In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

A thought just occurred to me......

Not a "thought" but rather another limp rerun of the same old procode stuff.


"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"WA3IYC" wrote in message
...
Would you agree with this statement:

however, at the same time, those who are not interested in building
radios
should not be forced to learn how they work in order to gain amateur
radio
privileges ...

No ... because, even if you don't build your own radios, you are
responsible
for their proper operation. How could you possibly know something was
wrong if you had no knowledge of how the radio worked?

I'm responsible for the proper operation of any motor vehicles I
operate, but I'm not required to know how they work. Or pass any exams
on how they work, even to build or repair my own vehicles.

This is a rather absurd comparison. In normal debate it is called by
the formal name of "reducto ad absurdum," a Latin phrase meaning
it is "reduced to an absurdity."

Perhaps Pennsylvania has very lax driver license examinations, but
California and Illinois and Washington all require prospective driver
licensees to demonstrate knowledge of basic operating functions of a
vehicle...as well as actual operation of that vehicle on the streets.

This is an interference control issue ... a technical matter ... and
knowledge
of this IS required in order to be competent to operate a station in full
compliance with the rules.

Motor vehicle operation is a life-and-death public safety issue, and
an environmental issue. It's certainly a technical matter.

What is "technical" about operating a motor vehicle? Why do you use
the term "certainly a technical matter?" It is no more "technical" than
operating a CB radio or an amateur radio.

Radios can't carry you over the streets and highways to a physical
destination.

Yet there
is no exam for technical knowledge of motor vehicle operation. There
IS a skill test, though....

Make up your mind. You just said that motor vehicle operation
CERTAINLY IS A TECHNICAL MATTER. Now you say it is just a
"skill test."

Some states require that vehicles pass periodic inspections - but not
all states. And even in states that have inspection (like
Pennsylvania), a lot can go wrong between inspections. PA inspections
are annual, and a car that was perfectly fine at inspection time can
have all kinds of things go wrong in a year. Tires and brakes wear
out, shocks fail, fluids leak, alignment goes out, etc., etc. Yet PA
DMV trusts us to keep our vehicles in shape even though we are not
tested on how they work.

...and it's very easy in Pennsylvania to KILL someone using a motor
vehicle. Been there, seen that happen.

Now you want everyone to believe that driver's licenses are just like
amateur radio licenses?

Whatever it is you are on, you should stop taking it...

LHA

Len Over 21 wrote:


Make up your mind. You just said that motor vehicle operation
CERTAINLY IS A TECHNICAL MATTER. Now you say it is just a
"skill test."


My wife can drive just fine, that definitely proves that driving
is NOT a technical matter.