|
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? To answer your questions, yes, you really do need a license. When it come to the ham bands, the hams themselves are Big Brother, and they will turn you in to the enforcement division of the FCC, who can fine you up to $12,000 for a first offense (they usually don't, but they do have that option). It's extremely easy for them to find out if you're legit, and they always have someone who runs the calls for any newby through sites like www.arrl.org or www.qrz.org As for listening, no, you don't need a license for that. To get a ham license to operate on 2m is so simple that it's almost funny. You can buy the question pool at Radio Shack, study it for a week or so, and go to your local VE and plonk down a few bucks, take the test, and you're there. |
Corwin, Prince of Amber wrote:
So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If you learn all the lingo and invent a plausible "where did you take your test?" story, you might get away with it. (I notice you live in NYC. If you were in rural Kansas somewhere, where every ham knows every other ham, it'd be far less likely to work) You'll have to be VERY convincing. Licensing databases are freely accessible. If I contact a station identifying as "WB9NME", and have any reason whatsoever to be suspicious, I can put that call into http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsS...rchLicense.jsp (among other sites) and know in a few seconds it's not valid. [0] At the point when it's learned you're operating without a license, you will find contacts much more difficult to make. You will almost certainly be reported to the FCC. I doubt (but don't promise) they'll fine you on the first offense, but there's a good chance they'll confiscate your radio. And you'll probably find it difficult, if not impossible, to get a license. They might even hold it against your application for a license for some other service. (GMRS etc.) If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Really, getting licensed is easy & inexpensive. Especially in New York. (again, our theoretical Kansan might have to wait months and drive hundreds of miles to get to a testing session. Definitely not true in NYC!) Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? No, it's perfectly legal to listen without a license. Indeed, it would be a very good idea to listen while awaiting your license; that way you'll be familiar with operating procedure once the license arrives. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com [0] anymore. WB9NME was my old callsign back in the 1970s, it was surrendered to be changed to W9WI in 1977. |
All you need is a technician ticket thats just a multiple choice
test.....Its so easy retards and pure morons can pass it with a few days study time. What callsign do you plan on using on the radio?....You can bet your gonna get found out soon if you use someone elses call or just one person looks you up. Finding where you live is really easy while your on the radio and messing with repeaters could get quite a few ****ed off hams standing at your door. Does your mommy know your on the internet unsupervised sweetie? Tell ya what I'll forward this to Riley Hollingsworth...a good friend of mine and he can keep an eye out for ya ok? He's gonna get a giggle outta this! Someone gonna break the law and they tell literally millions about it before they do? Damn Rick! You really are stupid! I'm not angry old buddy!....Just laughing at your stupidity! "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? Rick Bryan New York, NY |
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Thats not a good idea anyone *really* care? Yes! Ham radio is self policing & has the FCC to back them up. Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? You'd be amazed & fines are stiff. Jail can also be in your future for doing so. They'll take your equipment (for keeps) If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? No you can listen all you want ;-) Rick Bryan New York, NY |
I had numerous hits on www.qrz.com within days of getting back on the air after
several years off ... people curious who I was and where I was. Bootlegging isn't as easy as it used to be! jw K9RZZ (go ahead, look me up) |
Corwin, Prince of Amber wrote:
New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. You will either pick a callsign that is already assigned to an amateur or maybe pick one not yet assigned. Either way a simple lookup on QRZ.COM or the ARRl site, or the FCC data base will verify that you are not legal. Does anyone *really* care? Yes, those hams who took the time and effort to study and pass the exams for their license and *earn* the priviledge to operate on the ham bands certainly care and take a very dim view of what you propose. Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? No one is going to bust through your front door, but the hams, who will uncover you sharade rather quickly, will file a report with the FCC and you will get one of those letters wanting to know why you are transmitting on the ham bands without a license and to continue doing so can result in a hefty fine. Of the 1+ million HAM operators, More like 680,000 in the U.S. how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? By the fact that they are HAMS means they are licensed, so they won't be doing what you are considering. However, doing what you are considering, operating in the ham bands without a license, several. By the way, it is very easy for the hams to DF your signal and find exactly your location. If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Why not just go ahead and get the license instead of the assurance of being caught operationg illegally, in which case the FCC may deny any request you make later to become licensed. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. |
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:32:59 -0600, JJ
wrote: Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. This is not exactly true. The FCC is currently considering a requirement for a "listener" license. The ruling is related to the new Patriot Act and says: Article 10:2:3a The requirement of said radio operator to be licensed in hereto state of operation for receiving Ham bands. See also this link: www.us.gov/radioreq/lic/listener Regards |
Bill E wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:32:59 -0600, JJ wrote: Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. This is not exactly true. The FCC is currently considering a requirement for a "listener" license. The ruling is related to the new Patriot Act and says: Article 10:2:3a The requirement of said radio operator to be licensed in hereto state of operation for receiving Ham bands. See also this link: www.us.gov/radioreq/lic/listener Regards I doubt that will ever fly, but until if/when it ever does I stand by my statement which is exactly true, you do not need a license to listen to the ham bands or any sw bands. I could not get the link to work. |
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:01:20 GMT, "Corwin, Prince of Amber"
wrote: All right. I get the idea. Thanks. My radio is up at my house in the Pocono Mountains, PA, not where I live here in NYC, so I suppose I'll buy an antenna (good grief, not I've got to figure *that* out!) and see if I can hear anyone talking. If I get reception I'll put in the time and effort to understand what I'm doing. Thanks again. I'll let you know if I succeed. I never even considered leaving the radio here in my apartment. You can't just stick the antenna out an open window and expect to get results, right, or can you . . ? Rick Bryan New York, NY |
An antenna out the window will do wonders. With a Radio Shack DX 398 and its
rollup antenna I am able to pick up many major SW stations. The rollup extends to 23 feet to the nearest support -- in my case a palm tree. A wire would do just as well. -- Lamont Cranston The Shadow Knows "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:01:20 GMT, "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote: All right. I get the idea. Thanks. My radio is up at my house in the Pocono Mountains, PA, not where I live here in NYC, so I suppose I'll buy an antenna (good grief, not I've got to figure *that* out!) and see if I can hear anyone talking. If I get reception I'll put in the time and effort to understand what I'm doing. Thanks again. I'll let you know if I succeed. I never even considered leaving the radio here in my apartment. You can't just stick the antenna out an open window and expect to get results, right, or can you . . ? Rick Bryan New York, NY |
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? Rick Bryan New York, NY You do not need a license to listen. As far as transmitting, all I can say is that I have been running a station for 25 years with no license and no one has figured it out yet. I don't mean to sound rude here but the fact is that hams are a socially challenged lot with no real social skills. Regardless of what they tell you on this NG, they are so deprived of people to talk to that they don't care if you're licensed or not. Just be sure to obay the rules and don't be an asshole on the airways. If you can do those things, you will never be turned in. As I said, I have been doing it for a very long time and have had no problems. Just enjoy yourself and learn. |
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:01:20 GMT, "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote: All right. I get the idea. Thanks. My radio is up at my house in the Pocono Mountains, PA, not where I live here in NYC, so I suppose I'll buy an antenna (good grief, not I've got to figure *that* out!) and see if I can hear anyone talking. If I get reception I'll put in the time and effort to understand what I'm doing. Thanks again. I'll let you know if I succeed. I never even considered leaving the radio here in my apartment. You can't just stick the antenna out an open window and expect to get results, right, or can you . . ? Absolutly you can. |
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message . ..
