why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

On Apr 9, 1:46 pm, (Michael Black) wrote:
"bpnjensen" ) writes:
On Apr 9, 12:16 pm, "Brian O" wrote:

There are standars of right and wrong. The point is its illegal to operate
a gmrs radio without a license.

And my point is that it is unethical to require an outrageous fee for
a license for this service. That's just as wrong, arguably worse,
than operating wiothout a license.

This has no releveance to rec.radio.shortwave, which is about reception
not transmitting.

Then feel free not talk about it.

It's hardly outrageous, since you get a good number of years on
each license. What you are complaining about is the fact that
it's not an annual license, so per year it would be cheaper. Though
likely it would be higher than the cost per year, since there's be
administrative fees that would run up the yearly license fee.

You think this is only about a fee, and you don't want to pay it,
so it's okay to operate without a license.

No, that's not what I think. Tell me, what's the fee for? Does it
prove that I am going to operate properly? Does it actually make me a
better person? Or just a poorer one?

But I should point out that in the early days of radio, there
were no licenses, or allocations. INstead, you had a bunch of
different people with different needs all operating in a relatively
small part of the spectrum, because technology hadn't advance enough
to make use of more than a tiny bit of the spectrum. So a ship at
sea sends out an SOS, and can't be received because someone is
broadcasting on that frequency, or the ham down the street
is transmitting.

That's the point where regulations came into effect. They did not
proceed the use of radio, they followed.

So the spectrum started be carved up, allocating to different services
and requiring licenses.

And the rules are to protect existing services, including some that
might be really important in emergencies.

And a large fee on one limited-band service helps to protect this -
how?

The rules are not just about making sure that broadcast station won't
interfere with that airplane by giving them different parts of the
spectrum, the rules are also about making sure that someone buying
that radio off the back of a truck isn't going to interfere with
that airplane because it puts out spurious signals. The rules
limit what can be sold so junk won't be sold, but the rules also
set things up so that if you did buy something that was illegal
in the first place, you would be tracked down for interfering with
a legit radio service.

So, the fee is going to make sure that my little 2-mile walkie talkie
is not going to mess up a Homeland Security operation - how?

So you think you should be able to buy a transceiver off the shelf
and use any old frequency, like the one those ambulances use?

No.

That really is no different than your belief that you shouldn't pay for
a GMRS license because it "costs too much".

Wrong. Period. There is considerable actual difference on the
ground. One can directly affect health safety and welfare, the other
cannot.

Because without that license, you are in the same state as the bozo who buys the transceiver for a frequency he has no use using, and transmits away without a license
(which he couldn't get anyway because he's not that ambulance) simply
because the rules don't matter.

Please - a little logic, OK?. How is the intereference with emergency
operations by an off-frequency jerk anything comparable to not paying
some bureaucrat for the ability to pretty much do anything you like on
a radio whose channels do not overlap with emergency freqs, ranging
from reasonable and useful notifications of scientific events, all the
way out to screwing around with your friends on a drunken binge?

If you transmit on GMRS without a license, then the rules can't mean
a thing to you since you've already broken the rule that requires
a license to use the band.

This is an unreasonable illogical emotionally-based extrapolation, and
is beside the point. Once again, what effect exactly will the fee
have on my operation of the radio, other than the vague notion that
some bureaucrat knows I exist?

Bruce Jensen

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

"bpnjensen" ) writes:

If you transmit on GMRS without a license, then the rules can't mean
a thing to you since you've already broken the rule that requires
a license to use the band.

This is an unreasonable illogical emotionally-based extrapolation, and
is beside the point. Once again, what effect exactly will the fee
have on my operation of the radio, other than the vague notion that
some bureaucrat knows I exist?

The fee limits who can use the band, so it ensures that it doesn't get
so crowded that it's unuseable.

Again, that's the same principal as all the radio regulations. Take
them away, and you get a free for all, like in the early days of radio.

That ship at sea couldn't send out the SOS because the band was
crowded with land based transmitters. If anyone can use the GMRS
band, then chances are those who were using it for serious use won't
be able to do so because it's either too crowded, or because someone
who doesn't know what they are doing is playing around.

Note that the one thing that has basically put radio in the hands of
everyone, the cellphone, has a sophisticated infrastructure to make
very good use of the allocated spectrum. It can tolerate a high
density of users because of that infrastucture. Low power units,
with the cells all over the place, and the phones are controlled
by the cells so they may switch frequency as required.

