Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those who are
already licensed.

Dave K8MN

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age when the FCC
drags you in for a retest?

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those who are
already licensed.

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age when the FCC
drags you in for a retest?

I'm not scheduled. I'm not likely to be scheduled and the FCC doesn't
drag anyone for anything.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those
who are already licensed.

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age
when the FCC drags you in for a retest?

I'm not scheduled. I'm not likely to be scheduled
and the FCC doesn't drag anyone for anything.

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-requirement
idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the USA. Not even
back before WW1.

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed, has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence - that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems. Nor has anyone
else.

As a diversion, it has been suggested that such an age requirement
would not affect most hams today, such as you (K8MN) and Steve (K4YZ).
The clear implication is that you shouldn't oppose it because you're
over 14, and were at least 14 when you were first licensed.

But there's a clear contradiction in that diversion, because the person
demanding the age restriction is way over the age of 14, so it won't
affect him, either.

In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect you', it could be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at all.

His only apparent involvement in amateur radio is spouting off
bull****, nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general acting like a
complete jackass. His sole follower simply performs a variation on his
themes. Why bother with them?

Yes, Mr. Anderson did say that he was "going for Extra right out of the
box" back on January 19, 2000. But he hasn't taken even the first step
towards doing so, and there's no evidence he ever will. So the
requirements for an amateur license don't affect him in the least.

There's no good reason for a minimum age requirement for an amateur
radio license in the USA. We have more than 90 years of evidence to
back that up.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: Brian Burke on Sun, Mar 13 2005 3:20 pm

Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those who are
already licensed.

Dave K8MN

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age when the FCC
drags you in for a retest?

Mentally 14, I'm sure... :-)

Nobody, repeat NOBODY can "drag" big badass dave "in"
to anything. He said as much in the past. He IS the
Lawgiver despite Congress not approving him for that.

Big badass dave is very territorial, very old-style.
All who are allowed to play on HF or below MUST be
federally code-tested. "Or else." NO challenges,
let alone changes are "allowed" on that. :-)

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those
who are already licensed.

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age
when the FCC drags you in for a retest?

I'm not scheduled. I'm not likely to be scheduled
and the FCC doesn't drag anyone for anything.

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-requirement
idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the USA. Not
even
back before WW1.

And prior to the Morse Exam requirement, there had been no Morse Exam
requirement.

Jim, you've just got to realize that there are "firsts" for many things
in life.

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed, has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence - that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

Len has a self-admitted problem with the arbitrary licensing
requirements that are in-play today, some of which you support. That
he would suggest yet another one may only be a strawman. Something to
jar your noggin into doing what it was designed to do.

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems. Nor has anyone
else.

Welp, there was the unlicensed Kelly...

As a diversion, it has been suggested that such an age requirement
would not affect most hams today, such as you (K8MN) and Steve
(K4YZ).
The clear implication is that you shouldn't oppose it because you're
over 14, and were at least 14 when you were first licensed.

Len has been reminded again and again and again not to pay any
attention to things which don't concern him. So if you are not
affected by Len's suggested age requirement, perhaps you should take
your own advice and not be concerned.

But there's a clear contradiction in that diversion, because the
person
demanding the age restriction is way over the age of 14, so it won't
affect him, either.

Ah, you caught my one and only flaw. You da man.

In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect you', it could
be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at all.

He isn't complaining. He is petitioning his government for change
which is a protected right in America. I think.

His only apparent involvement in amateur radio is spouting off
{EXPLETIVE DELETED}, nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general
acting like a
complete {EXPLETIVE DELETED}. His sole follower simply performs a
variation on his
themes. Why bother with them?

Lions and tigers and bears. Oh, my!

Reverend Jim must leave the Antenna Mount at once. Say pennance or be
defrocked.

Yes, Mr. Anderson did say that he was "going for Extra right out of
the
box" back on January 19, 2000. But he hasn't taken even the first
step
towards doing so, and there's no evidence he ever will.

Is there a time limit on getting an amateur license, or is it
self-paced?

So the
requirements for an amateur license don't affect him in the least.

Perhaps they really do affect Len. Perhaps they affect every American
whether they're aware of it or not. Ever think of that?

There's no good reason for a minimum age requirement for an amateur
radio license in the USA. We have more than 90 years of evidence to
back that up.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Welp, Jim. You sound like you've had your fair share of sour grapes
today. Take the rest of the day off.

Dave Heil wrote:

Precisely what I've told him over the years. He is uninvolved in
amateur radio. He is a non-participant in amateur radio. He is
irrelevant to amateur radio. He has no experience in amateur radio.

Dave K8MN

That almost gives you something to hang your hat on, doesn't it?

