|
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a
licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters? |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
John wrote:
... got my license even before I purchased radios. I did this because it is the right thing to do. I consider the fee to be laughingly outrageous; ... John: If you had lived in mexico centuries ago, when the aztecs had control, would you have considered human sacrifice the "right thing to do?" God help us ... and get yourself some backbone and intelligence man! JS |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Brenda Ann wrote:
... They are cheaper! Check any salvation army, goodwill or other second hand store ... JS |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
|
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"bpnjensen" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: John Smith wrote in : John: God help us ... and get yourself some backbone and intelligence man! I have both. I just choose to comply with the laws of the land, as any proper citizen would do. An intelligent person obeys the law. Those who lack intelligence occupy our prisons. An intelligent and ethical person will not obey an unethical or immoral law. Prison or not. The GMRS license has nothing to do with ethics or morality, jeeze. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
MnMikew wrote:
The GMRS license has nothing to do with ethics or morality, jeeze. Hey - it wasn't me who brought up the idea that mindlessly doing what the law requires is always justified. And, if the cost of the license is too high - there are some that would argue that it DOES have something to do with ethics....so "geez" back atcha. It isn't hard to imagine a fiscal conservative thinking it another unethical aspect of big government...just like excessive taxes or anything else the government nicks you for. Bruce Jensen |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"bpnjensen" wrote in message ups.com... MnMikew wrote: The GMRS license has nothing to do with ethics or morality, jeeze. Hey - it wasn't me who brought up the idea that mindlessly doing what the law requires is always justified. And, if the cost of the license is too high - there are some that would argue that it DOES have something to do with ethics....so "geez" back atcha. It isn't hard to imagine a fiscal conservative thinking it another unethical aspect of big government...just like excessive taxes or anything else the government nicks you for. Bruce Jensen The cost of a GMRS license was probably no big deal until all those cheapo handhelds came out. Who the hell is goin to pay $75 to license a $25 radio? The license requirement is outdated yes, unethical and immoral, uh, no. I'm pretty this requirement will go the way of CB license someday. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
MnMikew wrote:
The cost of a GMRS license was probably no big deal until all those cheapo handhelds came out. Who the hell is goin to pay $75 to license a $25 radio? No argument there. The license requirement is outdated yes, unethical and immoral, uh, no. It isn't the license - it's the cost. I'm pretty this requirement will go the way of CB license someday. Probably right. In any case, for my few days per year use of these things to hopefully contribute to a valid public purpose, I am not going to pay $80. Unethical or not, it's just silly. Bruce Jensen |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"bpnjensen" wrote in message ups.com... someday. Probably right. In any case, for my few days per year use of these things to hopefully contribute to a valid public purpose, I am not going to pay $80. Unethical or not, it's just silly. Bruce Jensen I have six of them, unlicensed. :-) |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Brenda Ann wrote:
... Brenda: I love you, send me a pic of ya! grin Warmest regards, JS |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
|
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
bpnjensen wrote:
... An intelligent and ethical person will not obey an unethical or immoral law. Prison or not. Bruce Jensen A stupid imbecile will do the same, is there an difference? JS |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters? As a ham operator,I can point out people who get busted all the time. Believe me, they will find you. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
On Jan 25, 10:02 pm, "Sarge" wrote: Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters?As a ham operator,I can point out people who get busted all the time. Believe me, they will find you. Maybe I am doing something wrong, but I just looked through the FCC's list of busts, fines and other non fun things. Several hams got nailed, but it takes years even for that, several broadcasters for various and most often stupily silly offenses. But I couldn't find a single instance of anyone getting nailed for using GMRS or MURS without a license. Could you please provide cites of the "people who get busted all the time"? Thank you Operating without a required license is illegal. Neglecting to pay a parking meter is also illegal. I don't see either as a moral or ethical quagmire. As that famed child actor said; "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time". Although to be fair I suspect it should be "Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine". The FCC sure looks like a money raising operation. Somehow I figure the chances of getting the FCC to even look into GMRS or MURS violations to be on the order of picking winning lottery numbers. When I add in the fact that every enforcement action I have read about has a cease and desist warning before the fines begin. For me it isn't a big deal. I value my ham license and wouldn't want to place it at risk. But here in the Lexington KY area I hear very little traffic on GMRS and I have enver heard any on MURS. I use my ham radios with hams, and FRS for everyone else. Although one stormy night before my wife had her license we were towing a friends AirStream and ran into deep water. I had 2 IC-2ATs with me and gave one to her and I lead the way. Illegal? Yes. Life and property safey issue? Yes! I decided to take the ever so slight risk of a pink ticket and save our friends home. Dumb? Yes as a rock. Had I checked the weather I would have picked another route. My wife was driving the truck, much better at it then me, but given the one lane road with no good place to turn around, we had to press on. Lossing my license was the least of my worries that "Dark and Stormy Night". It did prompt my wife to get her license. And somehow I really doubt if I managed to hurt anyone, interferr with any comms as I picked an out of the way freq and we ran low power into smaller(then stock) stubby duckies. That is why I have 3 FRS with spare batteries in the car these days. Terry |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