The old way, any geographical area could only tolerate a small
number of users and a small number of phone calls, because they
had a handful of frequencies and one or a handful of base units
meaning the carphones had to have higher power and contact
the central base. If someone was using a channel, then nobody else
could, because those signals had to cover a relatively large area.

Note that there are a number of bands allocated to license free use.
The old 27MHz CB band at this point, not just the 100mW walkie talkies
of the old days but the 5watt units, a 100mW 49MHz allocation, and of
course the FRS band up in the 450Mhz range. The caveat is that by
letting anyone use them, there is no control over useage. Hence
even if a user can live with the power limitations, they may not
find it suitable because everytime they want to make an important
transmission the kid down the road is talking to their friend. If
they want something better, they can pay for the privilege.

If you want to break the law, and then make a big deal that you've
broken the law by not getting a license, then your intent is to
change the law. At least you are willing to take the consequences.
But you are simply saying "I won't pay the license fee, I don't like
it".

How is that different from someone who ignores the laws because
they think worry about interfering with emergency communication isn't
important to them, or they think they have a right to the radio waves
so it doesn't matter if their bootleg station interferes with an
existing licensed radio station?

Michael

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

I don't own any GMRS radios.Are y'all talking about those two way walkie
talkie radios I see for sale in the Wal Mart stores and similar stores?
They require a license?,,, I didn't know that.How about those Nextel
cell phones that also have built in walkie talkies?
cuhulin

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

www.devilfinder.com GMRS Radios

Some information about those radios.
cuhulin

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

"bpnjensen" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 9, 12:16 pm, "Brian O" wrote:

There are standars of right and wrong. The point is its illegal to
operate
a gmrs radio without a license.

And my point is that it is unethical to require an outrageous fee for
a license for this service. That's just as wrong, arguably worse,
than operating wiothout a license.

Sorry, but your opinion that it is unethical is just that, an opinion. If
you dont like the law, lobby to change it. Its not an ourageous fee
especially in the face of what a cell phone costs per year.


Yes, you do, you can break the law by operating a gmrs radio without a
license, or comply with the law and get a license to operate. Just
because
you don't pay for illegality now, doesn't mean you wont later. If you
feel
safe, you're welcome to it. But people that generally don't have regard
enough for the law will turn gmrs into another cb radio band. I for one
don't want to see that and will report people using the radios without a
license.

Ah, a snitch, eh? What are you going to do, interrogate each user?

Just report what I know.


As I have explained before, I use them for a couple of weeks a year to
report observations of geyser activity in Yellowstone National Park.
This activity is very common among the geyser enthusiasts and
scientists that congregate there. It is quite useful, is clearly not
an abuse of the airwaves, and provides invaluable information to the
Visitor Center who in turn provide geyser viewing advice to the
millions of folks who visit each year. Now, if I read the rules
correctly, the legal use of these devices requires frequent
identification using the assigned call sign. In all of my experience
there, I have not once heard an utterance of a call sign. This, in
direct view of federal government employees that are also sworn peace
oficers (rangers).

That still doesnt give you an excuse to break the law. "No body else does
it, why should I have to?"


So, are you going to come up to the geyser basins this summer and
report each geyser report that does not use a call sign as an
infraction, so that you can feel vindicated in your scorn? Or are you
going to sensibly recognize that limited valid use does not require
extortion by your government?

Bruce Jensen

You can try to justify your illegal operation all you wish. It still doesn't
change the truth of your operations being illegal.
B

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

"bpnjensen" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 9, 1:46 pm, (Michael Black) wrote:
"bpnjensen" ) writes:
On Apr 9, 12:16 pm, "Brian O" wrote:

There are standars of right and wrong. The point is its illegal to
operate
a gmrs radio without a license.

And my point is that it is unethical to require an outrageous fee for
a license for this service. That's just as wrong, arguably worse,
than operating wiothout a license.

This has no releveance to rec.radio.shortwave, which is about reception
not transmitting.

Then feel free not talk about it.

It's hardly outrageous, since you get a good number of years on
each license. What you are complaining about is the fact that
it's not an annual license, so per year it would be cheaper. Though
likely it would be higher than the cost per year, since there's be
administrative fees that would run up the yearly license fee.

You think this is only about a fee, and you don't want to pay it,
so it's okay to operate without a license.

No, that's not what I think. Tell me, what's the fee for? Does it
prove that I am going to operate properly? Does it actually make me a
better person? Or just a poorer one?

