From: "bb" on Mon, Mar 14 2005 6:01 pm

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Dave,

You're missing some basic points about this minimum-age-
requirement idea.

First off, there has never been such a requirement in the
USA. Not even back before WW1.

Correct.

Also, many other countries which once had age requirements (like
Canada) have abandoned them.

Dissimilarly, other countries which once had a morse code exam
requirement are to be ignored or discredited, South Africa...

Quite true, Brian, but that is NOT what this thread
is about. :-)

Tsk, tsk...Jimmie Miccolis can't bear it when his noble
league-speak isn't accepted as Ultimate Truth in ham radio
so he tries to manufacture an ISSUE based on attempts to
denigrate an NCTA in here. We may have to call him
"Misdirection Miccolis," privately, of course since he is
a lofty, noble, royal amateur extra.

Len Anderson, who requested the age requirement of FCC
and who has
a self-admitted problem with young people being licensed,
has been
repeatedly asked to provide evidence - any evidence -
that there
is some sort of problem caused by lack of an age requirement.

Len has never come up with any proof for his assertion of ARRL
dishonesty either.

I didn't ask for proof. Just evidence. Len has not provided
*any* evidence in either case.

So people now have to have evidence for why they want an arbitrary
licensing requirement?

Absolutely, Brian! Tsk, some of these PCTAs want to take
code test elimination to the highest courts in the land! :-)

Never mind that my source of information (and cute picture)
of those two "youngest hams in the world" at 6 years old was
the ARRL News, on their website. Jimmie wanna say I "lie."

Jimmie is of the opinion that ANY toddler (with a ham
license) ALWAYS behaves and could never, ever do anything
wrong on the air. Neither do such toddlers EVER cause
trouble on a playground or with their parents in super-
markets, etc., etc., etc.

Of course, if such code-tested kids grow up to be extras
then they will be beyond reproach! PCTA extras can never
ever be charged with ANY impropriety!

He has provided no evidence at all of such problems.
Nor has anyone else.

That'd likely be because there is no such evidence in existence.

Yep.

Oh, my!

Tsk, tsk. The league continues to Sin by Omission on
much of its "news." Such "evidence" is glaringly in
view by comparing REAL news sources output about an
event also "reported" by the league.

The league is the league and beyond reproach. None may
gainsay a thing nasty about them. The league is holy.


As a diversion, it has been suggested that such an
age requirement
would not affect most hams today, such as you
(K8MN) and Steve (K4YZ).
The clear implication is that you shouldn't oppose
it because you're
over 14, and were at least 14 when you were first licensed.

But there's a clear contradiction in that diversion,
because the person
demanding the age restriction is way over the age
of 14, so it won't affect him, either.

It remains that it has not been demonstrated that such
a rule change would be a positive thing.

It's quite clear that it would be a negative thing.

Proof? Evidence?

Jimmie needs NO "proof." He points to ham radio as it is
and says "It ain't broke, don't fix it!"

There we have it.

Absolute.

Jimmie is one of the Lawgivers.


In fact, if we follow the logic of 'it doesn't affect
you', it could be
argued that since Len Anderson obvioulsy doesn't want
an amateur license, he has no real grounds for complaint at
all.

To be completely fair to Len, he does not desire an
amateur radio
license at this time. He changes his view from time to
time on whether he desires an amateur radio license.

That is certainly a more accurate way of saying it.

However, please note that at no time has Len's desire for
an amateur radio license reached the point where he
actually obtained one. So it cannot be much of a desire
even at its greatest.

Perhaps the desire to implement an arbitrary licensing requirement on
the American amateur radio community is stronger?

Careful, Brian, you are making negative criticsm on one
of the Lawgivers, a god of radio.

By their virtue of being PCTA extras, gods of radio like
Jimmie KNOW EVERYTHING and what they KNOW is the TRUTH.

Look in other threads in this newsgroup. Jimmie KNOWS
about things having NOTHING to do with amateur radio
and doesn't hesitate to tell the world he is "right."

Never mind that Jimmie has NEVER been IN government or
in national party politics, he KNOWS it all without EVER
being IN government nor expressing any desire to be IN
government or national politics.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...I've never claimed to be IN amateur radio
since I began advocating the elimination of the morse code
test. [over two decades ago, by the way]

His only apparent involvement in amateur radio is spouting off
bull****, nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general
acting like a complete jackass.
His sole follower simply performs a variation on his
themes. Why bother with them?

Len believes that by commenting to the FCC in regard
to amateur radio
regulations and by doing whatever it is that he does
here, he is somehow
participating in amateur radio itself.

Just a matter of semantics.

I'm sure Chairman Powell never gave it much thought.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Whover big badass dave and Jimmie
are mind-reading, it sure isn't me. :-)

It would seem that Jimmie's only apparent involvement
in government and politics is spouting off bull****,
nonsense and abuse on usenet, and in general acting like
a complete jackass.

Jimmie has NO government office position nor does he have
ANY "in" with national party politics, has never ever
served in the United States military, has never ever
been IN the aerospace business...yet he KNOWS all about
that and doesn't hesitate to claim "authority" and a
noble, even royal judgemental capability on all who dare
speak against his NON-ham-radio opinions!


There's no good reason for a minimum age requirement
for an amateur
radio license in the USA. We have more than 90 years
of evidence to
back that up.

You'd think that if a problem existed, it would have
manifested itself by now.

Yep. But it hasn't. And as previously mentioned, the cb
service had such a rule, but it was not effective in
keeping that service well-behaved and law-abiding.

Jim, you're unlikely to be able to reason out how an arbitrary
licensing requirement will manifest itself. That is the beauty of
arbitrary requirements.

Brian, he just CANNOT change his mind.

Further, Jimmie is a Lawgiver and KNOWS what is "right"
and what is "wrong."

Anyone who says the least thing negative about what
Jimmie considers "right" is thus automatically "wrong."

It's as simple as that. :-)

But, we can't disturb this god of radio right now. He
is very busy manufacturing a mountain out of a molehill
right now. He wants to make an "example" of something
I wrote to the FCC over six years ago, possibly preparing
a writ for submission to the Supreme Court or something...

What a waste of time he be.