Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
KØHB wrote:
"Dee D. Flint" wrote Mike, You and I know it can't be enforced without invasion of privacy. You have to go on the operator's property and make local field strength measurements. The rules have a wide assortment of power level restrictions below 100W, some as low as 2.5W, Many of them apply to every license class. Can I presume from your flip answer that we can safely ignore those limits because it would be an "invasion of privacy" for FCC to enforce them? You muddy the waters. The point as I see it is that Technicians now have access to much higher power levels. Equipment is already out that has 100 watts, and you can be hurt by 50 watt units as well as 100 watt units. And it makes an unenforceable power level for no real purpose. No reason why the first class of license can't have enough RF information that it is expected to know that it can safely operate 100 watts. I presume there is evidence that Technicians are harming themselves now? If not, you have a pretty weak argument. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The 14 Petitions | Policy | |||
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Dx |