New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? Rick Bryan New York, NY Please don't take offense, but you will almost certainly be found out very soon. While the lingo is not all that hard, it is hard to sound convincing. At best you will be labeled a LID, at worst the local hams might decide to use you as the fox in a RDF hunt. Given that a normal fox hunt has rather low powered txs, in difficult locations and run very short bursts, to RDF a person engaged in normal conversation is, as the computer gurus say, "a trivial task". Even with no special equipment, meaning no fancy Yagis, I have tracked down ham friends just for grins. Given that it will cost you less then $10, and, at most a few days of study, why run the risk. I would worry a lot more about a local cop, who might well be a ham, deciding to bust you for having a radio that will receive "police comms". While real hams are imune, you would be fair game. Big fine, plus the chance of real jail time. Terry |
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:15:04 -0600, JJ
wrote: Bill E wrote: On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:32:59 -0600, JJ wrote: Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. This is not exactly true. The FCC is currently considering a requirement for a "listener" license. The ruling is related to the new Patriot Act and says: Article 10:2:3a The requirement of said radio operator to be licensed in hereto state of operation for receiving Ham bands. See also this link: www.us.gov/radioreq/lic/listener Regards I doubt that will ever fly, but until if/when it ever does I stand by my statement which is exactly true, you do not need a license to listen to the ham bands or any sw bands. I could not get the link to work. Here's your sign. |
"JJ" wrote:
(snip) No one is going to bust through your front door, but the hams, who will uncover you sharade rather quickly, will file a report with the FCC and you will get one of those letters wanting to know why you are transmitting on the ham bands without a license and to continue doing so can result in a hefty fine. (snip) Most non-hams would probably be amazed at how much effort the FCC has put towards making the Amateur radio service effective at self-policing, including guidelines on locating & identifying the offending party (rdf/foxhunting), evidence gathering (times, frequencies, tape recordings, and so on), reporting procedures, attending ham activities to encourage cooperation, and more. Ham operators have access to a massive amount of frequecies, spread across the entire radio spectrum. They also have great liberty in the technology that can be used. As such, the FCC takes this radio service seriously and expects the operators to do the same. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
In article , "coustanis"
writes: Subject: Excuse me. Do you *really* need a license? From: "coustanis" Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 21:15:08 -0400 "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:01:20 GMT, "Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote: All right. I get the idea. Thanks. My radio is up at my house in the Pocono Mountains, PA, not where I live here in NYC, so I suppose I'll buy an antenna (good grief, not I've got to figure *that* out!) and see if I can hear anyone talking. If I get reception I'll put in the time and effort to understand what I'm doing. Thanks again. I'll let you know if I succeed. I never even considered leaving the radio here in my apartment. You can't just stick the antenna out an open window and expect to get results, right, or can you . . ? Absolutly you can. Stealth Apartment Antenna design & construction procedures.. __________________________________________________ ______ MATERIALS Some Stranded, Insulated copper wire from Radio shack Colors so it matches the bricks / outside of your building Some stick-on Cord holders One tube clear Silicone sealer glue One black magic marker A roll of Duct tape color of outside of apt. One Mop One piece of twine or string. One Small soft edged weight. PROCEDU See how far it is in between two windows of your Apt.. Measure out a piece of string this distance + ~ 6 - 8 feet. Attach a small soft edged weight to it. ( Look Outside to see no one is looking !! ) Secure curious household pets Open Both Windows. Insert mop part way out one] Close that window to secure mop handle Run over to the other window QUICK! Take the twine with the weight on it & (without risking life & limb) Toss the string over the mop sticking out the other window. Secure the end of that end of the string with a bit of slack Close that window Run over to the other window with the mop that has the twine handing down off it Pull the mop in Close the window. ( Breath deeply ) NOW.... Attach the stranded wire to the end of the string. Slightly open window Run over to the oher window. Open it & pull in string until wire / string connection is through.. Pull in enough so that wire will reach SWR Attach wire to SWR. Close window. - That's basically it. Modify as needed. You can take Square stick -on cord holders Camouflage them with magic Marker color , & Silicone glue them to the outside corners of the window, Then loop more wire ( DONT FALL OUT WHEN DOING THIS !!) around the cord holders. This makes the antenna longer. repeat for other windows..This should help lots.. ( Works for me !!) |
= = = "Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
