![]() |
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article .net, "Bill Sohl" writes: Personally I think good true conservative idea is to allow people on the air with no licencing requirements whatsoever, then cull out the ones that violate the rules. Wrong. A true conservative desires the least practical government intervention in life. A true liberal desires the least practical government intervention in life as well. ROTFLMAO... Guess I have truly never met such a "true liberal." Every liberal I hear from is always looking to use more of my money to create larger and more involved government programs to do ever more for the "poor, unwashed public". The devil is in the details of what "least practical government intervention" really means. Just one example: The government used tax dollars to rescue Chrysler about 20 years ago. It turned out to be a good gamble because Chrysler paid back all of the money with interest, and in the end it cost the taxpayers nothing. Now - was the bailout a "liberal" move to save workers' jobs and try to manage the economy? Some "conservatives" would say that companies that get in trouble should be allowed to fail in a 'free market' and not propped up with tax dollars. OTOH, was the bailout a "conservative" move to save investors' money? Or to give some help to an industry bedeviled with safety, pollution and economy regulations *and* the double whammy of foreign competiton and two oil crises? Some "liberals" would say that Big Business should not be propped up with tax dollars. (Ma's Diner wouldn't get such a bailout) Clearly a "free-for-all" no license approach to ham radio wouldn't cut it and, as such, I and other conservative minded individuals do support ham licensing. Most "conservatives", anyway. The exact same is said by most "liberals". Where we depart from the current approach is in the recognition that the "incentives" of today's licensing do NOT dovetail with the knowledge needed to pass the higher level license exams. Not perfectly, anyway. Not even very imperfectly. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Bill Sohl" wrote The important aspect of getting to any truly "new" licensing scheme absolutly requires either some free upgrades, loss of some privileges or a combination of both. Hans's view of the future takes into account a "least" loss approach plus free upgrades. I could easily support Hans's vision above. That's not my view of the future, and it FOR DAMNED SURE isn't my "vision". For a view of my vision, visit http://tinyurl.com/wce9. No losses, and no freebie upgrades, and elimination of "newcomer ghettos". So much for your "absolutly (sic) requires". 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"JEP" wrote in message om... SNIP YES! No code is killing ham radio. See you on channel 22 good buddy. And just what "facts" do you preent to back-up your claim that: "No Code is killing ham radio?" Odds are you haven't a single rational example. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"JEP" wrote in message om... Check the figures yourself then check how many are really active. And just "how" do you propose anyone can "check how many are really active?" Yes you can but NRA and AARP rags on the stand. AAA no. I quoted no data, I made an observation. Your observation was absent any clarification that it was only YOUR observation, unsubstantiated by any true facts. Get you head out the sand and look around. See all of your old buddies just hanging around the club meeting doing nothing? is field day as well attended as it was in the 60's? Are new folks welcomed? Is help provided? If so then consider yourself lucky. One aspect of almost all hobbies" is the cost to play which often results in an older cross-section of participants. The same is true for antique cars, model railroading, etc. Add to that the available "free time" which most older folks, especially retirees, have. "Bill Sohl" wrote in message hlink.net... "JEP" wrote in message om... Just my point. I don't want to belong to ARRL just as I don't care to belong to AARP, NRA, AAA, Skinheads, etc. Can you "just buy" the magazines of AARP, NRA, AAA, etc. without joining? I am always amazed at people that want the "benefits" of an organization's efforts, in this case the publication, but don't want to support the organization by joining. I see the same thing at times in the antique car hobby. People that bitch about the club rules at a car show, or otherwise want technical help from club officials but won't part with the few bucks it takes to join. I just want to read their magazine when it has something that interests me. I wouldn't buy it every month as most of the time it has useless drivel about some clowntest or whether someone died or some such crap. ARRL and QST have a short time left as the active Ham population lessens. Is it lessening? News to me. If they took a real survey as to how many real active ham there are they would find the number far less than they think. I'm not talking about members, I'm talking about HAMS that really use a radio to transmit a signal. Doesnt matter what band. How many transmit a signal at least once a week? Most don't. Please provide your survey data. Look at your local HAM clubs, talk to the members(if you can wake them up). Most show up and act disgusted with the club, Ham radio, life in general. New folks are never there. Ya I know about your Skywarn in Flint, MI. Great service! Could be run on CB, NEXTEL, GMRS. Could be but isn't...there in lies the difference. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"KØHB" wrote in message link.net... "Bill Sohl" wrote The important aspect of getting to any truly "new" licensing scheme absolutly requires either some free upgrades, loss of some privileges or a combination of both. Hans's view of the future takes into account a "least" loss approach plus free upgrades. I could easily support Hans's vision above. That's not my view of the future, and it FOR DAMNED SURE isn't my "vision". For a view of my vision, visit http://tinyurl.com/wce9. No losses, and no freebie upgrades, and elimination of "newcomer ghettos". So much for your "absolutly (sic) requires". 73, de Hans, K0HB Hans, Apologies for misunderstanding your position. As to my view that either freebies or losses are needed to get to a new license plan, I truly think that will be the case. I doubt the FCC wants to have a hybred licensing scheme in the long run. That's my perspective. Assuming "free upgrades" as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm? Cheers and Happy New Year. Bill K2UNK |
