Dave Heil wrote:

Oh heck, Mike. That's nothing. None of that stuff phases me. I'd
begin to be weirded out if Len were to suddenly take a liking to me,
to
begin being cordial, to act as if there were other people on the
planet
who knew as much or more about a subject than he does.

If he dropped his wild rants about the Church of St. Hiram, Sermons
on
the Antenna Mount, his claims of being a PROFESSIONAL, his
not-so-subtle
references to Mr. Glock or his belittling of the careers of others,
I'd
be nervous that something quite unpleasant was about to take place.
Then it dawns on me: How much worse could it get?

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age requirement....

--

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

Oh heck, Mike. That's nothing. None of that stuff phases me. I'd
begin to be weirded out if Len were to suddenly take a liking to me,
to
begin being cordial, to act as if there were other people on the
planet
who knew as much or more about a subject than he does.

If he dropped his wild rants about the Church of St. Hiram, Sermons
on
the Antenna Mount, his claims of being a PROFESSIONAL, his
not-so-subtle
references to Mr. Glock or his belittling of the careers of others,
I'd
be nervous that something quite unpleasant was about to take place.
Then it dawns on me: How much worse could it get?

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age requirement
for radio amateurs.

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.
He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.

Dave K8MN

From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll topic,
scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age requirement
for radio amateurs.

Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...

Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)

How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)

Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.

Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go. They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.
He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.

Tsk. To answer a repeated question by big badass dave,
no, I don't beat (physically) my wife. :-)

You want "straightforward manner answers?" Okay, he

Yes, No, Yes, maybe, No, No, Yes, perhaps.

Now all you have to do is connect those answers with
your LOADED questions you post in here. :-)

Okay, big badass dave, here's a question for YOU:

Where SPECIFICALLY and when SPECIFICALLY did you
see "combat" in Vietnam sufficient to make you this
big badass "combat veteran" you claim for yourself?

Or does that violate the copyrights on your story
in "Soldier of Fortune" magazine?

The world has a right to know...

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

Then it dawns on me: How much worse could it get?

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

I think he wishes everyone would forget them....

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.

Aw heck, Dave, give credit where it's due! All of those behaviors are
classic Len Anderson. He manages to do at least 3 of them in almost
every post, and it's not uncommon to see all 4 in a single post of his.
Sometimes he manages to do all 4 in a single paragraph.

He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.

Most of the time he won't answer questions at all. Yet he'll demand
answers to *his* questions.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll topic,
scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...

Why is it a "Personal Attack" to disagree with your comments, Len?

You wanted FCC to deny amateur licenses to anyone under the age of
14, regardless of their ability to pass the required tests.

Yet you have not produced one single bit of evidence that the licensing
of people under the age of 14 has produced *any* problems for the
amateur radio service.

Not one example of an under-14 ham violating any rules, getting an NAL
or enforcement letter, or even complaints from other hams.

Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)

You would forbid people more than twice as old from getting an amateur
license, Len. Without any evidence.

How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)

Yes.

Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.

Why should they need parental supervision to operate? FCC,
the expert agency on US civil radio regulation, thinks they're
qualified.

Back in 1948, a 9-year-old local girl passed the Class B exam. In front
of the FCC examiner.

This was back when the license test required diagram drawing and had
essay questions. 13 wpm code, sending and receiving, too. No Novice
class back then, either, it was Class B from a standing start.

Now of course her dad was a ham and she had lots of help. But if the
FCC then and now thought young people were qualified to be hams, and
you have no evidence of problems caused by their youth, why should
there be an age limit?

Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go.

Why should they? You have not admitted that age requirements for a ham
license are a bad idea.

They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

Dave Heil wrote:

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the out of band french radio
amateurs on six meters.

wrote:

You wanted FCC to deny amateur licenses to anyone under the age of
14, regardless of their ability to pass the required tests.

Yet you have not produced one single bit of evidence that the
licensing
of people under the age of 14 has produced *any* problems for the
amateur radio service.

Not one example of an under-14 ham violating any rules, getting an
NAL
or enforcement letter, or even complaints from other hams.

Maybe it's completely arbitrary like some current licensing
requirements and would fit right in and not be noticed except by some
fringe group claiming "Unfairness."

So at what age did you get your first license?

bb wrote:

So at what age did you get your first license?

Seventeen. And you?

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:

From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll topic,
scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age requirement
for radio amateurs.

Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...

Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)

How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)

Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.

Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go. They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.
He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.

Tsk. To answer a repeated question by big badass dave,
no, I don't beat (physically) my wife. :-)

I've never asked you any such question, little wizened Leonard.

You want "straightforward manner answers?" Okay, he

Yes, No, Yes, maybe, No, No, Yes, perhaps.

Now all you have to do is connect those answers with
your LOADED questions you post in here. :-)

Loaded questions? The two questions I posed to you some days ago
weren't loaded at all. They were in direct response to an accusation
you made.

Okay, big badass dave, here's a question for YOU:

Where SPECIFICALLY and when SPECIFICALLY did you
see "combat" in Vietnam sufficient to make you this
big badass "combat veteran" you claim for yourself?

What does that have to do with anything here on r.r.a.p? You brought up
my Vietnam service some posts ago as a part of personal attack. It
wasn't relative then and isn't now. At no time did I claim to be a "big
badass" anything. Your latest tactic is a very good illustration of what
I wrote about you--that the "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion of
the material on the link supplied by Jim is classic Len Anderson. What
brought up the issue of answering a question with a straight answer was
your recent comment below:

"Both Heil and Robeson MUST
triumph in the word-fights, will never ever admit to any
wrong-doing and always try to turn around things so the
other party is at fault."

I responded to your statement with relevant questions:

"Let me ask you a couple of plain question to see if I can get some
straight answer from you, Len. When is the last time that you ever
admitted to any wrongdoing in here? When is the last time you were
involved in a scrap here in which you didn't try to turn things around
so that the other party appeared to be at fault?"

You've still not provided straight answers to the questions. Perhaps
when and if you do, we can discuss my Vietnam service.

Dave K8MN

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

Then it dawns on me: How much worse could it get?

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

I think he wishes everyone would forget them....

When he's reminded of what he has written to the FCC and here, Len takes
it as a personal attack.

The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts

The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.

Aw heck, Dave, give credit where it's due! All of those behaviors are
classic Len Anderson. He manages to do at least 3 of them in almost
every post, and it's not uncommon to see all 4 in a single post of his.
Sometimes he manages to do all 4 in a single paragraph.

Today brought at least two examples.

He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.

Most of the time he won't answer questions at all. Yet he'll demand
answers to *his* questions.

Right. The relevant questions I recently posed to him were ignored.
Now he'd like specifics on my Vietnam service, the service which *he
brought up*.

Dave K8MN

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the out of band french radio
amateurs on six meters.

Len worked guys on 6m? When did that happen?

Dave K8MN

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So at what age did you get your first license?

Seventeen. And you?

Well then, Jim, that arbitrary rule wouldn't affect you.

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the out of band french
radio
amateurs on six meters.

Len worked guys on 6m? When did that happen?

Dave K8MN

From downtown Dar es Salam.

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:


So at what age did you get your first license?


Seventeen. And you?

I got mine at 46. Who's giving out the prizes?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll
topic, scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement for radio amateurs.

Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...

Why is it a "Personal Attack" to disagree with your comments,
Len?

It is also a personal attack when you quote something Len has
written.

It seems that anyhting other than complete agreement is
considered a "Personal Attack" by Len.

You wanted FCC to deny amateur licenses to anyone
under the age of
14, regardless of their ability to pass the required tests.

Yet you have not produced one single bit of evidence
that the licensing
of people under the age of 14 has produced *any*
problems for the amateur radio service.

Not one example of an under-14 ham violating any rules,
getting an NAL
or enforcement letter, or even complaints from other hams.

Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)

You would forbid people more than twice as old from
getting an amateur
license, Len. Without any evidence.

Len's posts on the subject indicate that he has problems
with children
having done something which he himself has not attained.

Len has admitted he has a problem including children in
what he considers an "adult" activity.

How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)

Yes.

Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.

Why should they need parental supervision to operate? FCC,
the expert agency on US civil radio regulation, thinks they're
qualified.

My parents didn't supervise me or need to supervise me when I
operated
as a fourteen-year-old Novice. Did your parents ever
supervise you, Jim?

Not in my amateur radio operations. I was licensed at age 13, and was
the first amateur radio operator in my family.

But I was "in radio" a lot earlier, building receivers and such.
In fact, the way I learned Morse Code was to build a simple
receiver and code-practice oscillator from scavenged parts, and
listen to hams use it on the air. Also sending with the oscillator and
key. My Elmers were books.