= = = ink.net... "JJ" wrote: (snip) No one is going to bust through your front door, but the hams, who will uncover you sharade rather quickly, will file a report with the FCC and you will get one of those letters wanting to know why you are transmitting on the ham bands without a license and to continue doing so can result in a hefty fine. (snip) Most non-hams would probably be amazed at how much effort the FCC has put towards making the Amateur radio service effective at self-policing, including guidelines on locating & identifying the offending party (rdf/foxhunting), evidence gathering (times, frequencies, tape recordings, and so on), reporting procedures, attending ham activities to encourage cooperation, and more. Ham operators have access to a massive amount of frequecies, spread across the entire radio spectrum. They also have great liberty in the technology that can be used. As such, the FCC takes this radio service seriously and expects the operators to do the same. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ DS et al, I sorry, I have to Laugh. But this last couple of posts reads like the FCC (Gestapo) and the Amateurs (the Hitler Youth) during the NAZI Era. Something to Think About ~ RHF .. |
Bill E wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:15:04 -0600, JJ wrote: Bill E wrote: On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:32:59 -0600, JJ wrote: Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. This is not exactly true. The FCC is currently considering a requirement for a "listener" license. The ruling is related to the new Patriot Act and says: Article 10:2:3a The requirement of said radio operator to be licensed in hereto state of operation for receiving Ham bands. See also this link: www.us.gov/radioreq/lic/listener Regards I doubt that will ever fly, but until if/when it ever does I stand by my statement which is exactly true, you do not need a license to listen to the ham bands or any sw bands. I could not get the link to work. Here's your sign. ??????? |
"JJ" wrote in message ... Bill E wrote: On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:15:04 -0600, JJ wrote: Bill E wrote: On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:32:59 -0600, JJ wrote: Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You do not need a license to just listen. This is not exactly true. The FCC is currently considering a requirement for a "listener" license. The ruling is related to the new Patriot Act and says: Article 10:2:3a The requirement of said radio operator to be licensed in hereto state of operation for receiving Ham bands. See also this link: www.us.gov/radioreq/lic/listener Regards I doubt that will ever fly, but until if/when it ever does I stand by my statement which is exactly true, you do not need a license to listen to the ham bands or any sw bands. I could not get the link to work. Here's your sign. ??????? The post was a joke.. the "here's your sign" is from a comedy routine by Bill Engvall.. you should pick up one of his CD's.. he's hilarious. |
"RHF" wrote:
DS et al, I sorry, I have to Laugh. But this last couple of posts reads like the FCC (Gestapo) and the Amateurs (the Hitler Youth) during the NAZI Era. Something to Think About ~ RHF Perhaps one would think that if one considers all forms of restrictions and enforcement to be Nazi-like. However, most people agree reasonable restrictions, and enforcement of those restrictions, are necessary for members of societies to co-exist in any civilized manner. And, unlike Nazi Germany, we all have a clear say in those FCC restrictions and enforcement, through public comments over proposed rules and through our election of those who appoint the commission members and oversee their actions. Most within the radio community agree restrictions and enforcement are valuable, and were successful at convincing legislators outside the radio community of that. You're certainly free to disagree, but your disagreement in itself doesn't make those restrictions and enforcement Nazi-like. Something for you to think about. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
And, unlike Nazi Germany, we all have a clear say in those FCC restrictions and enforcement, through public comments over proposed rules and through our election of those who appoint the commission members and oversee their actions. When it comes to topics like BPL, the FCC seems more responsive to industry lobbyists than the public comments. -----= 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! =----- |
= = = "Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
= = = hlink.net... "RHF" wrote: DS et al, I sorry, I have to Laugh. But this last couple of posts reads like the FCC (Gestapo) and the Amateurs (the Hitler Youth) during the NAZI Era. Something to Think About ~ RHF Perhaps one would think that if one considers all forms of restrictions and enforcement to be Nazi-like. However, most people agree reasonable restrictions, and enforcement of those restrictions, are necessary for members of societies to co-exist in any civilized manner. And, unlike Nazi Germany, we all have a clear say in those FCC restrictions and enforcement, through public comments over proposed rules and through our election of those who appoint the commission members and oversee their actions. Most within the radio community agree restrictions and enforcement are valuable, and were successful at convincing legislators outside the radio community of that. You're certainly free to disagree, but your disagreement in itself doesn't make those restrictions and enforcement Nazi-like. Something for you to think about. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ DS - So t all comes down to 'community standards' ;-) ~ RHF .. |
"starman" wrote:
