, "just a hobby". While most hams do radio simply as an
avocation, IMHO the word "hobby" carries with it a sort of meaning
that it's not a serious thing worthy of protection.


You'll never hear folks who do sports or art nonprofessionally refer
to those activities as "just a hobby". Nor will the term be used by
volunteers who donate their time and efforts to a variety of causes.


IOW, "hobbies" don't get the kind of respect we want amateur radio to
have. If we hams describe amateur radio as "just a hobby", the folks
who want to restrict us may think "well, if they say it's just a
hobby, what's the problem with a few restrictions?" and "there are all
sorts of hobbies that these homes don't accomodate, like raising
horses, target shooting, or pleasure boating with a boat that won't
fit in the garage. What's different about your radio hobby?"


Then what do we call it? Avocation? Pasttime? no, none of these ter

ms seem
appropriate, either.


We don't need to call it anything other than "Amateur Radio". The
person who
gardens/landscapes doesn't use the word "hobby", s/he says "I'm a
gardener"
and that's it.

The amateur artist who paints, sculpts, does pottery, photography,
woodwork or any
of a range of other activities does not use the word "hobby" either.

I know! It's emergency preparation and training. Now that's sounds
impressive..


We don't need to sound impressive. All we need to do is not sound
apologetic.
"Just a hobby" sounds self-denigrating to me.

Part 97 does not use the word "hobby". Neither should we.

Consider the following conversations:

Conversation 1

"What's that wire up there?"

"It's my ham radio antenna"

"What's ham radio?"

"It's just a hobby where I talk to other ham radio operators."

"Why would you want to do that? Don't you have a telephone and
the internet?"

Conversation 2

"What's that wire up there?"

"It's the antenna for my Amateur Radio station"

"What's Amateur Radio?"

"It's a form of noncommercial radio by which licensed
radio operators all over the world communicate with each other
using a wide variety of methods and technologies."

Which do you think sounds better to a non-ham?

73 de Jim, N2EY



  #7   Report Post  
Old July 16th 08, 11:01 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 125
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!


wrote in message
...

Besides pushing Congress, one of the things I think we
hams could do to help the process is to never refer to
amateur radio as "a hobby" or even worse, "just a hobby".


But ham radio's dirty little secret is that we have let it become "just a
hobby". With the exception of 2M most of our VHF/UHF spectrum is shared with
"real" users like DoD who tolerate our presence and because they are NTIA (not
FCC) controlled are (at least for now) immune to auctions. Our HF spectrum
isn't particularly attractive for commercial applications. Were it not for
those fortunate circumstances, our allocations would have been auctioned long
ago.

73, de Hans, K0HB



  #8   Report Post  
Old July 16th 08, 08:30 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 828
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

wrote:
(insert standard "I Am Not A Lawyer" disclaimer HERE)

On Jul 14, 4:18 pm, KC4UAI wrote:
On Jul 11, 8:45 pm, "KØHB" wrote:


I so wish that the FCC could be persuaded to reconsider us
hams in
their limited preemption of CC&R's and give us the same
standing as TV antennas and satellite dishes.


As K2ASP says, that action has to come from Congress.

IMHO, part of the problem is that CC&Rs are a different thing
than zoning ordinances and other govt. regs. Most anti-antenna
rules are essentially private contracts that you, the buyer, agreed
to when you bought the place. Asking for preemption means you
want out of that part of the deal. That's a tough sell!

It is my understanding that what drove the OTARD process for
satellite TV was that the satellite TV companies pushed the case,
and invested the sizable $$$ resources necessary to win. IIRC, their
argument was essentially that the no-TV-antennas CC&Rs effectively
created a cable-TV monopoly by making it impossible for some people to
choose satellite TV, since the dish has to have a clear view of the
sky where the satellite is. Regular broadcast TV was added to the mix
a bit later, basically on the same argument.

There was big money at stake because the satellite TV folks saw a huge
part of the TV market being off-limits to them because of
no-satellite-dish CC&Rs.


Sure, and considering that the antenna restrictions served to
monopolize access to the cable industry. It is hard to argue that
allowing satellite dishes wasn't a fair and equitable thing to do.


All I want is reasonable accommodation
here.


The problem is, who determines what's reasonable? In some places a
clothesline in the back yard is considered an eyesore!



A mile or so from us, there is one of those places. No clotheslines, no
kids stuff in yards, all landscaping must be approved. Almost everything
about your home life is tightly regulated. People who live in a place
that restrictive deserve it.

As it stands I’m left to what ever I can cram into the attic
and nothing higher than the top of the roof on my single story
ranch.


Well, it's a buyer's market now....


As I peruse through the real estate guides, I'm struck by the number of
homes that are available that do not have restrictive covenants. Even
the village that I live in does not have ban antennas. So I have a nice
woodsey atmosphere, and can do most of the things I want. I wasn't
allowed to set up my still to make corn squeezins! hehe

But my point is that if people are looking for a house, there are
options. It's also very important to read all that boring stuff. I
wonder how many Hams who live in a place that prohibits antennas read
the fineprint.


Another tactic is to ask if you can put up an antenna, and if the answer
is no, then politely say, "Too bad-see you later!". If the real estate
agent loses a few sales for something silly like that, then they will
start looking into it.



