Kim W5TIT wrote:

Absolutely. To come to the conclusion that deaf people cannot learn and use
CW is rather narrow-minded in my opnion. I bet there's a way that ANYONE
could learn CW.

It helps if a person types in all caps too! ;^)


For goodness sake! By your example, Keith, blind people should not be
licensed because, "how in the world would they know what frequency they are
on?"


Now that you mention it, how does a fully blind ham tell what frequency
he or she is on? I suppose that using the memory channels on an HF rig
would be one method, but does anyone here know?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Dwight Stewart wrote:

All international treaties have to ratified by Congress....


And you know how our recent history on treaty ratification has gone.
(in other words we haven't ratified them) This could be interesting.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Keith wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 10:36:26 -0600, JJ wrote:


It does not mean that
the FCC has to abolish a code test. So like Phil says, nothing has
changed yet.


Phil is not unbiased in this since he is part of the ARRL legal goons that
want to ram morse code down the throats of Americans so they can pick a
microphone to talk on HF. Read 97.301(e) it depends on the International
requirement for morse code proficiency. The requirement for morse code
proficiency is GONE.


HAR! You'll just toss out every expert opinion until you get one you like.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:04:58 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

So please don't tell those who cannot hear as well as you what they can
and cannot do.

I'm not you knuckle head. I'm saying the requirement for the hearing disabled
to pass a morse code test is discriminatory.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 09:40:04 -0400, "Spamhater"
wrote:


HEY KEITH,

IF YOU'RE NOT ILLITERATE, TRY READING PART 95 SOMETIME.... YOU WILL SEE
HOW
STUPID YOU SOUND. THE NEWEST VERSION! ALL AMATEURS ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A
COPY OF CURRENT LAWS AVAILABLE... BUT SINCE YOU"VE OBVIOUSLY NOT READ
THEM
TO KNOW THE LAWS, YOU WOULDN'T BE AWARE OF THIS ONE EITHER! NOW, IS THIS
BIG
ENOUGH FOR YOU TO READ AND UNDERSTAND?????? DUHHHHH.......

You're both on crack. Part 95 is the CB regs. The regs for ham radio
are in part 97.

DE John, KC2HMZ


NOPE, I'm not on Crack, but you're right... Being I was in a "CB" room, got
tunnel vision - so thought instinctlively of Part 95.. It is part 97 for
Ham. So, "I" stand corrected... My error.
JMS

On 28 Jul 2003 08:00:00 -0700, (Brian Kelly) wrote:

Will somebody wake me up when this idiotic rant is over?

Give me your phone number and I will give you call.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

Keith wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:04:58 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:


So please don't tell those who cannot hear as well as you what they can
and cannot do.


I'm not you knuckle head. I'm saying the requirement for the hearing disabled
to pass a morse code test is discriminatory.

And I'm saying it's not.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Keith wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:09:19 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:


Now that you mention it, how does a fully blind ham tell what frequency
he or she is on? I suppose that using the memory channels on an HF rig
would be one method, but does anyone here know?


But does the government require the blind to take a test to prove they can
read the frequency read out in order to obtain a license?

Are you telling me that you think the wo are related?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 10:36:26 -0600, JJ wrote:

It does not mean that
the FCC has to abolish a code test. So like Phil says, nothing has
changed yet.

Phil is not unbiased in this since he is part of the ARRL legal goons
that
want to ram morse code down the throats of Americans so they can pick a
microphone to talk on HF. Read 97.301(e) it depends on the International
requirement for morse code proficiency. The requirement for morse code
proficiency is GONE.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

BUT UNTIL THE AMERICAN LAWS are rewritten, changed, updated (pick your
term), the CW requirement STILL exists in our Radio Laws.
You can NOT sidestep laws that exist. A law may be come effective in one
sense but when it affects so many countries, it takes time in the
administrative governments to trickle down. As I understand it, there are
yet, a few countries who will refuse to abide by the International Treaty's
standards to the letter.
The International Union decided to drop CW as a requirement, that does NOT
mean WE have to. IF the other countries are not so willing to go with it
either, then perhaps the FCC won't be so quick to jump either.

Get off your lazy ass and learn 5 WPM CW. It is not any harder than learning
to drive a car or program a computer. IF it is worth it to you to use 10
meters or any other band, then get your act together and make it a mission
to actually LEARN something. "I" am NOT one of the biased ARRL people, I
don't and won't belong to the ARRL. So my opinion is based purely on KNOWING
that is doesn't take a hell of a lot of work to LEARN - CW @ 5 WPM.
If the handicapped can do it, ANYONE CAN. If you can't, then you're not
handicapped, you're plain brain dead and lazy.

JMS

On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 18:09:44 -0700, Keith wrote:

Another problem that was pointed out to me are people with disabilities.
According to the American with Disabilities Act the government can not
discriminate against disabled people .
Now that s25.5 is international law the government must now accommodate
disabled people and they must do it without reasonable delay.

You must really enjoy playing wannabe lawyer --- and missing the
target. The issue of code and the ADA was hashed out by the FCC
several years ago. Nothing changed.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
A real lawyer