Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

Are we self policing or not?

Should we be self policing?

AOF:

The fcc has an avenue where ideas for change, restructuring and progress
can be introduced.

In the past, the ARRL seems to quickly leap to the forefront of this
process, claim they represent all amateurs and lobby for the issues in the
way they would them implemented... a vast influx of new people may be
able to knock that strangle hold which a few at the bottle-neck were able
to achieve--loose... change appears on the way, time will tell... after
decades of decline and stagnation, cures are not to had over-night.

John


On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:58:12 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:

Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

Are we self policing or not?

Should we be self policing?

AOF:

You know, there is an experiment which was done in the pursuit of studying
animal behavior and psychology: (and lets' face it, humans are animals)

A frog was tossed into a pan of water which was dis-comfortably warm--he
jumped out immediately to seek a cooler spot.

A frog was tossed into a pan of water which as dangerously warm--same
occurred, frog left for cooler areas.

Now, a frog is placed into a pan of nice cool water to its' liking, and
the water ever so slowly warmed. Even when the temperature climbs to the
point where the frog expires, rolls over, and becomes SK (no more croaks
ever!) it remains within the pan of water. All of the biological
safeguards which uncounted eons of time had given that frog to escape
danger have been defeated, and all because it happened so gradually...

So is the saga of amateur radio... and it has taken decades... now comes
the wake-up call.

John

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:58:12 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:

Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

Are we self policing or not?

Should we be self policing?

an_old_friend wrote:

Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

Where does it suggest in FCC rules that you are allowed to deviate
from the letter, Mark?

And who's going to be the arbitrator of what is "rule" and what is
"intent"?

Part 97 of the FCC Rules and Regulations are set up to do both,
but on a limited basis.

The "Basis and Purpose" of the ARS as defined in 97.1 establishes
"intent" for the deployment of the Amateur Radio service. But in that
"intent" does not set any "rules" for operating.

The remainder of Part 97, for the most part, makes specific do's
and don'ts, ie: operating bands, power limits, identification, etc.

The Constitution of the United States is a document drawn up in
such a way as to be intentionally susceptible to "interpretation" and
change as current needs dictate.

RULES are just that...rules. They usually specify certain things
you MUST do, things you MAY do and certain things you must NOT do.

Although not always successful, they are written so as to be as
unambiguous as possible.

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

That's what the rule making process is all about, and people
already use it every day. As for "hiding", what are you talking about?
You either comply with what is written or you don't.

Are we self policing or not?

To the degree allowed by law. Then the law steps in.

Should we be self policing?

What's your alternative?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:

Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

Where does it suggest in FCC rules that you are allowed to deviate
from the letter, Mark?

Excellent question

And who's going to be the arbitrator of what is "rule" and what is
"intent"?

Excellent question

Part 97 of the FCC Rules and Regulations are set up to do both,
but on a limited basis.

The "Basis and Purpose" of the ARS as defined in 97.1 establishes
"intent" for the deployment of the Amateur Radio service. But in that
"intent" does not set any "rules" for operating.

The remainder of Part 97, for the most part, makes specific do's
and don'ts, ie: operating bands, power limits, identification, etc.

The Constitution of the United States is a document drawn up in
such a way as to be intentionally susceptible to "interpretation" and
change as current needs dictate.

RULES are just that...rules. They usually specify certain things
you MUST do, things you MAY do and certain things you must NOT do.

Although not always successful, they are written so as to be as
unambiguous as possible.

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

That's what the rule making process is all about, and people
already use it every day. As for "hiding", what are you talking about?
You either comply with what is written or you don't.

Trifle touchy arent we

Are we self policing or not?

To the degree allowed by law. Then the law steps in.

Should we be self policing?

What's your alternative?

Excellent question

Steve, K4YZ

an_old_friend wrote:
Should Hams in their operator respect the intent of the rules or just
obey the letter?

IMHO, hams should respect the intent of the rules as well as the exact
letter of the rules.

The trouble is that different hams have different ideas as to what
the intent really is.

Should hams Hide behind the rules or stand up and say you know I think
this is right and the rules are wrong

If someone thinks a rule can be improved, they should say so. However,
they should understand that simply because they think a rule isn't the
way it should be doesn't make it 'wrong'.

I don't see how someone can "hide behind the rules".

Are we self policing or not?

Should we be self policing?

A lot depends on what is meant by "self-policing".

IMHO, hams themselves can do the following:

- Inform fellow hams of observed or suspected violations ("Did you know
your signal is so wide it's bringing up the repeater on the adjacent
frequency?"

- Set a good example in rules compliance

- Inform FCC of uncorrected violations

- Have nothing to do with those who commit repeated and/or serious
violations.

But enforcement by FCC is still needed. That doesn't mean FCC is
expected to do everything, however.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 17 Aug 2005 09:36:19 -0700 wrote:

| I don't see how someone can "hide behind the rules".

How about someone operating in such a way that they are in literal
compliance with the rule, but many others believe they are violating the
intent. Sorry, I can't give an example of such a situation; maybe one can
be found from other people's experience.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/ http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

John I have had to sit in class and watch that one on film, I dropped
the class the next day

AOF:

Well, the experiment is continuing. Such an experiment began with the
"Radio Act of 1912" when the first amateur license was issued, it
continues to this day and beyond... a review of the data gained after
close to 100 years should show us what has been done right, and what is in
need of change...

John

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:15:30 -0700, an old friend wrote:

John I have had to sit in class and watch that one on film, I dropped
the class the next day

AOF:

.... make note, I do see your point.

The poor frog gave its' all to teach us an important lesson--and so few
have ever paid attention... waste of a damn good frog if you ask me!

John

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:15:30 -0700, an old friend wrote:

John I have had to sit in class and watch that one on film, I dropped
the class the next day