an_old_idiot wrote:


My rig will not tranmit out band so I am covered there

So what about the sub-bands you are allowed/not allowed to operate on
with you tech license? Do you know which part of the band you are
allowed to operate according to your license? Your Yeasu rig sure
doesn't know. Do you just depend on something else to keep you legal
instead of knowing the rules yourself? Looks like if your rig isn't
smart enough know the rules you're in trouble, because you sure don't
seem that smart.

I am required to obey
not understand

Nothing in part 97 says I have to understand it

So how do you intend to obey rules you don't understand?

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Answer my question, please...

How do you comply with the regulations if you aren't "familiar"
with them...???

well the regular you are referring to by punching the botton on my
radio, Yeaszu and FCC have seen to it that it generates legal types of
signals wether i know the letter codes or not

You are responsible for the proper operation of your radio
station.

agreed

Yeasu (NOT "Yeaszu") is NOT responsible for the emissions of the
radio.

agreed but it can none the less be relied on to to make the right
emissions, indeed I can'r tell if it were not neither can most Hams

Can you test YOUR rig to see that it complies with the rules



My rig will not tranmit out band so I am covered there

Bravo Sierra.

Alpha Tango


E V E R Y RF generating device has the potential of radiating a
signal other than the one designed for.

yep it does your point

If your radio was doing how would YOU know


Ask Lennie.

why you aran't saying something I don't know


Obeying the rules is all that is required.In the case of mode which
sparked this thread.

How do you comply with the regulations if you aren't "familiar"
with them...???

several methods are possible such apllaince operating

"Apllaince operating" does not make you familiar with FCC rules
and regulations.

never said it did


It makes you an "apllaince" operator...that's all.

and makes it a very high likelyhood that I am following the rules


not operating also insures I don't break the rules

And keeps them free of your "dreck".

But the method would work for keeping in complaince


one could count on simple luck (not wise but possible)

I am sure there are additional examples

None of which meet the letter of the spirit of the law.

The letter of spirit of the law?

Auf anglish Bittie

I am only required to obey the letter of the law. I don't have to obey
the Spirit of the law, if I can even devine such without a seance/ The
letter of the spririt in nonsense


SO you're bascially saying that you don't care what the rules are,
you'll just do what you darn well please.

nope not at all

never said that

don't need to what number letter combination is USB in order to use
it, I push a botton on the rig and it does that for me

How do you comply with the regulations if you aren't "familiar"
with them...???

asked and answered

Asked and answered with stupid answers.

stupid to your mind sure maybe but not incorrect


(...as if I expected anything different...?!?!)

And by the way...Yes you ARE required to be familiar with Part 97.

Ask the FCC.

Nope

Uh huh...about what I figured...

I am required to obey
not understand

And you STILL have not adequately explained how you can "obey"
laws that you do not understand.

I have indeed done so I given you an example abolsutely certian of
compling and 2 others that are safe enough

what more is required



Nothing in part 97 says I have to understand it

Your signature on FCC form 660 an the provisions of the
Communications Act of 1934 in Section 310 and others do.

not sure I ever signed a form 660 may have not sure

But the courts have ruled that no one need understand tany rule or law
in order to be held to it, therefore it must be legaly possible to obey
without understanding


And yes, you're supposed to know them. You sign the document.

Supposed, gee that isn't required merely supposed




The line on the back of your license where it says you will abide
by FCC rules and regualtions as thhey pertain to your Amateur Radio
station.


...Abide by the FCC rules and regulation... nothing about understanding
them there

another Stevie LIE

Nope.

yes it says will abide not will understand


You cannot "abide" by laws you do not understand.

yes you can


I am merely required to the USE the airwaves correctly. If i di by use
Tarrot definiation the FCC doesn't care.

Sure they do.

prove it. or even show something that suggests it

Done.

nope


http://www.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices

so what nothing on the pages sates or suggests that the FCC cares
wether the cited enities knew the rules


Show me a Tarot (...not Tarrot) card deck that has Part 97 in it.

Tarrot Torot and Tarot are all vaild speling of the words

and you question merely shows you ignorance of the Tarrot

I know that it's spelled "Tarot" in English.

how ? when did you become the supreme arbiter of english


Indeed in large discussions I generaly id every transmisstion since it
might not get back around to me in 10 minutes

If you didn't cause RF to be emitted, it doesn't matter.

not by what I hear maybe I just don't understand, and htta is what what
some of the old timers claim very loudy at time when they break and
play radio cop

Perhaps if you knew the laws that you are governed by you wouldn't
have to depend on "...not by what I hear..."


perhaps if everyone was a decent human being there would be not need
for laws

or what if angel danced on pin heads


But givent he behavooir of others I choose to ID every signal to avoid
the wanna be radio cops My choice and the FCC doesn't care


And yes, you DON'T understand. Being wilfully ignorant doesn't
excuse you from compliance.

