LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Old July 16th 03, 02:50 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Carl - wk3c

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,


(K0HB) writes:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote


Obviously not a lawyer, but my read on this was that the FCC is
giving him a chance to keep his radios, avoid the nasty fine that
COULD have gone along with this, and sends a very loud signal to
anyone else so inclined to not abuse the privilege.


My concern is NOT with the severity of his penalty (I think it was
pathetically lenient) but with the chilling effect it could have on
tinkering and experimenting by amateurs who apparently must now fear
that FCC can require them to put their equipment back into
factory-fresh configuration.


Hans,

Step back a minute and look at what this newbie actually did.

He allegedly cut a wire in a manufactured piece of amateur equipment so

that he
could *illegally* transmit on frequencies he was *not* authorized to use.

I don't have a single peice of equipment which I have not "improved"
from it's original schematic.


Neither do I. However, neither have I modified any equipment so that I

could
*illegally* transmit on frequencies I am *not* authorized to use.

Frankly, I thought the FCC encouraged
such experimentation.


Not when the end result is *illegal* transmission on frequencies the

"tinkerer"
is *not* authorized to use.

And to make it all that much worse, he transmits false distress calls on a
marine freq.

This incident suggests just the opposite and
I'm surprised that ARRL isn't screaming bloody murder.


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.

73 de Jim, N2EY


 
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
The "TRICK" to TV 'type' Coax Cable [Shielded] SWL Loop Antennas {RHF} RHF Antenna 27 November 3rd 04 01:38 PM
Keeping moisture out of 9913 type coax? Dave Woolf Antenna 15 January 5th 04 03:52 AM
DRSI type 2 PCPA 4sal Dennis A. Homerick General 0 December 26th 03 10:48 PM
New Type of HF Shootout (antennas, pedestrian, bicycle) Expeditionradio Antenna 15 October 4th 03 08:37 AM
Is the IC-V8 type accepted? VHFRadioBuff Equipment 4 August 9th 03 07:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:17 PM.

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