LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 8th 06, 06:21 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,027
Default You're not a real ham if you if you keep advocating killing the ARS


cmdr buzz corey wrote:
wrote:
On 9 Aug 2006 20:30:59 -0700, "cmdr buzz corey"
wrote:

an old idiot wrote:


Part 97 does not define Ham radio, Part 97 defines the rules

WE define Ham radio

And again your compete ignorance springs fourth to show you for the
total moronic half-wit you are. But then, what's new?

§97.3 Definitions.

(4) Amateur service. A radiocommunication service for the purpose of
self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried
out by amateurs, that is, duly authorized persons interested in radio
technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

your poitn

We defeine Ham radio the FCC merely defines the rules we must obey in
doing so
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Get a six-year-old to read and explain to you part 97.3 (Definitions),
subpart (4) where it DEFINES the Amateur service, note the word
service, nowhere does it say hobby.


Tsk, tsk, tsk, "Buzz," if you look harder at Definitions and "Basis
and Purpose" political boilerplate, you will see that amateur radio
is for "non-essential communications" and done "without pecuniary
interest!" That pretty much defines an AVOCATION, "Buzz." You
know what? An avocation is a HOBBY! [amazing but true]

If you look farther in Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations you will
see that ALL Parts use the word "service." [amazing but true]
The FCC uses the word "service" as a regulatory term defining
a type and kind of radio. How about that Citizens Band Radio
SERVICE, "Buzz?" :-) [got yer uniform on?]

Try not to look so ignorant.

We can get a FIVE-year-old to explain it to you?





 
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
Supporting theory that Antennas "Match" to 377 Ohms (Free space) Dr. Slick Antenna 183 October 2nd 20 10:44 AM
IN THE REAL WORLD ANTI GIRLS CAN DO NOTHING TO STOP THIS... Chim Bubba CB 4 December 2nd 03 07:45 PM
Reflection Delay is it real??? Peter O. Brackett Antenna 7 September 20th 03 11:55 AM
50 Ohms "Real Resistive" impedance a Misnomer? Dr. Slick Antenna 255 July 29th 03 11:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:54 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