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-
requirement idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the
USA. Not even back before WW1.

Correct.

Also, many other countries which once had age requirements (like
Canada) have abandoned them.

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC
and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed,
has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence -
that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

Len has never come up with any proof for his assertion of ARRL
dishonesty either.

I didn't ask for proof. Just evidence. Len has not provided
*any* evidence in either case.

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems.
Nor has anyone else.

That'd likely be because there is no such evidence in existence.

Yep.

As a diversion, it has been suggested that such an
age requirement
would not affect most hams today, such as you
(K8MN) and Steve (K4YZ).
The clear implication is that you shouldn't oppose
it because you're
over 14, and were at least 14 when you were first licensed.

But there's a clear contradiction in that diversion,
because the person
demanding the age restriction is way over the age
of 14, so it won't affect him, either.

It remains that it has not been demonstrated that such
a rule change would be a positive thing.

It's quite clear that it would be a negative thing.

In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect
you', it could be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at
all.

To be completely fair to Len, he does not desire an
amateur radio
license at this time. He changes his view from time to
time on whether he desires an amateur radio license.

That is certainly a more accurate way of saying it.

However, please note that at no time has Len's desire for
an amateur radio license reached the point where he
actually obtained one. So it cannot be much of a desire
even at its greatest.

His only apparent involvement in amateur radio is spouting off
bull****, nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general
acting like a complete jackass.
His sole follower simply performs a variation on his
themes. Why bother with them?

Len believes that by commenting to the FCC in regard
to amateur radio
regulations and by doing whatever it is that he does
here, he is somehow
participating in amateur radio itself.

Just a matter of semantics.

Yes, Mr. Anderson did say that he was "going for Extra
right out of the
box" back on January 19, 2000. But he hasn't taken
even the first step
towards doing so, and there's no evidence he ever will. So the
requirements for an amateur license don't affect him in the
least.

Precisely what I've told him over the years. He is
uninvolved in
amateur radio. He is a non-participant in amateur radio. He is
irrelevant to amateur radio. He has no experience in amateur
radio.

Like the Norwegian Blue parrot....

There's no good reason for a minimum age requirement
for an amateur
radio license in the USA. We have more than 90 years
of evidence to
back that up.

You'd think that if a problem existed, it would have
manifested itself by now.

Yep. But it hasn't. And as previously mentioned, the cb
service had such a rule, but it was not effective in
keeping that service well-behaved and law-abiding.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-
requirement idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the
USA. Not even back before WW1.

Correct.

Also, many other countries which once had age requirements (like
Canada) have abandoned them.

Dissimilarly, other countries which once had a morse code exam
requirement are to be ignored or discredited, South Africa...

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC
and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed,
has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence -
that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

Len has never come up with any proof for his assertion of ARRL
dishonesty either.

I didn't ask for proof. Just evidence. Len has not provided
*any* evidence in either case.

So people now have to have evidence for why they want an arbitrary
licensing requirement?

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems.
Nor has anyone else.

That'd likely be because there is no such evidence in existence.

Yep.

Oh, my!

As a diversion, it has been suggested that such an
age requirement
would not affect most hams today, such as you
(K8MN) and Steve (K4YZ).
The clear implication is that you shouldn't oppose
it because you're
over 14, and were at least 14 when you were first licensed.

But there's a clear contradiction in that diversion,
because the person
demanding the age restriction is way over the age
of 14, so it won't affect him, either.

It remains that it has not been demonstrated that such
a rule change would be a positive thing.

It's quite clear that it would be a negative thing.

Proof? Evidence?

In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect
you', it could be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at
all.

To be completely fair to Len, he does not desire an
amateur radio
license at this time. He changes his view from time to
time on whether he desires an amateur radio license.

That is certainly a more accurate way of saying it.

However, please note that at no time has Len's desire for
an amateur radio license reached the point where he
actually obtained one. So it cannot be much of a desire
even at its greatest.

Perhaps the desire to implement an arbitrary licensing requirement on
the American amateur radio community is stronger?

His only apparent involvement in amateur radio is spouting off
bull****, nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general
acting like a complete jackass.
His sole follower simply performs a variation on his
themes. Why bother with them?

Len believes that by commenting to the FCC in regard
to amateur radio
regulations and by doing whatever it is that he does
here, he is somehow
participating in amateur radio itself.

Just a matter of semantics.

I'm sure Chairman Powell never gave it much thought.

Yes, Mr. Anderson did say that he was "going for Extra
right out of the
box" back on January 19, 2000. But he hasn't taken
even the first step
towards doing so, and there's no evidence he ever will. So the
requirements for an amateur license don't affect him in the
least.