Besides pushing Congress, one of the things I think we hams could do
to help the process is to never refer to amateur radio as "a hobby" or
even worse, "just a hobby". While most hams do radio simply as an
avocation, IMHO the word "hobby" carries with it a sort of meaning
that it's not a serious thing worthy of protection.



You'll never hear folks who do sports or art nonprofessionally refer
to those activities as "just a hobby". Nor will the term be used by
volunteers who donate their time and efforts to a variety of causes.

IOW, "hobbies" don't get the kind of respect we want amateur radio to
have. If we hams describe amateur radio as "just a hobby", the folks
who want to restrict us may think "well, if they say it's just a
hobby, what's the problem with a few restrictions?" and "there are all
sorts of hobbies that these homes don't accomodate, like raising
horses, target shooting, or pleasure boating with a boat that won't
fit in the garage. What's different about your radio hobby?"

You can be sure the satellite TV people pushing for the OTARD ruling
never, ever referred to watching TV as "a hobby", even though their
viewers don't get paid to watch TV.


I agree!

Here are some ideas:

The old vertical as a flagpole. Its a sorry bunch who wouldn't approve a
flagpole.

Most multiband verticals can be tilted over with kits sold for that
purpose. Maybe that can be hid though the day.

Maybe it's time to install a yard watering sytem. They always increase
the value of the house, and elicit pleased smiles from HOA people. Maybe
a lot of wire for radials could be installed at the same time....

I have a radial installation method that I can discuss off-list if you
are curious.

Couple the radials to either:

That flagpole that the HOA would refuse at risk of being ostracized.

If the house has plastic gutters, run a wire around them. I'm sure that
is part of a defrosting system - Really, it could be!

Maybe an antenna that fits in the umbrella holder on your deck or patio.
Good candidates for that are simple verticals, or I like Bugcatchers
antennas, though they aren't as convenient for band changing.
The trick is to make the setup so that it is easy to set up in the dark.

There are other candidates such as Outbackers. Some folks use Buddipoles
put together as a dipole.

In-house antennas are pretty much last on my list.

There is almost always a way.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -





  #9   Report Post  
Old July 17th 08, 01:35 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 116
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

Michael Coslo wrote:
Here are some ideas:

The old vertical as a flagpole.


[ Etc. ]

Mind if I play devils advocate here for a minute?

Where is it written that as Licensed Amateur Radio Operators
we have a fair pass to ignore the rules?

What part of "no antennas" in the CC&R you signed do you not
understand?

"But but but, I'm a Ham radio operator!"

I'm sorry, I just keep seeing this same thing over and over
and over and I don't buy it.

(Along with, since I have a license, I don't need a permit to
put up a tower.)

Jeff-1.0
wa6vfi

  #10   Report Post  
Old July 17th 08, 04:16 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 168
Default Jesus knew about ham radio guys!

Jeffrey D Angus wrote in
:

Michael Coslo wrote:
Here are some ideas:

The old vertical as a flagpole.


[ Etc. ]

Mind if I play devils advocate here for a minute?

Where is it written that as Licensed Amateur Radio Operators
we have a fair pass to ignore the rules?


Well, we don't really. I only offer advice to those who might have made
a mistake.

What part of "no antennas" in the CC&R you signed do you not
understand?

"But but but, I'm a Ham radio operator!"

I'm sorry, I just keep seeing this same thing over and over
and over and I don't buy it.


I think that in most cases, the Ham didn't read the fine print, or they
might not have been a Ham when they bought the house.

I've been a long term advocate of knowing what you are getting into. I'm
one of thos insufferable geeks that irritate the lawyers and other
people present by reading over the fine print. I'm a quick reader though
- it is 5 to 10 minutes well spent. I even read equipment manuals,
heheh.

I wouldn't buy a house in a neighborhood that wouldn't allow mw to put
up an antenna.

But I know that not everyone is so careful - and I don't think that they
should be punished forever. I think that the fight to give them access
to the airwaves is a good fight.


All that being said, who would want to live in those neighborhoods
anyway? All we have to do is keep the grass cut, the house in good
repair, and no junk cars sitting around. And our neighborhood is a
showpiece. My antennas notwithstanding.


(Along with, since I have a license, I don't need a permit to
put up a tower.)


Well now there is a different kettle of fish. A tower can be a
major liability. We can have them here, but they must be approved by an
engineer. And I agree with that, even if they take the arbitrary "100
percent height fall radius circle". I don't know if any tower has fallen
that way.

At least I wouldn't have to fight the township just to put one up.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
At the risk of bursting your shiny balloon...JESUS HATES OBAMA,... dave Shortwave 1 January 25th 11 05:11 AM
Read-It-&-Believe-It : "The Life and Morals of Jesus ofNazaret... [email protected] Shortwave 2 December 18th 10 05:57 AM
.Insane Jesus Freaks dave Shortwave 0 December 17th 10 01:36 PM
Were the Parables of Jesus a Critical Spirit, or Satire as a teacher? Editor RadioTalkingPoints Shortwave 0 February 8th 10 03:45 AM
IBOC Hates Jesus dave Shortwave 1 June 1st 09 04:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017