Why do you pay for groceries? Why do those nasty grocery stores have to
charge for them? How dare they? Even though they control all the groceries
sold to them, they should not have any right to charge for them!! You, sir,
do not own the airwaves, the American people say who operates and who does
not. You sir are a thief, plain and simple.


But I should point out that in the early days of radio, there
were no licenses, or allocations. INstead, you had a bunch of
different people with different needs all operating in a relatively
small part of the spectrum, because technology hadn't advance enough
to make use of more than a tiny bit of the spectrum. So a ship at
sea sends out an SOS, and can't be received because someone is
broadcasting on that frequency, or the ham down the street
is transmitting.

That's the point where regulations came into effect. They did not
proceed the use of radio, they followed.

So the spectrum started be carved up, allocating to different services
and requiring licenses.

And the rules are to protect existing services, including some that
might be really important in emergencies.

And a large fee on one limited-band service helps to protect this -
how?

By keeping renegades from wanting to use the service for abusive purposes.
People that pay money for their licenses are much more responsible when they
operate, especially since they are registered with an agency that can put
them in jail if they dont.


The rules are not just about making sure that broadcast station won't
interfere with that airplane by giving them different parts of the
spectrum, the rules are also about making sure that someone buying
that radio off the back of a truck isn't going to interfere with
that airplane because it puts out spurious signals. The rules
limit what can be sold so junk won't be sold, but the rules also
set things up so that if you did buy something that was illegal
in the first place, you would be tracked down for interfering with
a legit radio service.

So, the fee is going to make sure that my little 2-mile walkie talkie
is not going to mess up a Homeland Security operation - how?

There are a lot of businesses that use the same frequencies. If anarchy
were to get started like it did when CB was deregulated, then those
frequencies would be just a worthless as the CB.


So you think you should be able to buy a transceiver off the shelf
and use any old frequency, like the one those ambulances use?

No.

That really is no different than your belief that you shouldn't pay for
a GMRS license because it "costs too much".

Wrong. Period. There is considerable actual difference on the
ground. One can directly affect health safety and welfare, the other
cannot.

Thats not entirely true.


Because without that license, you are in the same state as the bozo who
buys the transceiver for a frequency he has no use using, and transmits away
without a license
(which he couldn't get anyway because he's not that ambulance) simply
because the rules don't matter.

Please - a little logic, OK?. How is the intereference with emergency
operations by an off-frequency jerk anything comparable to not paying
some bureaucrat for the ability to pretty much do anything you like on
a radio whose channels do not overlap with emergency freqs, ranging
from reasonable and useful notifications of scientific events, all the
way out to screwing around with your friends on a drunken binge?

If you transmit on GMRS without a license, then the rules can't mean
a thing to you since you've already broken the rule that requires
a license to use the band.

This is an unreasonable illogical emotionally-based extrapolation, and
is beside the point. Once again, what effect exactly will the fee
have on my operation of the radio, other than the vague notion that
some bureaucrat knows I exist?

Bruce Jensen

Its not unreasonable at all. He who is unfaithful in little will be
unfaithful with much. Your point of view is no different than someone that
robs a bank.
B

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

On Apr 9, 4:19 pm, (Michael Black) wrote:
"bpnjensen" ) writes:
If you transmit on GMRS without a license, then the rules can't mean
a thing to you since you've already broken the rule that requires
a license to use the band.

This is an unreasonable illogical emotionally-based extrapolation, and
is beside the point. Once again, what effect exactly will the fee
have on my operation of the radio, other than the vague notion that
some bureaucrat knows I exist?

The fee limits who can use the band, so it ensures that it doesn't get
so crowded that it's unuseable.

Oh, I get it. Thus, even if someone has a valid use for the radio, if
they cannot afford it, they are stuck, up the creek without an
aerial. Real sweet, real public-interest minded. I still say, HOW
DOES THIS AFFECT WHETHER THE RADIO IS USED PROPERLY?

Again, that's the same principal as all the radio regulations. Take
them away, and you get a free for all, like in the early days of radio.

A free-for-all with radios that communicate at maximum a few miles?
Yeah, sure. besides a fee is not going to prevent improper use of the
radio.

That ship at sea couldn't send out the SOS because the band was
crowded with land based transmitters. If anyone can use the GMRS
band, then chances are those who were using it for serious use won't
be able to do so because it's either too crowded, or because someone
who doesn't know what they are doing is playing around.

A fee does not mean that someone knows what he is doing. It might
mean that only the rich get to use it, though.

Note that the one thing that has basically put radio in the hands of
everyone, the cellphone, has a sophisticated infrastructure to make
very good use of the allocated spectrum. It can tolerate a high
density of users because of that infrastucture. Low power units,
with the cells all over the place, and the phones are controlled
by the cells so they may switch frequency as required.

I don't own one. It simply isn't useful to me.

The old way, any geographical area could only tolerate a small
number of users and a small number of phone calls, because they
had a handful of frequencies and one or a handful of base units
meaning the carphones had to have higher power and contact
the central base. If someone was using a channel, then nobody else
could, because those signals had to cover a relatively large area.

Note that there are a number of bands allocated to license free use.
The old 27MHz CB band at this point, not just the 100mW walkie talkies
of the old days but the 5watt units, a 100mW 49MHz allocation, and of
course the FRS band up in the 450Mhz range. The caveat is that by
letting anyone use them, there is no control over useage. Hence
even if a user can live with the power limitations, they may not
find it suitable because everytime they want to make an important
transmission the kid down the road is talking to their friend. If
they want something better, they can pay for the privilege.

If you want to break the law, and then make a big deal that you've
broken the law by not getting a license, then your intent is to
change the law. At least you are willing to take the consequences.
But you are simply saying "I won't pay the license fee, I don't like
it".

I am not in favor of breaking the law. I am also not in favor of
unfair laws that penalize those with less money. I am certainly of in
favor of paying through the nose for the privilege of providing a
public service, which is what I and several other volunteers do at
Yellowstone each summer, with no interference from the government or
to other users.

Just show me that the fee actually accomplishes something worthwhile,
and is not wasted after it is collected, and I will retract.

How is that different from someone who ignores the laws because
they think worry about interfering with emergency communication isn't
important to them, or they think they have a right to the radio waves
so it doesn't matter if their bootleg station interferes with an
existing licensed radio station?

It is different in that I consciously use the radio in an appropriate
and useful way. I don't get on it and ramble or make noises or tread
upon someone else's comms. Neither do any of the geyser watchers at
the park. I use it to provide worthwhile information to other
interested parties, including official information providers at a US
Government installation. The summer network there at Yellowstone is
invaluable for those who are charged with getting the information out
to the public.

I talk on the radio less than 1/2 hour per year, total, only to report
on-the-spot geyser information, to help other people enjoy an improved
experience and to provide data points for possible future reasearch.
It is the same freq used by everyone in the geyser basins, NPS
included. If I could use a freebie-fee 27 MHz walkie-talkie, I would
- but nobody would hear me, because it ain't what they use.

Bruce Jensen

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

On Apr 9, 5:47 pm, "Brian O" wrote:
"bpnjensen" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Apr 9, 12:16 pm, "Brian O" wrote:

There are standars of right and wrong. The point is its illegal to
operate
a gmrs radio without a license.

And my point is that it is unethical to require an outrageous fee for
a license for this service. That's just as wrong, arguably worse,
than operating wiothout a license.

Sorry, but your opinion that it is unethical is just that, an opinion. If
you dont like the law, lobby to change it. Its not an ourageous fee
especially in the face of what a cell phone costs per year.

I agree, it is an opinion, just as is your POV. I have explained
elsewhere in this thread why I think the way I do.

Yes, you do, you can break the law by operating a gmrs radio without a
license, or comply with the law and get a license to operate. Just
because
you don't pay for illegality now, doesn't mean you wont later. If you
feel
safe, you're welcome to it. But people that generally don't have regard
enough for the law will turn gmrs into another cb radio band. I for one
don't want to see that and will report people using the radios without a
license.

Fine, go ahead. I believe your opinion to be incorrect. As I have
also explained elsewhere in this thread, I do not use the radio
improperly, and in fact I use it for a valid and worthwhile public
purpose ONLY. My transmissions are brief, to-the-point and limited to
specific use in the Yellowstone geyser basins. There are plenty of
unlicensed people there, nobody uses his/her call sign, and the NPS VC
welcomes out information.

The GPs who show up there *with licenses* cannot say as much about
their own transmissions. Luckily, the bands are not crowded at YNP.

Ah, a snitch, eh? What are you going to do, interrogate each user?

Just report what I know.

Or what you suspect?

As I have explained before, I use them for a couple of weeks a year to
report observations of geyser activity in Yellowstone National Park.
This activity is very common among the geyser enthusiasts and
scientists that congregate there. It is quite useful, is clearly not
an abuse of the airwaves, and provides invaluable information to the
Visitor Center who in turn provide geyser viewing advice to the
millions of folks who visit each year. Now, if I read the rules
correctly, the legal use of these devices requires frequent
identification using the assigned call sign. In all of my experience
there, I have not once heard an utterance of a call sign. This, in
direct view of federal government employees that are also sworn peace
oficers (rangers).

That still doesn't give you an excuse to break the law. "No body else does
it, why should I have to?"

Your opinion. As I have stated, I disagree and am not going to be
penalized for providing a public service.

You can try to justify your illegal operation all you wish. It still doesn't
change the truth of your operations being illegal.

It also doesn't change the truth that the law is wrong and benefits
only the bureaucrats.

BJ

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

On Apr 9, 5:54 pm, "Brian O" wrote:

Why do you pay for groceries? Why do those nasty grocery stores have to
charge for them? How dare they? Even though they control all the groceries
sold to them, they should not have any right to charge for them!! You, sir,
do not own the airwaves, the American people say who operates and who does
not. You sir are a thief, plain and simple.

Bullsh** Nobody *owns* the airwaves any more than they own outer
space.

Groceries cost someone money to produce. Radio transmission medium
costs nobody anything. The bureacrats are the thieves.

And a large fee on one limited-band service helps to protect this -
how?

By keeping renegades from wanting to use the service for abusive purposes.
People that pay money for their licenses are much more responsible when they
operate, especially since they are registered with an agency that can put
them in jail if they dont.

Oh, yeah - that worked really well with prohibition in the 1920's,
didn't it? It was a total sucess with CB radio, wasn't it?

Nonsense. If people want to abuse the use of 2-mile range walkie
talkies, they're going to do it with or without a license.
Responsible users, which I consider myself to be for reasons already
stated, are going to use it properly and courteously...whether they
have paid or not.

So, the fee is going to make sure that my little 2-mile walkie talkie
is not going to mess up a Homeland Security operation - how?

There are a lot of businesses that use the same frequencies. If anarchy
were to get started like it did when CB was deregulated, then those
frequencies would be just a worthless as the CB.

And I say, a license is not going to prevent a person from abusing a
privilege. If the government merely wants to keep track, there is no
reason why a license must cost $85. If they really don't want
interference, they'd be better off not making the business frequencies
available to the GP in the first place. The GMRS is much less prone
to anarchy because the power is lower and the nature of the
transmissions and signals is far different. Finally, I'll bet the
only businesses that use these freqs extensively anymore are rural,
where few GPs use the GMRS anyway...everyone else uses cell phones.

Wrong. Period. There is considerable actual difference on the
ground. One can directly affect health safety and welfare, the other
cannot.

Thats not entirely true.

Sure it is. The effects on health and safety are purely a result of
improper use, and a license does not prevent this. Many people with
driver's licenses get out and behave miserably on the road every day -
and those without licenses can go years without getting caught, by
just being careful. This, with *massive* police oversight at
virtually all times. For something like a radio license, where
oversight is minimal and the power and range are too low for most
people to notice anyway - the success of this service wil ultimately
depend on whether people *use* the radios properly or foolishly.
Government regalation will not be the deciding factor.

Its not unreasonable at all.

Yeah, it is.

He who is unfaithful in little will be unfaithful with much.

This is at least an opinion, or more realistically blather, and you
know it. Life is not all or nothing, black and white. I have far
more faith in individual humans to do the right thing at the right
time than I do in some expensive goverment program to try to control
what people do with the ether. I know that I will never abuse the
ability to use the radio in a worthwhile and public-spirited way,
whether I have paid the confounded fee or not.

Your point of view is no different than someone that
robs a bank.

Bullsh**. Someone who robs a bank wants to live for free, with no
regard to who is losing as a result. I would never rob a bank, just
like I would never interfere with someone else's valid communications;
and I don't expect the government to rob me. One is not better or
more acceptable than the other, legal or not.

Bruce Jensen

why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
 

I am not if favor of breaking any laws either,although there are
many,many mostly fed govt Commie ''laws'' I do not agree with.What does
that license fee do? It helps make those fat cat Commie fed govt
a..holes even richer.The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.Am I
lieing?

Often,I have thought about buying two of those fancy two way radios at
the Wal Mart store before,but what would I do with them? I already own
some old two way radios (four of them are old,old ex-Sheriff department
Motorola car radios,I bought them at the Goodwill store years and years
ago.They are still sitting in a paper sack under my kitchen table right
now) and I haven't had any need or desire to use them yet.
cuhulin