Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #741   Report Post  
Old January 12th 04, 08:55 PM
Steve Robeson, K4CAP
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:


It's the standard YOU have tried to set, Scummy. YOU are the one
stating "we" (the Amateur community) don't respect
"professionals"...yet here you are spewing antgonisms, profanities and
boldface lies.


tsk, tsk, tsk, stebe...YOU don't respect professionals.


I don't respect you. You are a liar...a documented pathological
liar.

I've never stated any "boldface lies." This web browser doesn't allow
selection of boldface type.


Sure you have. That you don't accept responsibility for them is
moot. They are here. No more need be said. You're busted...over and
over and over and......

On contraire again, Lennie...I get to radiate more than adequate
"great power". I hardly ever use more than 200 watts on ANY band,
however, since it's not necessary to use it.


You have 40 KW RF output capability?

How about 600 KW RF output?

tsk, tsk, tsk, stebe, look again at amateur radio band allocations
and allowed RF output power. you can't use it on "ANY" band.


tsk, tsk, tsk, Lennie.

Where did I say "40KW" or "600KW", Your Sliminess?

I paraphrased your "great power" and then cited that I hardly
ever use more than 200watts.

With very few exceptions, I can use 200 watts where I please.

And by the way, Anderscum, would you care to share a copy of the
station licensed where YOU were authorized those powers you
cited...???

I can show you MY station license and quote for you the
paragraphs that stipulate how much power I can use.

Of course, unlike YOU, I have a station license that allows me to
establish a radio station wherein I can use it.


wow, stebe, impressville all the way! your vewwy own wadio
station!


Yep.

So...if I go into K-Mart or Wal-Mart and plunk down $99 for a shrink-
wrapped CB transceiver "it's not my own radio?"


Sure it is. And you can have fun alllllllll day chatting with
foul mouthed truckers, 10 year old space cadets and rogue taxi cabs.

Okay, if I own a Cessna 182 and buy a Civil Airways VHF Comm
transceiver and install it, "I wouldn't own my own transceiver?"
Who would own it? FAA? USAF? An airlines corporation?


Sure...ALLLLLLLLLL yours. No station license, of course, unless
you file for one from the FAA and obtain the Restricted Telephone
Operators Permit and intend to use the aircraft outside of the
territorial United States.

And while you're at it, just pick any old random frequency and
call "CQ" while you're at it.

If I have an ocean-going sailboat and buy the "civilian" version of an
SBC-2020 and install it, "I wouldn't own my own radio?" Who would
own it? SBC? USN? USCG? A cruise line corporation?


Sure it's yours, Lennie. Still no station license unless you
operate it outside the United States...And THEN only (STILL "only") on
the fixed maritime frequencies with a type accepted rig. (Enjoy
plunking down those bucks, Lennie....You earned them...)

If, as a private businessman, I buy several transceivers to put in my
delivery vehicles, "I wouldn't OWN them?" Who would own them?
A city department of communications? FCC? NTIA? DMV?

Suppose I buy a pair of FRS HTs. "I won't OWN them?" Who "owns"
them? The store I bought it from using a valid credit card?

Oh, yeah, the only "real radios" are ham radios where everyone
works DX on HF with CW.


Lennie, if you went on a buying spree RIGHT NOW, and bought one
of every radio that you could LEGALLY operate without a document from
the FCC, you'd still only have enough bandwidth to fit inside the 10
meter Amateur band.

I, on the other hand, can buy those SAME radios, thereby not only
having the entire AMATEUR allocations to play with, but all those SAME
services in which you might operate, and yet again would have more
OPERATING privileges than you do right now.

Of course, any former E-5 or higher that thinks "asshole" is a
terribly profane word must be of the sissy pink coloring.


Blatant evidence that you are not in touch with the "new"
professional Armed Forces, Lennie. That kind of language, although
rampant in your day, can get a prefessional soldier busted or fined.


aha, stebe, so that's how you got your non-honorable discharge!


Uh huh...right.

Rest of LennieRant clipped...Once again, made a fool of by his
own hand.

Keep it up Lennie. It's been a slow week.

Putz. Say Hi to Mrs Putz for me.

