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:

Excellent question

Excellent question

Trifle touchy arent we

Excellent question

Well that was a meaningful exchange.

Steve, K4YZ

well stveie hacks a post apart
K4YZ wrote:
an old friend wrote:

Excellent question

Excellent question

Trifle touchy arent we

Excellent question

Well that was a meaningful exchange.

Gee even when a guy agrees with you, you flame him

Steve, K4YZ