Dwight Stewart wrote: And, unlike Nazi Germany, we all have a clear say in those FCC restrictions and enforcement, through public comments over proposed rules and through our election of those who appoint the commission members and oversee their actions. When it comes to topics like BPL, the FCC seems more responsive to industry lobbyists than the public comments. Think about it, Starman. There are only slightly more than a half million ham operators in the USA, while BPL has to potential to serve the well more than 150 million internet users. If the FCC is going to kill BPL, it must have a darn good reason. The "interference with our frequencies" argument can only go so far if that industry can show it is even taking superficial steps to minimize that. The point here is that the FCC doesn't just work for us (a relatively small group of ham operators), but must take the needs of _all_ Americans into consideration. As the world changes, with a greater need for more and more radio frequencies for newer technologies, our small numbers are going to continue to hurt us. The only solution is to dramatically increase those numbers, but that will only come with dramatic change in this radio service. With substantial numbers, the FCC has something substantial to protect. Sadly, far too many in this radio service are resisting the very changes so desperately needed. I won't go into those changes here because it really isn't germane to this newsgroup. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:01:20 GMT, "Corwin, Prince of Amber"
wrote: So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Why bother with a drivers license either? Does anyone *really* care? Yes. The people who actually are licensed. Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? No. Chances are you'll get a letter from the FCC with a court date and fine listed. Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? None. Because if they are ham operators, they are licensed. -- To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address. |
You seem to be saying that ham operators are the only ones affected. How
about air traffic control? FEMA? Coast Guard. Many more. All have voiced their objections but the FCC is still going with the money. "Dwight Stewart" wrote in message hlink.net... Think about it, Starman. There are only slightly more than a half million ham operators in the USA, while BPL has to potential to serve the well more than 150 million internet users. If the FCC is going to kill BPL, it must have a darn good reason. The "interference with our frequencies" argument can only go so far if that industry can show it is even taking superficial steps to minimize that. The point here is that the FCC doesn't just work for us (a relatively small group of ham operators), but must take the needs of _all_ Americans into consideration. As the world changes, with a greater need for more and more radio frequencies for newer technologies, our small numbers are going to continue to hurt us. The only solution is to dramatically increase those numbers, but that will only come with dramatic change in this radio service. With substantial numbers, the FCC has something substantial to protect. Sadly, far too many in this radio service are resisting the very changes so desperately needed. I won't go into those changes here because it really isn't germane to this newsgroup. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
"starman" wrote: When it comes to topics like BPL, the FCC seems more responsive to industry lobbyists than the public comments. Think about it, Starman. There are only slightly more than a half million ham operators in the USA, while BPL has to potential to serve the well more than 150 million internet users. If the FCC is going to kill BPL, it must have a darn good reason. The "interference with our frequencies" argument can only go so far if that industry can show it is even taking superficial steps to minimize that. The point here is that the FCC doesn't just work for us (a relatively small group of ham operators), but must take the needs of _all_ Americans into consideration. As the world changes, with a greater need for more and more radio frequencies for newer technologies, our small numbers are going to continue to hurt us. The only solution is to dramatically increase those numbers, but that will only come with dramatic change in this radio service. With substantial numbers, the FCC has something substantial to protect. Sadly, far too many in this radio service are resisting the very changes so desperately needed. I won't go into those changes here because it really isn't germane to this newsgroup. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) There's no doubt that ham's are in the minority regarding BPL interference but the FCC has a legal mandate to protect licensed radio spectrum users, as the law now stands. I suppose they'll change the law to get around this legal inconvenience for the BPL industry. -----= 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! =----- |
starman wrote in message ...
Dwight Stewart wrote: "starman" wrote: When it comes to topics like BPL, the FCC seems more responsive to industry lobbyists than the public comments. Think about it, Starman. There are only slightly more than a half million ham operators in the USA, while BPL has to potential to serve the well more than 150 million internet users. If the FCC is going to kill BPL, it must have a darn good reason. The "interference with our frequencies" argument can only go so far if that industry can show it is even taking superficial steps to minimize that. The point here is that the FCC doesn't just work for us (a relatively small group of ham operators), but must take the needs of _all_ Americans into consideration. As the world changes, with a greater need for more and more radio frequencies for newer technologies, our small numbers are going to continue to hurt us. The only solution is to dramatically increase those numbers, but that will only come with dramatic change in this radio service. With substantial numbers, the FCC has something substantial to protect. Sadly, far too many in this radio service are resisting the very changes so desperately needed. I won't go into those changes here because it really isn't germane to this newsgroup. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) There's no doubt that ham's are in the minority regarding BPL interference but the FCC has a legal mandate to protect licensed radio spectrum users, as the law now stands. I suppose they'll change the law to get around this legal inconvenience for the BPL industry. Where is this legal mandate? The FCC has no mandate as the Amateur Radio Service is experimental in nature and they can't even stop interference between the hams. How about broadcasters encroaching on the ham bands? Where is the FCC? Please point exactly where any part of the FCC rules regarding Amateur Radio Service. GR -----= 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! =----- |