Back in 1948, a 9-year-old local girl passed the Class B
exam. In front of the FCC examiner.

Still licensed and active, too.

This was back when the license test required diagram
drawing and had
essay questions. 13 wpm code, sending and receiving, too.
No Novice
class back then, either, it was Class B from a standing start.

Now of course her dad was a ham and she had lots of help.
But if the
FCC then and now thought young people were qualified to
be hams, and
you have no evidence of problems caused by their youth,
why should
there be an age limit?

You're writing of the late Jesse Bieberman's daughter?

Yes. W3KT is a legend in these parts. I met him a few times,
and the reputation is deserved.

Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go.

Why should they? You have not admitted that age
requirements for a ham
license are a bad idea.

He issued the comments to the Commission.
He never followed it up with
a retraction if he changed his mind.
All indications (even those in
this recent post) are that Len stills believes
that licensing children
is a bad thing.

Agreed. Perhaps we should quote that post....

They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.

I don't see it as the most hideous of gaffes, just one in a
long string of gaffes.

Just a bad idea.

Let us also not forget that Len accused the VEs and ARRL of "very mild
fraud" in connection with some preschoolers being licensed. He appears
to claim that no child that young could possibly pass the tests. Yet he
does not know any of the people involved.

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Here's a couple of plain, non-loaded questions for Len:

What problems has the licensing of people under the age
of 14 caused the amateur radio service?

What enforcement actions has the FCC pursued against
radio amateurs under the age of 14?

What should FCC do about the current licenses of
under-14 amateurs?


I doubt we'll get any straight answers, though.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Mike Coslo wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:


So at what age did you get your first license?


Seventeen. And you?

I got mine at 46. Who's giving out the prizes?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike, you're not affected either. So you need not be concerned.

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
Len's posts on the subject indicate that he has problems
with children
having done something which he himself has not attained.

Len has admitted he has a problem including children in
what he considers an "adult" activity.

From:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...6?dmode=source

Quoting Len Anderson's statements about himself:

"I've always had trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a
primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity. The
dialectical difference negation part is pure nonsense and far-liberal
pipedreaming."

Kinda says it all...

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the out of band french
radio
amateurs on six meters.

Len worked guys on 6m? When did that happen?

From downtown Dar es Salam.

When was Len in Dar es "Salam"?

Dave K8MN

wrote:

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
Len's posts on the subject indicate that he has problems
with children
having done something which he himself has not attained.

Len has admitted he has a problem including children in
what he considers an "adult" activity.

From:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...6?dmode=source

Quoting Len Anderson's statements about himself:

"I've always had trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a
primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity. The
dialectical difference negation part is pure nonsense and far-liberal
pipedreaming."

Kinda says it all...

I see a problem in Len's statement. Why should he have trouble
"integrating" youngsters in an activity in which he is not involved?

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll
topic, scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement for radio amateurs.

Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...

Why is it a "Personal Attack" to disagree with your comments,

Len?

It is also a personal attack when you quote something Len has
written.

It seems that anyhting other than complete agreement is
considered a "Personal Attack" by Len.

...and personal attacks by Len are just his way of debating the
issues, heh heh.

That pretty much sums it up, along with the four behaviors listed
on that website.

Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)

You would forbid people more than twice as old from
getting an amateur
license, Len. Without any evidence.

Len's posts on the subject indicate that he has problems
with children
having done something which he himself has not attained.

Len has admitted he has a problem including children in
what he considers an "adult" activity.

Good thing for guys like us that no such rule has ever
been seen as
necessary by the FCC.

Ever read the book "Radio Rescue"? True story:

Back in the early 1920s, a young boy in New York City became
the youngest ham in the country, being licensed at 10 or 11
years of age. He and his ham station were instrumental in
emergency communications during a Florida hurricane - all before
he was 14.

Len would have forbid him from getting a license.

Finland once had a rule where
no one under 15
could obtain a license. They've since done away with it.

Canada too, IIRC.

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100% sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement didn't
help cb's problems...

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)

Yes.

Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.

Why should they need parental supervision to operate? FCC,
the expert agency on US civil radio regulation, thinks they're
qualified.

My parents didn't supervise me or need to supervise me when I
operated
as a fourteen-year-old Novice. Did your parents ever
supervise you, Jim?