On Jan 28, 2:53 am, "General Mobile Radio Service |nformation" wrote: "Sarge" wrote : Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters? As a ham operator,I can point out people who get busted all the time. Believe me, they will find you.They don't learn. They get warned all the time. Then when they get caught, they just cry and say "i didn't know". Can you or someone provide a direct link to FCC busts on GMRS or MURS? I must be searching wrong, because I could find no busts. Heck it is very hard to get the FCC to act in cases of deliberate interferene on the ham bands. And I guess you would have to run a gazillion watts before the FCC would take any action on 11M CB these days. The FCC is not a rules enforcement agency these days, it is a frequency broker. The whole move to HDTV is so the old NTSC freqs can be auctioned off to the highest bidder. The FCC is so busy selling freqs they have little to no time for most enforcement actions. Sad but true. And I think the FCC has given up on technical standards for TV, regardless of ATSC or NTSC, it all sucks big time. Black in NTSC should be 7.5IRE, all of the local stations run black levels from 0 to at least 20. Synchronous switching, in a dream. If the FCC can't/won't enforce the most basic TV standards, violations of which used to create serious lissues for TV stations, I suspect you would have to threaten an important politico, interferr with a public safety (fire or PD) or show a bare boob during the superbowl to get any attention from the FCC. I will ask again, can someone provide links to the massive busts of unlicensed GMRS bootleggers or MURS? Terry |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"General Mobile Radio Service |nformation" wrote in message ... "Sarge" wrote in : Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters? As a ham operator,I can point out people who get busted all the time. Believe me, they will find you. They don't learn. They get warned all the time. Then when they get caught, they just cry and say "i didn't know". for sure. They can hide but not for long. Once the FCC has your scent, you're a dead duck. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
In article , "Sarge"
wrote: "General Mobile Radio Service |nformation" wrote in message ... "Sarge" wrote in : Does the FCC think that people will actually pay $75 bucks for a licence when u can use a gmrs without one and not get caught. How can they catch you if you don't give out your name on the radio and make up call letters? As a ham operator,I can point out people who get busted all the time. Believe me, they will find you. They don't learn. They get warned all the time. Then when they get caught, they just cry and say "i didn't know". for sure. They can hide but not for long. Once the FCC has your scent, you're a dead duck. Yeah, and those GMRS radios smell really bad. What chance do you think the FCC will have catching someone running around with a hand held? Not very good. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"Telamon" wrote in message Yeah, and those GMRS radios smell really bad. What chance do you think the FCC will have catching someone running around with a hand held? Not very good. well you'll have licensed operators turning you in along with tape recordings, signal strength reports, freqs and repeaters you frequent along with times. The FCC will be armed with a lot of info before they start. Then it won't take long. After the fiasco with CB, they are a determined bunch. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Truth is that it takes a fair amount of complaints, from credible users,
about egregious radio behavior - not just a kid with .5W radio playing calltones - before the FCC acts. The FCC field enforcement folks just have too much to do to chase everyone. For years, they've relied on amateurs to self-police their bands and only turn to the FCC when the offender will not take the advice to knock it off or change their ways. It took the FCC 5 years to get down on jack Gerritsen - even after he disrupted the LA PD radio systems. However, ham operators should not put their amateur licenses in jeopardy by operating unlicensed GMRS.. They are expected to know better. Licenses are now $80 (and going up next year?). It's no wonder the retailers would rather a prospective consumer not know they will need a license. I keep hearing Wally-Wonder-Radio ($8/hour 'salespeople') in Best-Buy and Wal*Mart tell folks that: "Oh, you no longer need the license. The airwaves are now free." ========== .._._. "Sarge" wrote in message ... "Telamon" wrote in message Yeah, and those GMRS radios smell really bad. What chance do you think the FCC will have catching someone running around with a hand held? Not very good. well you'll have licensed operators turning you in along with tape recordings, signal strength reports, freqs and repeaters you frequent along with times. The FCC will be armed with a lot of info before they start. Then it won't take long. After the fiasco with CB, they are a determined bunch. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"NEWNEWS" wrote in
t: Licenses are now $80 (and going up next year?). It's no wonder the retailers would rather a prospective consumer not know they will need a license. I keep hearing Wally-Wonder-Radio ($8/hour 'salespeople') in Best-Buy and Wal*Mart tell folks that: "Oh, you no longer need the license. The airwaves are now free." A GMRS license now costs $85. It went up a few months ago. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
