In article , Scott Unit 69
writes:

I agree with Jim 100% on this one ...

Me, too. He should have been hung by his 'nads.

I don't think even Riley has that authority...;-(

One interesting thing about that case is what we don't know. For example, we
don't know hold old Swift is, or whether the rescue agencies were fooled or
not, whether he suffers from some sort of problem besides ignorance of the
rules, lack of common sense and extreme stupidity.

Would be good to know the whole story. Usually there's more to these things
than is apparent at first. Take the case of the ham who called for help on a
police freq with his modded HT and wound up surrendering the thing. It was
demonstrated that he could have hit at least two repeaters and dialed 911 via
autopatch from the site where he called the police on *their* frequency.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote


I'm glad the ARRL is keeping quiet. This guy gives ham radio a black eye. You
wanna defend his "right" to modify his rig to a bunch of emergency personnel
who scrambled to answer the phony distress calls?

I do NOT want one cent of my dues, or one second of ARRL personnel's time,
spent defending the modification of amateur equipment for *illegal*
transmission on frequencies hams are *not* authorized to use.


Under FCC rules there is NOTHING ILLEGAL about modifying an amateur
radio transmitter. NOTHING. ZIPPO. NADA!

The *illegal* part of this incident lies in the *USE*.

I'm not here to defend this guy for USING his radio in the manner he
did, nor did I ever suggest the ARRL should defend his illegal use of
the radio, but they damn well SHOULD defend our existing privelege of
tinkering and modifying our equipment, as mandated by 97.1(b) of the
Commissions Rules.

"Modified radios don't break the rules, people do."

With all kind wishes for your QCAO chapter membership drive,

de Hans, K0HB
Lord High Liberator of the Electric Smoke




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

In article ilgate.org, "K0HB
with non-approved radios" writes:

"N2EY" wrote

I'm glad the ARRL is keeping quiet. This guy gives ham radio a black eye.
You wanna defend his "right" to modify his rig to a bunch of emergency
personnel who scrambled to answer the phony distress calls?

I do NOT want one cent of my dues, or one second of ARRL personnel's time,
spent defending the modification of amateur equipment for *illegal*
transmission on frequencies hams are *not* authorized to use.

Under FCC rules there is NOTHING ILLEGAL about modifying an amateur
radio transmitter. NOTHING. ZIPPO. NADA!

OK, fine.

The *illegal* part of this incident lies in the *USE*.

Yup.

I'm not here to defend this guy for USING his radio in the manner he
did, nor did I ever suggest the ARRL should defend his illegal use of
the radio, but they damn well SHOULD defend our existing privelege of
tinkering and modifying our equipment, as mandated by 97.1(b) of the
Commissions Rules.

With the privilege of being able to modify goes the responsibility to follow
the rules. That guy demonstrated that he could not follow the rules, therefore,
he lost the privilege.

Now if a law-abiding ham gets into trouble with the FCC for modification,
that's a different story. I don't know of any law-abiding ham who has gotten
into trouble for modifications. Do you?

But this dude isn't law abiding. Got his license two weeks and he's sending
phony distress calls on a marine freq.

"Modified radios don't break the rules, people do."

Yup. So the rulebreakers don't get to modify.

With all kind wishes for your QCAO chapter membership drive,

If you only knew.....

73 de Jim, N2EY

(N2EY) wrote in message ...


"Modified radios don't break the rules, people do."

Yup. So the rulebreakers don't get to modify.

With all kind wishes for your QCAO chapter membership drive,

If you only knew.....


http://www.wwdxc.org/tabloid0203/tab0403.htm


73 de Jim, N2EY

(K0HB) wrote:

I was under the impression (apparently mistaken?) that a licensed
amateur could possess any sort of equipment (commercial, homebrew,
converted surplus) or whatever.
[snip since other replies will have fullbody text]

Anyone transmitting false and malicious distress should not be a ham,
a cb'er, frs user nothing period. There is no need to modify
equipment back since this person should not ever have another radio
ever in his/hers hot little hands. Sorta like a child molester never
being allowed to work in a school.

Revert to type acceptance, what were they thinking?

73, wes, kc8spr


--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.