(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) writes:

It is already headed that way. Ummmm K1MAN? 14.313? 75 meters?

What mode are those folks using for their alleged violations? It isn't
Morse Code!


Yes man I know that, but does'nt that blow a hole for those folks who
code to
stay as a filter?

Not really.

No test can be a perfect filter that somehow guarantees perfect
behavior by everyone who passes it. That doesn't mean we don't need
testing.

Consider this plain, simple fact: All of those violators mentioned
above allegedly passed *written* tests which covered the rules,
regulations and operating practices. In fact most of them passed
several written tests. Yet those tests have not prevented them from
running afoul of the regulations. Thus, the written exams are not a
"filter" either, even though they deal directly with the rules and
regs.

So, should we just dump the written tests because they're not a
perfect filter?

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think the most popular 2 meter repeater frequencies and simplex calling freqs should be
added to new FRS/GMRS blister pack radios in WalMart with a little scrunched up
application for an FCC license placed in the package just where you would put a knife thru
it to open the blister pack.

N2UBP

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Steve Stone
Date: 5/10/2004 6:08 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I think the most popular 2 meter repeater frequencies and simplex calling
freqs should be
added to new FRS/GMRS blister pack radios in WalMart with a little scrunched
up
application for an FCC license placed in the package just where you would put
a knife thru
it to open the blister pack.

I'd be careful about how you say that...

Some idiot will take it to Wally-world and it may happen!

73

Steve, K4YZ

(N2EY) wrote in
om:

(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) wrote in message
... In article
,
(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) writes:

It is already headed that way. Ummmm K1MAN? 14.313? 75 meters?

What mode are those folks using for their alleged violations? It isn't
Morse Code!


Yes man I know that, but does'nt that blow a hole for those folks who
code to stay as a filter?

Not really.

No test can be a perfect filter that somehow guarantees perfect
behavior by everyone who passes it. That doesn't mean we don't need
testing.

Consider this plain, simple fact: All of those violators mentioned
above allegedly passed *written* tests which covered the rules,
regulations and operating practices. In fact most of them passed
several written tests. Yet those tests have not prevented them from
running afoul of the regulations. Thus, the written exams are not a
"filter" either, even though they deal directly with the rules and
regs.

So, should we just dump the written tests because they're not a
perfect filter?

73 de Jim, N2EY

We should test on the rules so they have no excuse

Alun wrote in message . ..
(N2EY) wrote in
om:

(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) wrote in message
... In article
,
(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) writes:

It is already headed that way. Ummmm K1MAN? 14.313? 75 meters?

What mode are those folks using for their alleged violations? It isn't
Morse Code!


Yes man I know that, but does'nt that blow a hole for those folks who
code to stay as a filter?

Not really.

No test can be a perfect filter that somehow guarantees perfect
behavior by everyone who passes it. That doesn't mean we don't need
testing.

Consider this plain, simple fact: All of those violators mentioned
above allegedly passed *written* tests which covered the rules,
regulations and operating practices. In fact most of them passed
several written tests. Yet those tests have not prevented them from
running afoul of the regulations. Thus, the written exams are not a
"filter" either, even though they deal directly with the rules and
regs.

So, should we just dump the written tests because they're not a
perfect filter?

73 de Jim, N2EY

We should test on the rules so they have no excuse

We *do* test on the rules, Alun! Every class of amateur radio license
in the USA includes rules'n'regs testing. And most hams follow the
rules. But it's not a perfect filter, as is proved by the violations.

If you mean there should be a completely separate test on rules, or
that the written test should be scored in sections so that one cannot
pass without knowing a significant amount of the rules'n'regs, I agree
100%. But I can guarantee you that no one-time written test will
filter out 100% of rules violators.

Heck, some time back we had the case of new ham (I'll let you guess
what license class) using a modified amateur transceiver to send phony
distress calls on the VHF marine band. The Coast Guard had to take the
calls seriously until they knew for sure they were fake. The written
test didn't stop that fellow, just like the code test didn't stop the
folks above. So why do we need either?

73 de Jim, N2EY