No it doesn't never said it did, but complaince and even willfull
ignorance are possible and legal


Instaead the turth is you up to stalking and harassment but everyone
(except perhaps you) knows that

Nope. You came here. No one forced you.

so

You claim you have the right to stalk and harrass anyone that comes in
your feild of vision?

I'm not stalking anyone nor am I harassing anyone.

lair


You voluntarilly reply to these posts.

so

YOU made the posts concerning my sexuality etc

you did so with the intent to harras



No one dragged you here.

so


But so far YOU keep stealing all my glory by beating me to it.

Then shut up if showing me an idoit is your sole goal and you you feel
I am beating you to it

There's that "idoit" thing again.

so

So you've proven yourself wrong.

no I haven't

you make the claim I have to know the rules in order to obey them

you prove it

I claim it is possible to obey the rules without understanding them

I have done so


Over and over.

yes over and over ignorant cracker


You're holding at 100%.

You just manged to prove YOURself a lair

I am not a lair. Nor am I a liar.

yes you are

Nope. You SAY I am a liar, but you've not yet shown a single one.
(Websters refers...)

I Have many times, mst ly by traping you in your inconsistanies



and you say Hans can't defend himself?

Nope. That's YOU "forging" my words.

then explain what you are doing

I've not forged a single word, Markie.

yes you have


Look up the definition of "forged" in Websters.

do you prefer the word altered?


No. Society can set the parameters by which rude treatment is
determined.

not ture

Absolutely "ture".

not ture


In no way shape or form did Hans cross that line.

says you?

Says everyone EXCEPT you.

say no one BUT you

Hans hasn't even said he did not being condesending


even IF I grant your...(SNIP)

You're not empowered to "grant" me anything, Markie.

yes I am, indeed you hold no power over that I don't grant



You haven't got the proper genetics.

what?

judging by the health of your now dead daughter mine are at least as
proper as yours


YOU did, however....

Auf anglish bitte is a phrase forbidden by Society?

Where did I say it was? (Even if you continue to mispell the
germanic reference to "English"

My response to Hans was

Auf Anglish Bitte

you claim I cross a line in something forbidden by society therefore
you calim my response was forbidden by socity


Bull####

Yes, You are.

more alterations Stevie



I think they need to disperse flyers in your town warning them
about you...No one should allow a 12 year old alone with you.

and more libel from you

Nope.

yes it is


Fact.

Stevie being fact does nopt bear on wether something is Libel



Based upon your own words.

what words?


If I thought you had anything worth taking that is enough to take you
to court for Stevie, at least in the Opinion of a paralegal (my partner
not me)

Uh huh...riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

yea right

you are too poor to be worth it


I don't know who the bigger idiot would be...

You for trying to file such a "case" considering the tons of
admissions of sexual perversion and wilfull mistruthfulness on your
part,

Being homosexaul or bisexual is not ilegal, nor lieing on the Interent

you impling I am a pedophile is and remain Libel (or slander depneding
on wether the net is viewed as written or spoken)

Or your "partner" for suggesting such might be possible
considering the aforementioned evidence that exists in Google archives.

Huh?

again I can free admit to everything you I posted none of which make me
a pedophile as you imply


Then if you "grant" me these "rights" why do you haraas me for using
them?

I don't "grant" you anything.

then you were lieing when you made the statement

I never "granted" you anything. Those are YOUR words...Not mine,
you "forger" ! ! !

your words are below agian

you granted or agreed or conceeded or whatever but you said I had the
rigt below\


" Actually, I consider you to have MORE rights than I consider
necesssary for myself.

Being an idiot is one of them. Being a chronic liar is yet
another.

Yes, you are an idiot and you are a chronic liar.

and you yourself say I have that right

so in hassling me you admit to being a lair


I am not people bashing.

you only engage in personal attack

It's not an attack.

it sure is


It's the truth.

If it were true that has nothing to do with wether it is a personal
attack or not

the 2 words have different meanings

you edit stuff to cover your tracks

Nope.

yes you

I "edit" stuff to keep these posts from being yards and yards
long.

you edit them in distorting ways that convently cover many of your lies


Anyone can go back and review them if they care to...Even you....

and everyone know you distort lie and evade at almost every
oppurturnity


Folks can just surf Google under any of your "KONSTANS"
nomme-de-guerre's you have used.

your point? or do you have one?