"no_spam_here" wrote in message om... Please point exactly where any part of the FCC rules regarding Amateur Radio Service. Part 97 |
"CW" wrote:
You seem to be saying that ham operators are the only ones affected. How about air traffic control? FEMA? Coast Guard. Many more. All have voiced their objections but the FCC is still going with the money. Look, I'm not trying to defend the BPL industry here, so don't jump on me about it. Instead, I'm simply explaining the realities of the situation. I limited my prior comments to ham operators because that was the discussion. Yes, others have expressed concerns about BPL. But, again, without some very specific problem for the FCC to hang it's hat on, it has no justification whatsoever to stop BPL. Concerns expressed without substance simply isn't enough if that industry can shown it has taken reasonable steps to minimize problems where those concerns exist. When it comes specifically to the relatively small number of ham operators, even superficial steps to minimize problems is probably enough. Your claim the FCC is "going with the money" is patently deceptive, and is doing nothing to improve our position in this situation. The money is there solely because the numbers are there. Again, BPL has the potential to serve many millions of households around the country. And, like any government agency, the FCC has an obligation to serve the majority (whether money is there or not). With all that in mind, give me one reason why the FCC should ignore the greater number that might benefit from BPL and instead cater to the objections of ham operators - especially if that industry can show it is, or has, taken steps to minimize the impact to ham radio. You may disagree those steps are sufficient, but deceptive comments about those we need on our side isn't going to prove it. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"starman" wrote:
There's no doubt that ham's are in the minority regarding BPL interference but the FCC has a legal mandate to protect licensed radio spectrum users, as the law now stands. I suppose they'll change the law to get around this legal inconvenience for the BPL industry. It's a balance, Starman. They also have a mandate to serve the public - the whole public, not just some small part of it. And they are protecting the us, the "licensed radio spectrum users," by providing us an opportunity to voice our concerns and requiring the BPL industry to address those concerns before approval is granted. That doesn't mean BPL is killed off entirely simply because we hear noise on our frequencies. Instead, it means that industry must take steps to minimize that. But, again, even that is a balance between the overall benefits of BPL and our ability to use our frequencies. Lets face it, balanced against the large numbers which may benefit from BPL, we may have to accept some inconvenient noise on our frequencies. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Brenda Ann Dyer" wrote in message ...
"no_spam_here" wrote in message om... Please point exactly where any part of the FCC rules regarding Amateur Radio Service. Part 97 And where in part 97 does it say anything about non amateur interference and hams frequencies being protected. |
yes, HAM operators need license to operate. Otherwise things will be
in bad shape in airwave, totally out of reach ... you'll never understand what other people says ... there should be a common lingo ..... you know what I mean. raqueeb hassan bangladesh |
"no_spam_here" wrote:
Where is this legal mandate? The FCC has no mandate as the Amateur Radio Service is experimental in nature and they can't even stop interference between the hams. (snip) It is buried somewhere in Part One or Two of the FCC rules. It's a one paragraph statement about preserving frequencies for intended use, minimizing interference, and so on. Of course, it says nothing about Amateur Radio specifically, but is a blanket statement about radio as a whole (which would presumably include Amateur radio). Now, please don't ask me to point it out, because I really do not feel like digging through all that to find it again. This is my last day as an active Ham operator (my equipment is on sale on eBay at this very moment - ending today), and would therefore rather not waste my time with it at the moment. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
In article ,
says... New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? You need no license at all to listen. But yes, you do need one to transmit. The FCC is taking a very dim view of unlicensed operation. Until you have passed the examination and have a callsign duly issued to you by the FCC, any transmissions you make will be illegal and will lead to legal action by the FCC. If you decide to do so, be sure you have a hefty surplus of cash -- the fines are up to $10,000 PER INCIDENT. A ham license is not very difficult to obtain these days. You don't even need to pass a Morse Code test, if you just want to get up on VHF and higher frequencies (including the 2m band you mentioned) and talk locally. Pick up a copy of the book, "Now You're Talking," from the ARRL (www.arrl.org) or through your local bookstore. It has all the information you will need to pass the test. For HF privileges, a five-words-per-minute Morse test is required at this time. (Many countries are dropping the Morse requirement for HF privileges, and it's entirely possible the US will follow suit in due course.) -- -- //Steve// Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS Fountain Valley, CA Email: |
