In reference to JerryOxendine blaming cb for what ails hammie radio,
Randy wrote:
OK, so they ban 10/11 meter rigs. What

premise prevents them from banning full

coverage rigs? Same difference, both are

easily modified.


Exactly. When the radios in contention are banned, Jerry and the like
will then have to resort to blaming the die-hards that still have such
radios as to the cause of their consternation, as he always claims if a
radio op breaks the law, they should get what's coming,,,but given the
astronomical number of hammies busted compared to cbers, JerryO has yet
to post details concerning hammie enforcemen in same jovial approac he
takes with cb-related enforcement....ah,,but that would require the
power of objectiveness.



Why should a single band rig that happens to

work on 11 meters be banned before a rig that
will transmit from 1-30 megs with the same

type of simple mod? We're not talking apples

and oranges here, Jerry. They are both

apples. Not to mention the obvious. Full

coverage rigs have MUCH (caps for you,

Jerry) more potential for abusing important

bands.






Jerry automatically discounts the theory a hammie would do such a
thing, compared to a cber with a Galaxy, despite the FCC's own records
affirming the problem is much worse with licensed hammies and that
hammies with the equipment have been the ones busted and even jailed for
such activity, at a rate that far exceeds any enforcement against cbers.



And as far as 10 meters goes, you and I both

know it's a rather useless band. You aren't

making sense, and really, you are beginning

to sound a little Dougay. Did you and he play

nice with each other this weekend?



Especially when he begins his bull**** claims about the magnitude of
cbers messing up the airwaves compared to hammies (read: mostly
nocodes). Hell, half of them couldn't learn code, let alone pass it, and
the rest failed the code test (like Lelnad last August)..no wonder there
are so many ****ed of nocodes. 75 phone really seems to be taking a
nosedive lately,,,,,in fact, all the popular hammie bands seem to be in
trouble. ..and here sits Jerry, picking his nose and blaming others when
it bleeds.

You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio interference.....

http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm

Twistedhed wrote:

You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio interference.....

http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm


Same old story, blame the ham who is operating a clean station
completely legal, instead of the crappy electronic devices.

From: (JJ)
Twistedhed wrote:
You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio interference.....
http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm
Same old story, blame the ham who is

operating a clean station completely legal,

instead of the crappy electronic devices.

_
If that were the case, one would need point out such a scenario would
then be no different than blaming the posters of this board for
interference on ten meter.
What I find entertaining is this hammie's self-purported claim of
causing blinking street lights when he keys.

(Twistedhed) wrote:
From: (JJ)
Twistedhed wrote:
You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio
interference.....

http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm

Same old story, blame the ham who is

operating a clean station completely legal,

instead of the crappy electronic devices.

_
If that were the case, one would need point out such a scenario would
then be no different than blaming the posters of this board for
interference on ten meter.
What I find entertaining is this hammie's self-purported claim of
causing blinking street lights when he keys.


we know there are some bad hams Twistydave thats why Riley was asked
to go into action. Now imagine that newspaper did an interview with
you and you told them how much you enjoy the superbowl and how you
were a ham and freebander and you diss the government.

Twist,

I've finally found the ultimate authority. Just wait until you go and
operate running all of 25 watts on 10 meters and your wife comes into the
shack hollering "you're getting into the entertainment center! I can't
watch tv!" And some folks think the FCC can be dangerous. Bye bye house,
bye bye car, bye bye bank account.

End of operation, end of discussion LOL
Been there, done that

Kinda makes all of the discussions around here moot too.


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim
(ps -gotta try PSK-31)


"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...
You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio interference.....


http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.605 / Virus Database: 385 - Release Date: 3/1/04

JJ wrote:
Twistedhed wrote:

You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio
interference.....

http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...CT_811_2692684,
00.htm


Same old story, blame the ham who is operating a clean station
completely legal, instead of the crappy electronic devices.

I run nothing but clean at home, mostly Collins in fact.

Do I get a free pass? -NO-!

--
Mopar http://www.allpar.com/mopar.html

In , Duke Of Windsor
wrote:

snip
The FCC rules place the responsibility for correcting interference on the
device user, i.e. the Pittaways. This can put a ham operator into the
unenviable position of explaining to neighbors that the device they
bought violates federal law."


I don't think a device (or "mechanical contrivance", for Twisty's sake) has ever
been convicted of violating federal law. Not to say it can't happen (Azimov).

Part 15 devices are required to accept interference. At the same time, a ham is
required to operate "in accordance with good engineering and good amateur
practice", which I assume would include limiting the amount of annoyance caused
to the neighbors via RFI. After all, a ham ticket isn't a license to broadcast
interference, nor is it a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card if he does. The ham is not
allowed to "willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any
radio communication or signal", a rule which makes no distinction between
signals to or from Part 15 devices, or from any other type of device under any
part, including a broadcast transmitter. So if he is continuing to operate while
knowingly (and therefore 'willingly') causing interference to the neighbor's TV,
it is clearly the -ham- who is at fault, and those neighbors should be bitching
to the television stations who would set that ham straight in a damn hurry.

They may also have the right to file a civil complaint against him for causing a
private or public nuisance, which may be perfectly valid -regardless- of how
legal he is under Title 47.






-----= 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! =-----

Frank Gilliland wrote:

So if he is continuing to operate while
knowingly (and therefore 'willingly') causing interference to the neighbor's TV,
it is clearly the -ham- who is at fault,

Not so, if the ham's signal is clean, no harmonics, no spurious energy,
within the power limits, operating according to FCC rules, and the TV
cannot reject out of band rf energy, it is the fault of the TV, not the
ham and he is perfectly within his rights to keep operating. Same for
any CB operator. If your logic made any sense, then if I complained to
you that you driving your car by my house interfers with my afternoon
nap, then it is your fault. I can't get my nap because you now knowingly
(and therefore 'willingly') interfer with my nap (disturbing the peace),
so I should be able to have you stopped from driving by my house.
Oh, you say I should better insulate my house against noise? Like maybe
the TV owner should fix his crappy TV so it does not pick up unwanted
signals?

and those neighbors should be bitching
to the television stations who would set that ham straight in a damn hurry.

And the tv station can't do a single thing but complain to the FCC.

They may also have the right to file a civil complaint against him for causing a
private or public nuisance, which may be perfectly valid -regardless- of how
legal he is under Title 47.

Civil authority has no jurisdiction over an FCC licensed ham station.

(Twistedhed) wrote in message ...
From: (JJ)
Twistedhed wrote:
You're right, Jerry,,,people do seem fed up with radio interference.....
http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_new...2692684,00.htm
Same old story, blame the ham who is

operating a clean station completely legal,

instead of the crappy electronic devices.

_
If that were the case, one would need point out such a scenario would
then be no different than blaming the posters of this board for
interference on ten meter.
What I find entertaining is this hammie's self-purported claim of
causing blinking street lights when he keys.

LMAO you have a comprehension deficit twistydave he was trying to make
a point that even small amount of rf will interfere with poorly made
appliances. you mistake his statement for bragging like keyclowns do
when they ride around in longnose suburbans trying to interfere with
stuff.