Sure.

My point is that anyone can surf Google under any of your
"KONSTANS" nomme-de-guerre's you've used and see what kind of a lyig
creep you are.

what is wrong with using my name online?

you have changed Call sign a few times (4 changes 3 calls by my count)

and where I do deny that I do lie

I do reservse to right to point out where you make up things I never
said, but I am not honest about many facts in my bio. I have my
reasons, and it is my right.



They can also surf KB9RQZ, "MWMORGAN" and a plethora of othr names
you've come and gone under as you bounce from ISP to ISP...

you oppose shoping for better deals on interent?


Speaking of which, I can only hope and pray that you finally
ditched that ISP you alleged was charging you $5/hr.

well I still subcribe to their service for use when I travel, since the
5$/hour rate came wit the use of a 1-800number to reach them was
cheaper than paying long distance


Only in that you suggest something improper. My REAL intent was
to try and get you to spontaneously issue Hans an apology for your
smart mouth and abuse of his rendering of information to you.

That is an improper intent, and one doomed to failure

Doomed to failure, perhaps.

a begining boyo

Huh?

a beging that you begin realize something boyo


Not improper, however.

It is imporper

What's "imporper"...???

aren't you claiming to be the sole judge of that Stevie and you don't
know


Nope. If you weren't such an idiot you'd remember what you wrote
a week ago.

making up stuff as a point of fact my partner is female was avoiding it
becuase it wasn't and isn't any of your affair

Your sister? Or mom?

more libel


No self-respecting English speaking woman I know would
tolerate a professed liar like you unless they were in your gene pool
or your will.

you have a limited aquantanceship, but then she is in my will of course
isn't your wifein yours?

as to wether she is self respecting you have never met me now you
presume to judge a women you have not even read her words?


So he's "guilty" for imparting MORE knowledge than you are capble
of processing...

He imparted no knowledge something you have already agreed

No, I have NOT agreed.

Hans clearly DID "impart knowledge"...YOU, on the otherhand, were
just too stupid to assimilate it.

whcih means you agree he imparted nothing to me, for what ever reason



But you STILL couldn't be polite to him and ask for a better
clarification if you didn't understand...?!?!

I did ask politely

I said "Auf Anglish Bitte"

Why do you insist on trying to look like you can speak German when
you clearly can't even do it in English?

huh?

I am trying to make it look like I speak german?

news to me


Auf Anglish bitte

oder auf Deutche bitte

prehaps you will make more sense in german

If I wrote Je parle Fransse that would I was trying to show people I
speak french?


I could have said "answer the question asked ####head" or other far
ruder responses

You basically said that anyway. That WAS the nature, if not
verbatim, response.

no it wasn't


I OCCASSIONALLY transpose "h" and "a"...

I can't recallseeing the word have speeled right by you in days

Becasue you haven't been paying attention.

Scroll back.

have done can't find where you spell have correctly

You do seem to spell haven't ok but not Have itself it s a stranage
thing

As opposed to your near-every sentence errors?

"judge not lest ye be judged"

I'll take my chances.

you certainly do


If you don't consider it pertinent to do so without his asking,
then you're obviously not sincere.

Not at all

Absolutely.

Stevie YOU insting on means it will not happen if hans asks I will
consider it If Jim Ney asks I will consider it, but the more you go the
less likely i will do it

I do nothing to please you

Sure you do.

reallY then of course what is your beef?


And who's "Jim Ney"...???

Jim you he is round here


Hans (nor anyone else) is entitled an apology where no offense was
intended with indaicating in some form he was offended

Obviously he was.

obviously was what?

auf anglish bitte

If you're going to ask a question, Markie, regardless of the
language you're trying to abuse, please use the proper punctuation.

why?


And what part of "offended" do you not understand?

no part but Hans and Hans alone is a proper judge of wether Hans was
offended, not Stevie, Unless of you are posting as Hans yourself and as
Stevie

Hans can ask and I'll consider it, Bill Sohl could ask and Id consdier
it etc, I don't do it for Stevie


And like I said...if you haven't got the cajones to just offer him
a sincere apology on your own, it's not..well...sincere...

oh I see what you mean now took you long enough to say what you mean
(if you are saying what you mean now)...(SNIP)

Huh?

clear enough slerly than your intent has been


Then you have been chasing a wild goose form...(SNIP)

A "wild goose form"..?!?!