Not in my amateur radio operations. I was licensed at age 13, and
was
the first amateur radio operator in my family.

But I was "in radio" a lot earlier, building receivers and such.
In fact, the way I learned Morse Code was to build a simple
receiver and code-practice oscillator from scavenged parts, and
listen to hams use it on the air. Also sending with the oscillator
and
key. My Elmers were books.

And that worked for you. I learned the code in the Boy Scouts and
simply brushed up over several weeks. I was lucky enough to have
mentors in two different towns. I moved before W8MN could administer
the exam. W8MN arranged an introduction to two local Novices and the
fellow who ran the local TV sales and service shop in my new town.
Buzz
Collins K8CFT then administered my Novice exam.

Too cool!

Back in 1948, a 9-year-old local girl passed the Class B
exam. In front of the FCC examiner.

Still licensed and active, too.

You're writing of the late Jesse Bieberman's daughter?

Yes. W3KT is a legend in these parts. I met him a few times,
and the reputation is deserved.

I knew W3KT and thought he was a super gent.

Yep.

Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go.

Why should they? You have not admitted that age
requirements for a ham
license are a bad idea.

He issued the comments to the Commission.
He never followed it up with
a retraction if he changed his mind.
All indications (even those in
this recent post) are that Len stills believes
that licensing children
is a bad thing.

Agreed. Perhaps we should quote that post....

...and I note that you have done so. What about his comments to the
FCC
regarding a minimum age for amateur radio licensing? Can you come up
with them?

Anyone can. Just go to fcc.gov, search ECFS, using as criteria Len's
name and the proceeding number.

Of course it's a scan of a *paper* submission, because Len couldn't
figure out how to get ECFS to work for him back
then.

Most of the dozen-plus pages are a diatribe against Mike
Deignan, which is interesting because Mike turned out to
be a no-code-test person in his comments to FCC.

The age thing is last in the document.

It is curious that Len's comments were filed after the comment
period but before the end of the reply comment period. That and
the use of paper made it practically impossible for anyone to file
reply comments to Len's filing before the deadline.


They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.

I don't see it as the most hideous of gaffes, just one in a
long string of gaffes.

Just a bad idea.

Let us also not forget that Len accused the VEs and ARRL of "very
mild
fraud" in connection with some preschoolers being licensed. He
appears
to claim that no child that young could possibly pass the tests.
Yet he
does not know any of the people involved.

That isn't news though. Len has made a number of accusations about
the
ARRL being dishonest. He never back any of them up with a single
fact.

"Never defend your positions"....

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100% sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement didn't
help cb's problems...

It was because 18 is the "age of majority" for most legal
purposes. A minor couldn't be held liable.

Why it matters for CB and not for Amateur Radio is beyond me.

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

Perhaps because Len epitomizes CBers...?!?!

73

Steve, K4YZ

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100% sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement didn't
help cb's problems...

It was because 18 is the "age of majority" for most legal
purposes. A minor couldn't be held liable.

Why it matters for CB and not for Amateur Radio is beyond me.


I wonder if that is perhaps because ham radio goes back to a time when
people were believed to be responsible at a younger age even though they may
or may not have been able to sign contracts, etc. That was a time when
completing the 8th grade was still considered sufficient for most people and
they often then went to full time work rather than going on to more
schooling. They were considered adults at least functionally if not
legally. Even quite young children sometimes worked instead of going to
school.

On the other hand, CB was set up at a time when people were expected to stay
in school through high school and people's perceptions changed that
teenagers were still children rather than people in the early stages of
becoming adults.

Of course this is all just speculation but it's fun to think about.

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

Perhaps because Len epitomizes CBers...?!?!

73

Steve, K4YZ


It's impossible to tell from his postings. It would appear not that he
wants it like CB but that he hates amateur radio and amateur radio
operators.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100%
sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement
didn't
help cb's problems...

It was because 18 is the "age of majority" for most legal
purposes. A minor couldn't be held liable.

I disagree. Some minors can get driver's licenses in most places, which
is a far more dangerous activity than being allowed to use a 5 watt,
channelized, type-accepted 27 MHz cb transceiver according to cb rules.

Why it matters for CB and not for Amateur Radio is beyond me.

I think the real difference was that a cb permit required no test, no
skill, and no demonstration of ability of any kind except for the
ability to fill out the application form and send it in.

