On Dec 17, 3:02*pm, "D. Stussy" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:
Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and
restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They
can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street
and
talking on it.

I guess I stand corrected then. They are trying to outlaw ham HTs
also, since they say they can confiscate them.


I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.
http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf

Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio.

Agreed. *However, Palmdale is shooting itself in the "foot."

For those not aware, Palmdale is adjacent to the San Andreas Fault. *I
can easily envision any and all amateur operators in the area REFUSING
to take part in any emergency communication, whether practice or real,
with regard to any disaster in the area. *Palmdale obviously does not
value the operators as a resource.

Note that Palmdale also went after TV and satellite antennas. *Again,
there are laws separate from PRB-1 and its state equivalent that exist
at both the federal and state levels of government that clearly PERMIT
these antennas. *Practically EVERYTHING cited in the proposed statute
is pre-empted at a higher government level. *Is the City really that
clueless?- Hide quoted text -

However, notice that they also exempted their own selves from the very
rules that they are trying to impose on ham radio operators.

Also, they claim it's to eliminate interference to other electronics
by ham radio.

However, as ham radio operators and some cbers know, lowering the
height of the antennas INCREASES interference.

Why didn't someone tell Palmdale that? Or did they?

If they were told that, and really wanted to decrease unterference to
electonics by ham radio, they would INCREASE the height linit.

Which they aren't.

If they were told that, and still DECREASING the height limt like
they're trying to do, then it's obvious it's not about them wanting to
decrease interference but is about them wanting to eliminate ham radio
alltogether.







- Show quoted text -