Get their name, and buy one. You can then claim fraud and settle out of
court for $$$... -- William Baldwin, Jr MBA HCM program at the Univ of Phoenix Ground below Zero at New Orleans area La. go to: www.coastguardauxiliaryslidell8cr.us "NEWNEWS" wrote in message t... Truth is that it takes a fair amount of complaints, from credible users, about egregious radio behavior - not just a kid with .5W radio playing calltones - before the FCC acts. The FCC field enforcement folks just have too much to do to chase everyone. For years, they've relied on amateurs to self-police their bands and only turn to the FCC when the offender will not take the advice to knock it off or change their ways. It took the FCC 5 years to get down on jack Gerritsen - even after he disrupted the LA PD radio systems. However, ham operators should not put their amateur licenses in jeopardy by operating unlicensed GMRS.. They are expected to know better. Licenses are now $80 (and going up next year?). It's no wonder the retailers would rather a prospective consumer not know they will need a license. I keep hearing Wally-Wonder-Radio ($8/hour 'salespeople') in Best-Buy and Wal*Mart tell folks that: "Oh, you no longer need the license. The airwaves are now free." ========== ._._. "Sarge" wrote in message ... "Telamon" wrote in message Yeah, and those GMRS radios smell really bad. What chance do you think the FCC will have catching someone running around with a hand held? Not very good. well you'll have licensed operators turning you in along with tape recordings, signal strength reports, freqs and repeaters you frequent along with times. The FCC will be armed with a lot of info before they start. Then it won't take long. After the fiasco with CB, they are a determined bunch. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
seems to me, they would make more money by lowering it to at least $40 or
so. People might actually be tempted to pay it. -- William Baldwin, Jr MBA HCM program at the Univ of Phoenix Ground below Zero at New Orleans area La. go to: www.coastguardauxiliaryslidell8cr.us "John" wrote in message ... "NEWNEWS" wrote in t: Licenses are now $80 (and going up next year?). It's no wonder the retailers would rather a prospective consumer not know they will need a license. I keep hearing Wally-Wonder-Radio ($8/hour 'salespeople') in Best-Buy and Wal*Mart tell folks that: "Oh, you no longer need the license. The airwaves are now free." A GMRS license now costs $85. It went up a few months ago. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"WILLIAM BALDWIN JR" wrote in
: seems to me, they would make more money by lowering it to at least $40 or so. People might actually be tempted to pay it. Instead they raise it about $5 a year. I really wonder if they actually expect folks to pay. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
On Apr 8, 11:05 am, John wrote:
"WILLIAM BALDWIN JR" wrote : seems to me, they would make more money by lowering it to at least $40 or so. People might actually be tempted to pay it. Instead they raise it about $5 a year. I really wonder if they actually expect folks to pay. I know lots of people with walkie-talkies, and don't know of a single one ever mentioning that they have a license. Don't see the point in bothering. It's just a way for the FCC to collect money on something they can't feasibly regulate anyway. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"Invader3K" wrote in
ups.com: I know lots of people with walkie-talkies, and don't know of a single one ever mentioning that they have a license. Don't see the point in bothering. It's just a way for the FCC to collect money on something they can't feasibly regulate anyway. Nonetheless, a license is a requirement. A great many people do get a license. It's the right thing to do and it is a requirement. You have no choice. |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
On Apr 9, 9:56 am, John wrote:
Nonetheless, a license is a requirement. A great many people do get a license. Yeah, 5% of a million is still a lot of people, I guess. It's the right thing to do Are you making this up as you go along? Prove it. Legality neither proves nor disproves what is "right." You have no choice. Of course, I do. Bruce Jensen |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"bpnjensen" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 9, 9:56 am, John wrote: Nonetheless, a license is a requirement. A great many people do get a license. Yeah, 5% of a million is still a lot of people, I guess. It's the right thing to do Are you making this up as you go along? Prove it. Legality neither proves nor disproves what is "right." There are standars of right and wrong. The point is its illegal to operate a gmrs radio without a license. You have no choice. Of course, I do. Bruce Jensen 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. B |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
If there's 1% compliance, I'd be surprised. The barn door is opened,
I'm afraid and stuck in that position. I was reading this recently: http://tinyurl.com/ypf46y On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 03:48:17 GMT, "NEWNEWS" wrote: Truth is that it takes a fair amount of complaints, from credible users, about egregious radio behavior - not just a kid with .5W radio playing calltones - before the FCC acts. The FCC field enforcement folks just have too much to do to chase everyone. Craig Schroeder craig nospam craigschroeder com |
why Bother getting a licence to use a GMRS radio?
"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. 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. 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. 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 you think you should be able to buy a transceiver off the shelf and use any old frequency, like the one those ambulances use? That really is no different than your belief that you shouldn't pay for a GMRS license because it "costs too much". 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. 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. Michael |
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?
|
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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com