I think FCC thought, back when cb was created, that denying cb permits
to people under 18 would insure that the vast majority of cb users
would display mature, responsible on-air behavior that followed FCC
rules. Unfortunately it didn't work out that way.

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

Perhaps because Len epitomizes CBers...?!?!

Epitomizes or idolizes?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dee Flint wrote:
"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100% sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement
didn't
help cb's problems...

I wonder if that is perhaps because ham radio goes back to a
time when
people were believed to be responsible at a younger age even
though they may
or may not have been able to sign contracts, etc. That was a
time when
completing the 8th grade was still considered sufficient for
most people and
they often then went to full time work rather than going on to more

schooling. They were considered adults at least functionally
if not
legally. Even quite young children sometimes worked instead of
going to
school.

On the other hand, CB was set up at a time when people were
expected to stay
in school through high school and people's perceptions changed that

teenagers were still children rather than people in the early
stages of
becoming adults.

Class A and B cb go back to just after WW2. Yet IIRC, the age
requirement goes back to the very beginning.

Of course this is all just speculation but it's fun to think
about.

The most important factor is that an age requirement did *not*
insure mature, law-abiding behavior on cb.

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

Perhaps because Len epitomizes CBers...?!?!

It's impossible to tell from his postings. It would appear not
that he
wants it like CB but that he hates amateur radio and amateur
radio
operators.

Since Len doesn't answer questions in a straightforward fashion,
there's no way to know for sure. But Len never has anything bad
to say about cb, and rarely if ever has anything good to say about
amateur radio. That tells a lot.

I've pretty much copied your killfiling of Len's tirades, Dee. The
analogy of the fence concealing the landfill is excellent.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age
requirement
for radio amateurs.

He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the out of band
french
radio
amateurs on six meters.

Len worked guys on 6m? When did that happen?

From downtown Dar es Salam.

When was Len in Dar es "Salam"?

Dave K8MN

He heard they were having an opening to out of band Frenchmen on 6
meters and decided to check in on it. The one amateur op he found had
the event sewed up, so he returned.

wrote:

Ever read the book "Radio Rescue"? True story:

Back in the early 1920s, a young boy in New York City became
the youngest ham in the country, being licensed at 10 or 11
years of age. He and his ham station were instrumental in
emergency communications during a Florida hurricane - all before
he was 14.

Len would have forbid him from getting a license.

There is no law that forbids anyone the use of amateur radio in a life
or death emergency.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Dave K8MN

Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

Kelly has already gone on record as having began his amateur career
sans any licensing whatsoever.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:

[snip]


I've pretty much copied your killfiling of Len's tirades, Dee. The
analogy of the fence concealing the landfill is excellent.

73 de Jim, N2EY


I can't take credit for that analogy however. I forget who did post it.

However, I probably would not object strongly to a landfill as it provides a
necessary and useful function in our society.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

From: "Dee Flint" on Sat, Mar 12 2005 8:32 am

"K4YZ" wrote in message
roups.com...

wrote:

btw, when cb required a license, there was an age requirement.
I think it was 18, but it could have been 15 - I'm not 100% sure
because I was never involved in cb. Yet that age requirement didn't
help cb's problems...

It was because 18 is the "age of majority" for most legal
purposes. A minor couldn't be held liable.

Why it matters for CB and not for Amateur Radio is beyond me.

I wonder if that is perhaps because ham radio goes back to a time when

people were believed to be responsible at a younger age even though
they may
or may not have been able to sign contracts, etc. That was a time
when
completing the 8th grade was still considered sufficient for most
people and
they often then went to full time work rather than going on to more
schooling. They were considered adults at least functionally if not
legally. Even quite young children sometimes worked instead of going
to
school.

Tsk. "Ham" radio existed prior to 1920 and the
ratification of the 19th Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution. [hint: women got the right to vote]

The voting age of U.S. citizens was lowered to 18
in 1971 with ratification of the 26th Amendment.

On the other hand, CB was set up at a time when people were expected
to stay
in school through high school and people's perceptions changed that
teenagers were still children rather than people in the early stages
of
becoming adults.

"CB" (as you morseaholics know it only on the 11
meter band) was created in 1958.

So, teenagers are NOT expected to go to school
nowadays?!?!?

Of course this is all just speculation but it's fun to think about.

Tsk. Everyone is losing it while having a gay
old time personally attacking one individual in
here. :-)

Perhaps Len wants amateur radio to be more like cb...