Steve

  #743   Report Post  
Old January 12th 04, 09:13 PM
Len Over 21
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article et, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:
To do the types of public service
we're authorized to do (MARS,
RACES, and so on), authorization
is required.

Sec. 97.407 (snip)


That is an authorization to operate
on those frequencies and an
authorization to operate the station
not an authorization to do public
service. (snip)


"That is authorization to operate on those frequencies" to do what, Dee?
The only answer is "public service" in this context. When it comes to
Amateur Radio, we perform our public service using the Amateur Radio
frequencies. And the FCC is the governing agency that says what is
authorized on those frequencies (not everything is - your license is not a
blank check to do what you want with the Amateur frequencies). For example,
when it comes to the walk-a-thon you mentioned, the FCC has set rules on
what is and isn't authorized in that situation. The same with your power
blackout situation. And the same with ARES. In other words, you are only
allowed to use your radio in situations authorized, and in the manner
authorized. One situation authorized is public service.


Dwight, throughout ALL of Title 47, Code of Federal Regulations,
the word "service" is a regulatory term used to denote the type
and kind of radio activity being regulated.

Too many self-enobling amateurs wish to wrap themselves in the
finery of some kind of "patriotism" or "good works" and say they
do their hobby activity "for the public good."

AMATEUR radio is, de facto, a hobby, a recreational activity
involving radio transmission, done without pecuniary interest.

There should be NOTHING WRONG with having a fun hobby just
to have a hobby. One hundred seventy thousand members of the
AMA use a number of 72 MHz frequencies for model radio control.
That's purely a recreational activity. Not one whit of "public
service" about it, no dreaming about being a "service to the nation"
by using those allocated, authorized radio frequencies.

Anyone thinking that amateur radio is "primarily about public
service" is deluding themselves and/or living in a fantasyland of
daydreams. Amateur radio is a hobby. It was never anything
else and it may never be anything else. Why should it be more
than a hobby?

I've never needed a "license" to do jury duty, yet I've done it four
times. I've never needed a "license" to be a court witness yet
I've done that once. I've never needed a "license" to contribute to
a charity or be a hospital volunteer or anything else to do REAL
public/civic service. Anyone physically capable can do all of those
things without any "license" or "special authorization/allocation"
by some "authority."

The five volumes of regulations on Title 47 C.F.R. concern normal
operation of all the US civil radio services, its operators, and the
structure and activities of the FCC. The authorization/allocation of
ALL services is specifically stated therein. For those wishing to
get into REAL public service radio, that is mostly in Part 90 under
Public Safety Radio Services.

Part 97.1 "Definitions" does NOT specifically "authorize public
service" nor is it in any way some kind of Important Noble Medal
surrogate to wear/show-off/brag-about. 97.1 is basically old,
standard political boilerplate CHAFF, words to use as political
radar screening (a time-honored American law tradition even if
the names of it vary) to INFER a raison d'etre for the radio service.

Political chaff is very important in lawmaking. It carries with it a
fantastic amount of emotional baggage...but all that baggage is
essential to the creation of whatever the law is defining. A
particular activity being legislated cannot readily exist without all
that baggage. That kind of baggage gets politicians elected and
it lets those politicians enact legislation that is so "important"
to some of the citizenry.

While all the radio amateurs - and especiall the league - were busy
thumping their gorilla chests to beats of self-importance rhythm,
the AMA quietly lobbied for, and got a number of R/C frequencies.
Not for any national "public service" to "do good works" or anything
else except make several thousand model hobbyists happy. Nothing
in there about "pioneering flight" or anything else pretentious, just for
a recreational hobby, to have fun, to enjoy themselves.

The membership of the AMA is approximately equal to the member-
ship of the ARRL...170 thousand each. Isn't that curious? :-)

The AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) doesn't constantly
pretend to be anything else but a hobby membership organization,
affiliated internationally with other model hobby organizations. ARRL
on the other hand is terribly self-pretentious with a constant PR of
self-importance, "radio pioneering" and general self-grandeur.

Amateur radio transmissions fall under the federal laws concerning
United States civil radio. Such are given specific regulations by
the FCC. That isn't enoblement "to do the public good," it is merely
a separation of the various radio activities for regulatory purposes.

