http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15


KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters
to call for help.

And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have
cell phones now.


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15


KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters
to call for help.

And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have
cell phones now.


- Mike KB3EIA -


I've said it before and I'll say it again and again--because I truly believe
it: carry any and all forms of communication that you are capable of using
and have the ability to have; including FRS, GMRS, CB, amateur, and other
radio; flagging systems; flares, whatever. Doesn't matter what you've
got--as long as it gets attention.

Kim W5TIT

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:48:44 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters
to call for help.

And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have
cell phones now.


My brother's a 4x4er and showed me the following link.

Ham Operators Save Life
http://www.highriders.ca/cgi-bin/gallery/album39

Tony

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters
to call for help.

And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have
cell phones now.

Who said that?

What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type
reporting that we hams used to do.

Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

Hams did SOME emergency calling in the distant past, but it was
rather minor even in the past half century compared to all the other
forms of communications available to citizens.

Particularly in metro areas.

Really? I live in a "metro area." Greater Los Angeles (counting the
82 other communities besides L.A. city) has a population of 10
million. There has been NO dependence on amateur radio for any
emergency communications for decades, not prime, not secondary,
not even tertiary level in decades...and that includes the huge harbor
facilities of San Pedro - Long Beach and all the marinas up and down
the immediate coast. USCG depends on the VHF radios of the
maritime life here for life-saving efforts just as they do in other
coastal and inland waterways.

The above example is the exception that proves the rule.

Nothing is "proved" other than resourcefulness of human beings
faced with any sort of emergency.

About three years ago a teenage girl heard a call for help on her
FRS handie-talkie, an action acted upon that resulted in a half
dozen mountain climbers being rescued quickly in the state of
Washington. That was in the state newspapers with some
exposure on the national press.

By your "exception logic," FRS radios are "vital to emergency
communications." Tsk, and FRS isn't licensed radio, either!

You should really confine your fantasyland imaginings to your
lulls between "Type 7" radio contacts...and remember that
amateur radio is basically a HOBBY activity done for fun, not
some heroic life-saving "service" to the nation.

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:


KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters
to call for help.

And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have
cell phones now.

Who said that?

What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type
reporting that we hams used to do.


Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so
many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the
initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone.


I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

'Cept it was a misquote.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so
many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the
initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone.

Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message
and quoted his EXACT WORDS.

Ain't no "misquote."

Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can
go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC,
and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts
killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever.

Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting."

I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

'Cept it was a misquote.

Except it was NOT a "misquote."

Lenof21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so
many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the
initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone.


Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message
and quoted his EXACT WORDS.


Do you mean when Jim posted:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
911-type
Jim reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:


Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"


Ain't no "misquote."

Jim wrote:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
911-type
Jim reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:


Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"


Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications?



Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can
go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC,
and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts
killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever.

I read your reply. I don't understand why you think that I should
bother all those people when Jim wrote:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
Jim 911-type reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:

Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"


Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting."

Is it bullsnit when Jim wrote:



I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

A brag that was never written.


'Cept it was a misquote.


Except it was NOT a "misquote."


It would appear to me, that it is very much a misquote.

Here however is an exact quote that is quite applicable:

I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go
to the next message.

If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Lenof21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so
many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the
initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone.

That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell
phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were.

Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message
and quoted his EXACT WORDS.

Looks like a misquote on Len's part.

Do you mean when Jim posted:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
Jim 911-type
Jim reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:

Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Ain't no "misquote."

Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike.

Jim wrote:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
Jim 911-type
Jim reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:

Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications?

Not in any post I can recall.

Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can
go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC,
and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts
killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever.

Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's
trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote.

I read your reply. I don't understand why you think that I should
bother all those people when Jim wrote:

Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the
Jim 911-type reporting that we hams used to do.

and you wrote:

Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting."

Looks like a misquote by Len from here.

Is it bullsnit when Jim wrote:

I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

A brag that was never written.

I kinda missed ya on that one, Mike.

'Cept it was a misquote.

Except it was NOT a "misquote."

Of course it *was* a misquote by Len, but he won't admit it.

It would appear to me, that it is very much a misquote.

Here however is an exact quote that is quite applicable:

I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go
to the next message.

If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same.

Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own
advice...

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same.

Now, now, don't get testy. :-)

You aren't following the Moderator Manual, just doing 5 Corrections
per Minute for someone else's posting. Real Moderators can do
20, not just 5. :-)

.

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?"

Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so
many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the
initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone.

Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message
and quoted his EXACT WORDS.

Ain't no "misquote."

Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can
go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC,
and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts
killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever.

Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting."

I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership
agitprop of the ARRL.

'Cept it was a misquote.

Except it was NOT a "misquote."