Perhaps because Len epitomizes CBers...?!?!

It's impossible to tell from his postings.

Really? ALL because I advocate an elimination of
the morse code test for an amateur radio license?

"Incroyable!" shouted the illegal 6 meter Frenchman.

It would appear not that he wants it like CB but that he hates amateur
radio and amateur radio
operators.

Tsk. Are you feeling abused? Not loved because
you do morse code and find out few others care?

Perk yourself up, buy some clothes. I heard there
are some neat things on Ebay. Like long-sleeved
tees with neat little morse code phrases on them.
Better hurry and get your bid in...lots of beefy
morsemen are clamoring for that tee, paying good
bucks to look sexy. :-)

Or, you can form your own HATE group, targeting
evil, wicked, mean and nasty CB! Shout to the
world that they are the Antichrist of Radio,
illegal lawbreakers all who are the spawn of
satan! Write your congresscritter today!

So...ALL who do not like morse code ALL HATE
amateur radio operators? Of course you think so.
You are a morseman (in the gender neutral case,
of course...with morse no one can hear your
orgasmic screams of delight when you get "good
copy").

Join FISTS. Let your love begin! :-)

From Brian Burke on Sat, Mar 12, 9:23 am

wrote:
Ever read the book "Radio Rescue"? True story:

Back in the early 1920s, a young boy in New York City became
the youngest ham in the country, being licensed at 10 or 11
years of age. He and his ham station were instrumental in
emergency communications during a Florida hurricane - all before
he was 14.

Len would have forbid him from getting a license.

There is no law that forbids anyone the use of amateur radio in a life

or death emergency.

Irrelevant to Jimmy Who, Brian, he lives IN the past.

Indicative of that is writing "...would have forbid"
instead of the usual (proper) way of past tense in
saying "...would have forbade."

Jimmy was THERE, saving the world through ham radio
valiantly fighting all oppressors with his mighty
macho morse key.

1920 was 85 years ago. A few things have changed
in public safety agencies in those 85 years...
except in the romance novels of amateur radio
where Kode is King and it always works through
all emergencies, etc., etc., etc.

If we don't love, honor, cherish, and obey the
mighty macho morsemen, we "HATE" them and "all of
amateur radio," too! :-(

From Brian Burke on Sat, Mar 12, 9:33 am:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.


Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

Absolutely! They KNEW in advance all the glory,
majesty, nobility of amateur radio and its
attendant rank, title, privileges well before
age 14! They were destined for Greatness from
birth and, to this day, demand all love and respect
their royal titles.

All through loving, cherishing, honoring, and
obeying (the league on) morsemanship!

Kelly has already gone on record as having began his amateur career
sans any licensing whatsoever.

The Katapult King is above the law. He is from
Philly where all eat hoagies and fill their autos
with "gaz!" :-)

If we don't love, honor, cherish, and obey the
Mighty Macho Moresemen, we all "HATE" amateur
radio!

Tsk, tsk.

bb wrote:

wrote:

Ever read the book "Radio Rescue"? True story:

Back in the early 1920s, a young boy in New York City became
the youngest ham in the country, being licensed at 10 or 11
years of age. He and his ham station were instrumental in
emergency communications during a Florida hurricane - all before
he was 14.

Len would have forbid him from getting a license.

There is no law that forbids anyone the use of amateur radio in a life
or death emergency.

That's right, "bb". All the guy would have to have done would be to
quickly learn to send and receive morse code and put together or find
some radio equipment and learn to use it--all very straightforward.

Dave K8MN

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Dave K8MN

Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

You must not be reading much of the material. Jim stated that he
obtained his license at thirteen. Would a minimum age of fourteen have
prevented his obtaining an amateur radio license at thirteen? You bet.

I obtained my license at age fourteen. How could a minimum age of
fourteen have presented a problem?

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Dave K8MN

Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have
prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

You must not be reading much of the material.

Correct. What clued you in? Perhaps the question I asked???

You know, I don't hang on every word that Jim types.

Jim stated that he
obtained his license at thirteen.

Which I did not read. Thus the question. See how it works???

Would a minimum age of fourteen have
prevented his obtaining an amateur radio license at thirteen? You
bet.

Not if he had approached amateur radio like Brian Kelly/W3RV did.

I obtained my license at age fourteen. How could a minimum age of
fourteen have presented a problem?