Trying to draw "conclusions, authorizations" from the first part of
Part 97 - for any reason - is like saying all politicians' statements
are "true." The definitions of 97.1 are just general statements,
political chaff (or any other spin-equivalent name you want) of the
old style to justify the existance of the radio activity in the political
arena.

LHA
  #744   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 02:09 AM
Hans K0HB
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

And, while there is nothing mandatory about it,
the mandate (authorization) to do so still
remains.

Dwight, do you read and understand what you write prior to mashing the
send button?

If there is nothing mandat(ory) about something, how can it be a
mandate?

A mandate is a command, *requiring* a certain action.

An authorization is a grant of permission, but does not *require* an
action.

73, de Hans, K0HB
  #745   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 09:14 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Len Over 21" wrote:

(snip) Anyone thinking that amateur
radio is "primarily about public service"
is deluding themselves and/or living in
a fantasyland of daydreams. Amateur
radio is a hobby. It was never anything
else and it may never be anything else.
Why should it be more than a hobby?



Of course, those quotes don't reflect anything said by me. Instead, I said
public service is a key component of the basis and purpose of this radio
service (97.1a).


(snip) I've never needed a "license"
to do jury duty, yet I've done it four
times. I've never needed a "license"
to be a court witness yet I've done
that once. I've never needed a
"license" to contribute to a charity or
be a hospital volunteer or anything
else to do REAL public/civic service.
Anyone physically capable can do
all of those things without any
"license" or "special authorization/
allocation" by some "authority."



Obviously, Len. We were talking public service relating to Amateur radio.
Nothing said precludes public service in some other means or manner.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



  #746   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 10:19 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"KHB" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

Again, the words mandate and authorization
are synonymous.



Not in any dictionary I can find, nor in Roget's.



Princeton University's WordNet...

http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn/

Click on "Use WordNet Online" and enter "mandate." Notice the word
"authorization" right next to it for the first definition. Notice the word
"mandatory" next to it for the second definition. Mandate and authorization
are synonymous in the context used.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

  #747   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 10:33 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Hans K0HB" wrote:

Dwight, do you read and understand
what you write prior to mashing the
send button?

If there is nothing mandat(ory) about
something, how can it be a mandate?



Mandatory is only one definition, or contextual sense, of the word
"mandate," Hans. There are others.


An authorization is a grant of
permission, but does not
*require* an action.



A mandate does not always "require" action. For example, a people can give
a mandate to their elected leaders, but those leaders are not required to
follow it. For example, the people can give a president a mandate to raise
taxes to finance schools, but he can finance those schools some other way.
In that sense, the people have their president an authorization to act, not
a requirement he must follow.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

  #748   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 10:33 AM
Kim W5TIT
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...
"KHB" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

Again, the words mandate and authorization
are synonymous.



Not in any dictionary I can find, nor in Roget's.



Princeton University's WordNet...

http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn/

Click on "Use WordNet Online" and enter "mandate." Notice the word
"authorization" right next to it for the first definition. Notice the word
"mandatory" next to it for the second definition. Mandate and

authorization
are synonymous in the context used.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Circumlocutory, Dwight. I understood your implied intent by the use of the
word mandate and they did, too. ; )

Kim W5TIT


  #749   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 11:13 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Circumlocutory, Dwight. I understood
your implied intent by the use of the
word mandate and they did, too. ; )



That's a mighty big word, Kim. Unnecessarily wordy? Perhaps.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/
  #750   Report Post  
Old January 13th 04, 05:53 PM
Dave Heil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Len Over 21 wrote:

Or just Attila the Ham (or "Atilla" if you speak Hunnish with a dialect)?


That'd be you, since you're the fellow who coined the terms "Atila" and
"beligerant", Leonard. You used both words more than once. Some
dialect.

Dave K8MN


Reply
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
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access Lloyd Mitchell Antenna 43 October 26th 04 01:37 AM
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions Louis C. LeVine Dx 36 September 9th 04 09:30 AM
BPL, the ARRL and the UPLC John Walton Homebrew 0 July 2nd 04 12:26 PM
NEWS: N2DUP announces for ARRL section manager in Minnesota Chuck Gysi N2DUP General 0 May 9th 04 09:18 PM
ARRL FUD about BPL Bill General 27 August 22nd 03 12:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017