coustanis wrote:
"Corwin, Prince of Amber" wrote in message ... New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? Rick Bryan New York, NY You do not need a license to listen. As far as transmitting, all I can say is that I have been running a station for 25 years with no license and no one has figured it out yet. I don't mean to sound rude here but the fact is that hams are a socially challenged lot with no real social skills. Regardless of what they tell you on this NG, they are so deprived of people to talk to that they don't care if you're licensed or not. Just be sure to obay the rules and don't be an asshole on the airways. If you can do those things, you will never be turned in. As I said, I have been doing it for a very long time and have had no problems. Just enjoy yourself and learn. Yea well if you want to listen to this guy go ahead, but you may want to pay attention to this first. ENFORCEMENT: NO LICENSE - DON’T OPERATE The town of Reseda, California, is only about 10 miles from the Newsline studio. It’s also the place where the FCC alleges that someone has been operating a ham radio transmitter without the benefit of being a licensed ham. In a letter to a resident identified as Joseph A. Mosbergen, the FCC says that he or someone in his residence has been operating radio-transmitting equipment on several Los Angeles area Two Meter Amateur Radio repeaters. The agency warns Mosbergen that this is a violation of it rules and will subject him or whoever is proven to be operating to punitive action. This could include a fine or imprisonment, as well as seizure of any non-certified radio transmitting equipment. It also tells Mosbergern that this is the last warning that he will receive. |
So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my
2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. In a letter to a resident identified as Joseph A. Mosbergen, the FCC says that he or someone in his residence has been operating radio-transmitting equipment on several Los Angeles area Two Meter Amateur Radio repeaters. What I can't quite figure out is why he doesn't just go ahead and get his ticket. To get onto 2 meters is like the easiest license class to get. Spend an hour looking at a Now You're Talking book or even studying online fer cryin' out loud, then take ten minutes to do the exam. No code needed, no headaches. I'd understand (for the sake of the discussion) why someone *might* not want to take the time to get a real license if they wanted to transmit on HF or on Extra class bands, etc. Not that I condone that either, but at least that requires code elements in the exam process. But 2 meter VHF and above? No sweat. That's like forging an I.D. just so you can vote. Just register and save the headache of making the damn thing, and the prospect of getting caught and fined. Not that I'm a ham (no interest in talking back) but I love monitoring SW. Just my useless 2 cents. I know it's been covered before. Linus |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
Look, I'm not trying to defend the BPL industry here, so don't jump on me about it. Instead, I'm simply explaining the realities of the situation. I limited my prior comments to ham operators because that was the discussion. Yes, others have expressed concerns about BPL. But, again, without some very specific problem for the FCC to hang it's hat on, it has no justification whatsoever to stop BPL. Concerns expressed without substance simply isn't enough if that industry can shown it has taken reasonable steps to minimize problems where those concerns exist. When it comes specifically to the relatively small number of ham operators, even superficial steps to minimize problems is probably enough. If a BPL system started operating in your area and you could no longer use your amateur HF equipment because of the noise, would you be willing to give it up for the sake of better Internet access for more people? -----= 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! =----- |
Corwin, Prince of Amber wrote:
New user. I know I may (hopefully not) get 9 angry replies and 1 who understands my ignorance and will provide an articulate reponse, but I'll take my chances. So what if I invent my call sign, learn the lingo, and start using my 2M radio without jumping through all the hoops to get licensed. Does anyone *really* care? Is 'big brother' really going to bust through my front door with a SWAT team? Of the 1+ million HAM operators, how many are actually fined each year for doing what I'm considering? If I stick with it instead of packing the radio up and putting it next to my photography equipment, I will get licensed, I promise. Also, even if I *really do* need a license to transmit, I don't need a license to turn the radio on and listen, do I? Rick Bryan New York, NY ================================================== ========= Sure, go ahead. Give it a try. There are hams that make it sport to track down guys like you. Radio direction finding is great fun. I know of unlicensed people that were nailed while driving down the highway. But these hams get bored when everyone behaves. They could use a little excitement. If you want to learn how they track people down then do a little research on APRS. Two guys triangulating can pinpoint you in about a minute. But why be the hunted when you can be the hunter? Get licensed. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com