Dave K8MN

It wouldn't have, David. You are an outsider WRT such an age
restriction, so I don't know why you are concerned.

wrote:
From Brian Burke on Sat, Mar 12, 9:33 am:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.


Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have
prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

Absolutely! They KNEW in advance all the glory,
majesty, nobility of amateur radio and its
attendant rank, title, privileges well before
age 14! They were destined for Greatness from
birth and, to this day, demand all love and respect
their royal titles.

All through loving, cherishing, honoring, and
obeying (the league on) morsemanship!

I just don't know why these guys get so concerned over arbitrary
requirements, especially when they don't affect them.

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age, without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have
prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

You must not be reading much of the material.

Correct. What clued you in? Perhaps the question I asked???


You know, I don't hang on every word that Jim types.

Jim stated that he
obtained his license at thirteen.

Which I did not read. Thus the question. See how it works???

I certainly do. You have comments and questions but haven't bothered to
read the material.

Would a minimum age of fourteen have
prevented his obtaining an amateur radio license at thirteen? You
bet.

Not if he had approached amateur radio like Brian Kelly/W3RV did.

You'll likely want to take that issue up with W3RV. Make sure you've
read all the applicable material.

I obtained my license at age fourteen. How could a minimum age of
fourteen have presented a problem?

It wouldn't have, David. You are an outsider WRT such an age
restriction, so I don't know why you are concerned.

Guess what, "bb", there's likely another piece of information of which
you are not aware. There was no age limit for amateur radio licensing
when I obtained my license. Despite the efforts of Leonard H. Anderson,
the FCC has still not seen fit to impose a minimum age limit.

Good luck on your quest for knowledge.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

You would deny licenses to people based solely on age,
without
*any* evidence of age-related problems.

That's just plain wrong.

But we'll never see agreement on that from Leonard.

Would an arbitrary barrier, such as an age 14 barrier, have
prevented
either you or Jim from obtaining an amateur license?

You must not be reading much of the material.

Correct. What clued you in? Perhaps the question I asked???


You know, I don't hang on every word that Jim types.

Jim stated that he
obtained his license at thirteen.

Which I did not read. Thus the question. See how it works???

I certainly do. You have comments and questions but haven't bothered
to
read the material.

Jim's complaint concerns Len's wish for an arbitrary age 14 requirement
into the amateur service.

Would a minimum age of fourteen have
prevented his obtaining an amateur radio license at thirteen?
You
bet.

Not if he had approached amateur radio like Brian Kelly/W3RV did.

You'll likely want to take that issue up with W3RV. Make sure you've
read all the applicable material.

Kelly has stated that his first amateur experience was as a bootlegger.
How much more discussion is required?

I obtained my license at age fourteen. How could a minimum age
of
fourteen have presented a problem?

It wouldn't have, David. You are an outsider WRT such an age
restriction, so I don't know why you are concerned.

Guess what, "bb", there's likely another piece of information of
which
you are not aware. There was no age limit for amateur radio
licensing
when I obtained my license. Despite the efforts of Leonard H.
Anderson,
the FCC has still not seen fit to impose a minimum age limit.

So don't concern yourself. Len's suggestion never has and never will
affect you.

bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

Jim stated that he
obtained his license at thirteen.

Which I did not read. Thus the question. See how it works???

I certainly do. You have comments and questions but haven't bothered
to
read the material.

Jim's complaint concerns Len's wish for an arbitrary age 14 requirement
into the amateur service.

So you got the first part but seemingly missed some vital information.

Would a minimum age of fourteen have
prevented his obtaining an amateur radio license at thirteen?
You
bet.

Not if he had approached amateur radio like Brian Kelly/W3RV did.

You'll likely want to take that issue up with W3RV. Make sure you've
read all the applicable material.

Kelly has stated that his first amateur experience was as a bootlegger.
How much more discussion is required?

None with me.

I obtained my license at age fourteen. How could a minimum age
of
fourteen have presented a problem?

It wouldn't have, David. You are an outsider WRT such an age
restriction, so I don't know why you are concerned.

Guess what, "bb", there's likely another piece of information of
which
you are not aware. There was no age limit for amateur radio
licensing
when I obtained my license. Despite the efforts of Leonard H.
Anderson,
the FCC has still not seen fit to impose a minimum age limit.

So don't concern yourself. Len's suggestion never has and never will
affect you.

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

Dave K8MN