About Us

October 30th 05, 01:50 PM

wrote:
wrote:
On 28 Oct 2005 18:55:32 -0700, wrote:

wrote:

Tsk, tsk, tsk...I think Jimmie-James is all for children
VOTING in elections!

I don't know who "Jimmie-James" is supposed to be, Len. But I'm
not "all for children VOTING in elections". I'm just opposed
to a minimum age requirement for an amateur radio license.

Jim in answering the post I am afraid you just lied above

Where?

Len uses multiple names in his posts. I'm not sure who he means by
"Jimmie-James". Is it me, or Jim Weir (who posts as "RSTEngineering")
or somebody else?

Then you must be dim-witted.

If he means me, *why* can't he just call me Jim, or N2EY?

All this confusion, then you go ahead and answer af if it were you he
was referring to. That is the lie that Mark refers to.

And it's a fact that I'm not "all for children VOTING in elections".

Why would you care? He's not talking about what you are in favor
of, is he?

I'm just opposed to a minimum age requirement for an amateur radio
license.

Good for you. Len is in favor of an age requirement.

Or perhaps, it is okay for children having state
drivers' licenses...

I don't think it's okay for children to have driver's
licenses. I'm
just opposed to a minimum age requirement for an amateur radio license.

and Len supports the notion at this point

Why?

Why not? The books are full of minimum age requirements for various
things.

Can he or anyone else supply *ANY* evidence that the lack of
an age requirement has had *any* negative effects on the amateur
radio service?

We've had licensed amateur radio in the USA for 93 years now. In all
that time there has *never* been an age requirement. So if
the lack of an age requirement is a problem, there should be
plenty of evidence by now. Yet Len provides no evidence, but
wants an age requirement of 14 years for anyone to have a US amateur
license.

If you look at FCC enforcement letters, the age of the worst
offenders is much closer to Len's age than to 14 years....

It's possible that yet another arbitrary licensing requirement might be
good for the ARS. Imagine all those 11, 12, and 13 year old trying to
sneak in under the FCC's radar and get their licenses prematurely.
Those poor old VE's will have to break out "thier" bi-focals and check
for proper age. Imagine all the "job security" that Riley will have
checking the birth dates of all those No-Code Technician wannabe's.

I neither support nor oppose such a notion,

Why don't you oppose it? It's a completely unnecessary
requirement for a license. No evidence has been presented
to support it.

Morse Code in sheep's clothing? Hi!

Just what we need is another unnecessary, arbitrary license requirement!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235	[email protected]	Policy	140	November 24th 05 12:27 AM
Docket Scorecard	[email protected]	Policy	108	October 29th 05 12:02 AM
Docket 05-235 Scorecard	[email protected]	Policy	83	September 7th 05 05:32 PM
Lennie's Back In Form...Old Rant's...Same Form...	K4YZ	Policy	18	May 12th 05 11:59 PM
Lennie's Double Standard Once Again Revealed...BY Lennie!	Steve Robeson, K4CAP	Policy	22	October 21st 03 12:08 PM

Menu

About Us