Is that as opposed to a tame goose form?

How can you tell?

Don't you know?


(UNSNIP)...moment one in this thread since of course If aplogize to
Hans now you will not consider it sincere, so logicly thier is
certianly no point in my doing so

Sure there is...

Because it's the right thing to do.

according to you No it would not be

since IF i were to apoligize to Hans without meaning it then I would be
making another LIE, and to you lying is basical evil

so NOw you want to do what you take me to task for all the time?

Lie?

If that's not reason enough, I don't know what is...

you got that right Stevie you don't what is

Steve, K4YZ

Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:
an_old_idiot wrote:

forgery btw


My rig will not tranmit out band so I am covered there

So what about the sub-bands you are allowed/not allowed to operate on
with you tech license? Do you know which part of the band you are
allowed to operate according to your license? Your Yeasu rig sure
doesn't know. Do you just depend on something else to keep you legal
instead of knowing the rules yourself? Looks like if your rig isn't
smart enough know the rules you're in trouble, because you sure don't
seem that smart.

gee what part of which Band has space restircted from tech operating

Tech like myself Have no prevlidges below 30 MHZ and all prevlidges
above


Don't YOU know that?

I did not say I depended on .. but that I could pretty much if I chose

But there is NO current need for me to know much of anything below 30
MHZ except what concerns the aurgments I may make

One's abilty to follow the rules is improved by some understanding of
the rules, However may contention that it is possible not to understand
and legaly operate satnds


I am required to obey
not understand

Nothing in part 97 says I have to understand it

So how do you intend to obey rules you don't understand?

asked and answered

Still No answer to this Stevie

b.b. wrote:
b.b. wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:

Two, No I am not required to be famiar with them, I am merely required
to obey them.

BBBWWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! !

I am going to wait with bated breath while you try to spin up an
explanation as to how you are not required to "be familiar" with the
regulations of the radio service in which you are a licensee, yet you
ARE required to obey them.... ! ! !

break


"Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

IOW, a person can be ignorant of the law, and yet they must obey the
law.

Or are you too ignorant to see that?

Why Steve no answer?

Still No answer and yet you seem to have come and gone for the day

That is becuase it is true

"an_old_friend" wrote


Can you test YOUR rig to see that it complies with the rules


Yes, as required by §97.103(a) and §97.105(a).

Can't you?

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote


Can you test YOUR rig to see that it complies with the rules



why did you edit out the fact i was asking Stevie

Yes, as required by =A797.103(a) and =A797.105(a).

Sec. 97.105 Control operator duties.


(a) The control operator must ensure the immediate proper operation

of the station, regardless of the type of control.
(b) A station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent
permitted by the privileges authorized for the class of operator
license
held by the control operator.


Sec. 97.103 Station licensee responsibilities.

(a) The station licensee is responsible for the proper operation of

the station in accordance with the FCC Rules. When the control operator

is a different amateur operator than the station licensee, both persons

are equally responsible for proper operation of the station.
(b) The station licensee must designate the station control
operator. The FCC will presume that the station licensee is also the
control operator, unless documentation to the contrary is in the
station
records.
(c) The station licensee must make the station and the station
records available for inspection upon request by an FCC representative.

When deemed necessary by an EIC to assure compliance with the FCC
Rules,
the station licensee must maintain a record of station operations
containing such items of information as the EIC may require in accord
with Sec. 0.314(x) of the FCC Rules.


nothing in the citied section reqiuring me to be able to test the
emission of my rig

=20
Can't you?

By that I don't have too

=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

an_old_friend wrote:
gee what part of which Band has space restircted from tech operating

Tech like myself Have no prevlidges below 30 MHZ and all prevlidges
above


Don't YOU know that?

I am surprised you do as you say you don't need to understand the rules.

an_old_friend wrote:


Can you test YOUR rig to see that it complies with the rules

Sure can. Can you? No? I believe that somewhere in the rules it say you
should be able to. But then you don't understand the rules.

"an_old_friend" wrote


By that I don't have too



If you are responsible for proper operation of your station (and those rules
apply equally above 30MHz as they do below), then you must have a method to
determine that your station complies with the Rules. How do you do that at your
station?

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote


By that I don't have too




If you are responsible for proper operation of your station (and those rules
apply equally above 30MHz as they do below), then you must have a method to
determine that your station complies with the Rules. How do you do that at your
station?

73, de Hans, K0HB




He hasn't a clue, he just hopes his radio will always work properly and
even if it does it can't compensate for any misunderstanding on his part
about operating it properly.