Precisely what I've told him over the years. He is
uninvolved in
amateur radio. He is a non-participant in amateur radio. He is
irrelevant to amateur radio. He has no experience in amateur
radio.

Like the Norwegian Blue parrot....

Riley will be a Novice this weekend.

There's no good reason for a minimum age requirement
for an amateur
radio license in the USA. We have more than 90 years
of evidence to
back that up.

You'd think that if a problem existed, it would have
manifested itself by now.

Yep. But it hasn't. And as previously mentioned, the cb
service had such a rule, but it was not effective in
keeping that service well-behaved and law-abiding.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Jim, you're unlikely to be able to reason out how an arbitrary
licensing requirement will manifest itself. That is the beauty of
arbitrary requirements.

From: "bb" on Mon, Mar 14 2005 4:34 pm

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Any changes made to amateur radio regulation effect those
who are already licensed.

I don't see how. Will you be at least 14 years of age
when the FCC drags you in for a retest?

I'm not scheduled. I'm not likely to be scheduled
and the FCC doesn't drag anyone for anything.

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-requirement
idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the USA. Not
even back before WW1.

And prior to the Morse Exam requirement, there had been no Morse Exam
requirement.

Jim, you've just got to realize that there are "firsts" for many
things
in life.

Brian, he does NOT realize that...therefore, whatever
Jimmie did IS what is "right" and anything else is
"wrong." Simple as that.

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed, has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence - that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

Len has a self-admitted problem with the arbitrary licensing
requirements that are in-play today, some of which you support. That
he would suggest yet another one may only be a strawman. Something to

jar your noggin into doing what it was designed to do.

Tsk, it must be such HARD work, making that molehill
into a mountain!

Poor Jimmie can't understand what I wrote on my 14-page
Comment on 98-143 that was filed on 13 January 1999...
EXCEPT a minor item on the last page of that. Perhaps
he skips the major content of daily newspapers and
concentrates on the funnies at the end of the paper?

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems. Nor has anyone
else.

Welp, there was the unlicensed Kelly...

So...rumors MUST be true...Jimmie is preparing a writ
for the Supreme Court on this TERRIBLE, TREASONOUS
subject of AGE requirements!

Len has been reminded again and again and again not to pay any
attention to things which don't concern him. So if you are not
affected by Len's suggested age requirement, perhaps you should take
your own advice and not be concerned.

Brian, Jimmie IS the Spanish Inquisition! :-)

All who do not think as HE does shall be burned at
the stake!

All who do not agree with HIM are the Antichrist!


In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect you', it could
be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at all.

He isn't complaining. He is petitioning his government for change
which is a protected right in America. I think.

Brian, that is NOT allowed in U.S. amateur radio!

PCTA extras ARE the inquisitors.

Inquisitors deny ALL rights given to U.S. citizens
if any disagree with their holinesses.


Reverend Jim must leave the Antenna Mount at once. Say pennance or be

defrocked.

Now, now, Jimmie wanted that "cool" WOMAN's morse code tee.

A frock would go very well with that outfit.

Yes, Mr. Anderson did say that he was "going for Extra right out of
the
box" back on January 19, 2000. But he hasn't taken even the first
step
towards doing so, and there's no evidence he ever will.

Is there a time limit on getting an amateur license, or is it
self-paced?

Whatever an Inquisitor demands now MUST be obeyed!

Jimmie is tuned to the wrong mind with his telepathy
machine. As usual. He really doesn't KNOW much about
others or their motivations...but damn if anyone can
point that out to him!

Tsk, Jimmie is sure working hard making that molehill
into a mountain! A casual statement made in here over
FIVE YEARS AGO is made to sound like some priestly VOWS
taken for life!!!

I wonder what Vows Jimmie took at the nave of the Church
of St. Hiram (prostrate on the floor, making the Sign of
the J-38)? Did he HOLD those Vows until now?

Tsk, if he be defrocked then he NEEDS all that women's
wear from Ebay! We can't have him running around naked
in front of high-voltage tube equipment...his shortcomings
might get a spark! Tsk!

So the requirements for an amateur license don't affect him in the
least.

Perhaps they really do affect Len. Perhaps they affect every American

whether they're aware of it or not. Ever think of that?

Americans do NOT get any Rights guaranteed under the
U.S. Constitution when it comes to amateur radio. The
gods of ham radio are the Lawgivers and none may fault
them. They RULE there!



Welp, Jim. You sound like you've had your fair share of sour grapes
today. Take the rest of the day off.

Tsk. I'd say those sour grapes were fermented as well.
Jimmie ought to sleep it off lest he have another angry
hangover.