"Bill Sohl" wrote Assuming "free upgrades" as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm? You're a bright guy, Bill, so surely you can see the "overall harm", but maybe you're having some trouble shaking off the effects of your New Years Eve celebration, so I'll spell it out for you. Today, passing the Amateur Extra exam is the qualification required for full amateur privileges. An existing General or Advanced licensee has passed a less comprehensive set of examinations, and has not (by FCC definition) demonstrated qualification for full amateur privileges. If FCC suddenly upgrades all General and Advanced licenses to Amateur Extra, then ipso facto and ipso jure the qualification required for full amateur privileges has been lowered by two full steps. Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can reasonably plead that any examination more comprehensive than the current General discriminates against new applicants. In some circles I've heard that called "the Great Dumbing Down" of amateur radio. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"KØHB" wrote in message link.net... "Bill Sohl" wrote Assuming "free upgrades" as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm? You're a bright guy, Bill, so surely you can see the "overall harm", but maybe you're having some trouble shaking off the effects of your New Years Eve celebration, so I'll spell it out for you. Today, passing the Amateur Extra exam is the qualification required for full amateur privileges. An existing General or Advanced licensee has passed a less comprehensive set of examinations, and has not (by FCC definition) demonstrated qualification for full amateur privileges. If FCC suddenly upgrades all General and Advanced licenses to Amateur Extra, then ipso facto and ipso jure the qualification required for full amateur privileges has been lowered by two full steps. Only on a one-time basis. The question still is, what is the harm of such a one-time "fix." Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can reasonably plead that any examination more comprehensive than the current General discriminates against new applicants. They can plead all they want...doesn't make it so. The FCC could certainly counter argue the upgrades were a one-time need to simplify the overall license structure. YMMV Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message link.net... "JEP" wrote in message om... SNIP YES! No code is killing ham radio. See you on channel 22 good buddy. And just what "facts" do you preent to back-up your claim that: "No Code is killing ham radio?" Odds are you haven't a single rational example. Cheers, Bill K2UNK May I, Bill? While I do not think No-Code Int'l. is "killing" ham radio, I do believe it is fostering a bad mindset. If there were truly no no-code AR license available, I'd agree that the Morse code exam is a barrier to those who neither possess the "Morse aptitude" (For lack of a better term.) nor wish to utilize it OTA. However, there's been a no-code ticket available for over a decade now...with some pretty generous RF real estate and power limitations I might add. IMHO, No-Code Int'l. has: 1. Encouraged the idea that it is preferable to lower the requirements through mass petition rather than encourage individuals to strive toward higher achievement. Some refer to it as "lowering the bar." 2. Made the notion of more privileges via higher achievement appear as if it's fundamentally wrong. If one wishes to upgrade, then meet the requirements necessary to achieve that upgrade. (Not just the requirements we *want* to meet.) I've read enough posts here and on the countless code vs. no-code articles on the various ham radio web forums (As well as the actual RM petitions and their respective comments.) to confidently say that neither side can claim an overwhelming numerical advantage over the other. So I think it's safe to say that not all ascribe to the "barrier" notion. What will happen? Well, the squeaky wheel gets the oil so I think we can be reasonably assured of the elimination of Element 1...at least for Technician "+" privies. Personally, I'm prouder to have achieved rather than squeaked. 73 es HNY de Bert WA2SI |
"Bill Sohl" wrote Only on a one-time basis. If N2EY's latest post under "ARS License Numbers" is accurate, and if the "fix" was instituted today, the number of Amateur Extra licensees would increase by 213% and the vast majority (69%) of this enlarged "Extra Class" would not qualify for the license under yesterdays rules or tomorrows rules. Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can reasonably plead that any examination more comprehensive than the current General discriminates against new applicants. They can plead all they want...doesn't make it so. The FCC could certainly counter argue the upgrades were a one-time need to simplify the overall license structure. Their counter argument would utterly fail, because they'd first need to prove that the "one-time need" over-rides the harm of a massive influx of underqualified (by their own rules) individuals into the top class of amateur operators. Judges rule on logic, not administrative convenience. The question still is, what is the harm of such a one-time "fix." Trivializing this as a one-time "fix" shows how little you've examined the issue. Instead of a one-time "fix", it would be a one-time "hammer blow". The answer still is exactly as stated in my previous message. Cheerios and bran flakes to you to, K0HB |
SNIP again.
Sorry, you'll have to find someone else to talk to on your favorite frequency. I don't have any equipment that will transmit there. (But I do have 3 rigs that cover all of the amateur bands (except the 5 channels at 5 MHz) from 160m-70cm, all modes, and can be run without AC mains power - main station rig, mobile (I'm in the process of installing that rig in a new vehicle), and a QRP station I use for backpack/travel use.) How many (ham band) rigs do you have? Can you run for extended periods (weeks or more, if need be) without commercial power? How active and well-prepared are you? Oh, you're just trolling? That's become abundantly clear ... why not try another stream? I think the bites are about to dry up here. Carl - wk3c The bites don't seem to drying up at all. I found a few nibbles yet. The Extras on the no code board have to 5wpm Extras. Couldn't be real Extras that had at least one exam in front of a FCC examiner. Passed at least one test at a real FCC examination site. Actually learned radio theory. The radios I own are not your concern. I will say I own enough to operate all bands and modes. Can stay active as long as some kind of power is still available.Also have had a Ham ticket long enough to know exactly what the ARRL has really done with the incentive crap from the 60's. Remember, it was Maxim not the ARRL thst got the frequencies back after WW 1. Maxim was a mover and shaker, unlike the deadheads in there now---The Good Ole Boy Club! You guys keep nibbling because you are afraid to admit you are wrong. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com