HEY ! Even though I am from the opposite side of the aisle.

You got to "LOVE" Willie Brown :o)
- He has been a Good
- - and Faithful Public Servant.
- - - Who has Served the State of California,
- - - - and the People of San Francisco very well.

God Bless Him, amen, Amen. AMEN !

~ RHF
..
..
= = =
= = = wrote in message . ..

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 07:29:04 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote:

In New England a group is suing the pilots flying out of a local
airport because they don't like the noise and there is nothing illegal
about what the pilots are doing. So, by harassing the pilots by
filing lawsuits they figure they can force them out. It may work and
it may backfire if the pilots counter sue for harassment.

This was tried in the San Francisco Bay Area some years back.
Flight patterns, changed for environmental reasons, brought outgoing
flights over housing south of San Francisco. After a number of
nuisance suits had been won in small claims court, Willie Brown, then
speaker of the assembly got a law passed preventing such suits. To
avoid problems with laws designed for specific entities (and probably
to minimize opposition), he managed to write the law so narrowly that
it applied only to SFO and one tiny airport up in Siskiyou County that
had no interest in the legislation.


..

"Ed Price" wrote:

Great Freudian slip re "pubic place". huge grin


Done all the time recently. I have a new desk with the keyboard too far
off centered. As a result, typing mistakes have increased dramatically. In
this case, that "Freudian slip" got right past my spelling checker.


Have you ever considered testing the universal truth
of your assertion? How about spending a week or
two at a playground, photographing only little girls,
say ages 6 to 10. Let us know if you survive.


Lets be realistic here, Ed. We're not talking about child porn - laws
don't protect that. What we're talking about is photographs taken for
legitimate purposes (art, advertising, travel, architecture, news, and so
on).

Regardless, while I haven't photographed little girls specifically (and
have no special desire to do so), I have dozens of images of kids at
playgrounds, parks, and on the street, in my film library. Some were taken
by me and some by my wife. Whatever the case, nobody has ever complained
while either of us were taking those photographs.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article 5Dayb.252403$mZ5.1876750@attbi_s54,
says...
Why does it have to be about damn property values?

Fairly simple, actually:

If your property value increases, your equity increases. If you have
more equity, then there's more value that you can borrow against.

--

-- //Steve//

Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS
Fountain Valley, CA
Email:

In article , says...
For starters, most hams that put up towers with elaborate antenna systems
would take them down when they moved (unless they became a silent key),
because these things are not petty investments, they cost a lot of money.
Some installations cost more than a new mid-sized car.

True. I've seen some pretty elaborate antenna farms, even here in
suburban Orange County, CA -- some even in my neighborhood. (Only part
of our neighborhood is condos, the rest being single-family residences
(houses), and the latter have some pretty nice antenna installations.)

The installation of
the tower itself is held to much higher standard by law than the house
itself is.

Sad but true.

And again, unlike someone who puts up an old car on blocks, or paints their
home in rainbow glow paint, hams perform a public service. There currently
exists a rule within the FCC that disallows municipalities preventing
amateur operators from erecting antennas, and a similar rule for CC&R's is
in the works.

At least, we hope it's still "in the works." How long has that been
rattling around the halls of Congress now, two years? Any bets on which
comes on the scene first in the US: a code-free amateur radio service,
or a PRB-1 bill to cover CC&Rs?

--

-- //Steve//

Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS
Fountain Valley, CA
Email:

Volker Kerkhoff wrote:
1. Acess to all information services is free.

Does God provide it as a miracle? That's the only
way it could be free. I'm willing to bet taxpayers
pay for it and all other "free" governmental services.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
Volker Kerkhoff wrote:

1. Acess to all information services is free.


Does God provide it as a miracle? That's the only
way it could be free. I'm willing to bet taxpayers
pay for it and all other "free" governmental services.

Should have specified... Free (as in free speech, not as in free lunch)
not necessarily means free of charge or other contractual terms, but
"must be acessible to anyone wanting to access it and pay the associated
charges and obey the contractual terms that go with it. Alas, I still
can't subscribe to a digital Satellite Pay-TV package sold and marketed
to germany in Spain, because the service provider does not hold a
license for selling in Spain, but I can access the 70-something
Free-to-air Sat cgannels in german, and put up a dish for it, and nobody
can legelly prevent me from doing so.

73,

Volker

On or about Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:00:43 +0100, Volker Kerkhoff
wrote about the following in article
:


Should have specified... Free (as in free speech, not as in free lunch)
not necessarily means free of charge or other contractual terms, but "must

With a statement like that, I knew that you were a Linux user even before
looking at the message headers...


--
Alex / AB2RC
Yaesu Ft100 software for Linux http://www.qsl.net/kc2ivl
Why do they call Radio "Wireless", between my shack and antennas
I must have over 1500 feet of wire!