Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance where you can read it for yourself. http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf QRZ.com are leading the hams in a campaign to stop this law from taking effect. You can read all about it he http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=185892 There is also are some videos on YouTube from N9FAA about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmWLFhjjbUY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A Hams in "Kalifornia" and the whole country have to unite to fight it now! Louis |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham wrote: Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance where you can read it for yourself. http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio. Sure they can; all they need to do is pass an ordinance. Whether or not someone has the resources to file a court challenge and fight it is a separate issue. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 15, 9:42*pm, N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote: In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham wrote: Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. And you all didn't believe me that SOME cities and counties are doing this. I didn't even know about the Palmdale California one until reading this message. So chalk up ANOTHER city making such a rule. technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "must use the least restrictive means" then what about all the previous statements in thse newsgroups that legally the local authorities are allowed to be more restrictive than the federal radio rules, but not legally allowed to be less restrictive than the federal rules??????? It seems to be if thety're allowed to be MORE restrictive than the federal rules, then the ban on ham radio in that city by that city is completely legal, if the law passed. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 15, 7:18*pm, radioguy wrote:
On Dec 15, 9:42*pm, N9OGL wrote: On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote: In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham wrote: Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. And you all didn't believe me that SOME cities and counties are doing this. I didn't even know about the Palmdale California one until reading this message. So chalk up ANOTHER city making such a rule. technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "must use the least restrictive means" then what about all the previous statements in thse newsgroups that legally the local authorities are allowed to be more restrictive than the federal radio rules, but not legally allowed to be less restrictive than the federal rules??????? Not true, many cities believe they can, but if you were to fight it in federal court, they would lose. Cities, States and Federal according to the courts must use the "lease restrictive mean necessary to substances governmental interest". There has been many court cases including Supreme Court cases and which the courts has ruled that is how it's suppose to be. That's where the FCC got that term in PRB-1. It seems to be if thety're allowed to be MORE restrictive than the federal rules, then the ban on ham radio in that city by that city is completely legal, if the law passed. Actually Federal laws also have to abide by the "lease restrictive mean" as well, although a lot of government agencies don't |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In rec.radio.amateur.misc N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 6:30Â*pm, wrote: In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham wrote: Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. Â*The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance where you can read it for yourself. http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio. Sure they can; all they need to do is pass an ordinance. Whether or not someone has the resources to file a court challenge and fight it is a separate issue. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest. Technically, yes they can. A city can pass an ordinance making it illegal to wear a white shirt and it is law until challenged in court. And, for what it is worth, California adoptd AB 1228 in 2003 which basically makes PRB-1 part of state law. Neither AB 1228 nor PRB-1 mean anything until a locality passes and enforces an ordinace contrary to state and federal statute AND an individual is "harmed" by the ordinance AND the individual challenges the ordinance in court. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Regarding the Palmdale code section cited below: Do you have a correct
reference? The link below results in the dreaded "404"! Thanks! Al "policy-ham" wrote in message ... Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance where you can read it for yourself. http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf QRZ.com are leading the hams in a campaign to stop this law from taking effect. You can read all about it he http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=185892 There is also are some videos on YouTube from N9FAA about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmWLFhjjbUY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A Hams in "Kalifornia" and the whole country have to unite to fight it now! Louis |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 15, 10:48*pm, "Al Gillis" wrote:
Regarding the Palmdale code section cited below: *Do you have a correct reference? *The link below results in the dreaded "404"! Thanks! Al "policy-ham" wrote in message ... Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof. It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and talking on it. I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance where you can read it for yourself. http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf QRZ.com are leading the hams in a campaign to stop this law from taking effect. You can read all about it he http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=185892 There is also are some videos on YouTube from N9FAA about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmWLFhjjbUY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wCWbzVP8A Hams in "Kalifornia" and the whole country have to unite to fight it now! Louis- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I also got the 404 error. His other link to qrz worked and I got this working link of Palmdale's website mentioning ham antennas dated December 2008. This link is currently working: http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
... Neither AB 1228 nor PRB-1 mean anything until a locality passes and enforces an ordinace contrary to state and federal statute AND an individual is "harmed" by the ordinance AND the individual challenges the ordinance in court. And to add insult to injury, you'll have to spend your money to get your antenna installed, spend your money to fight the city's illegal rules, and then you'll have to pay your taxes.. which the city will use to FIGHT YOU and your antenna installation. The Government(at all levels) passes all kind of laws that probably aren't legal or constitutional. They're supposed to at least try to pay attention to existing rules, laws, and the Constitution but frequently they don't. And then we the people have to spend our time and resources fighting the people we elect to these offices. The real problem is no one pays attention to these things. Even if you manage to go to court, get these rules thrown out, the people who wrote them will not be penalized in any palpable way. I had a HAM friend in a town near Sacramento who had to fight city hall on an antenna tower he'd set up. He had it up for almost 10 years before the city noticed.. and then tried to pull some permit nonsense to get him to take it down. