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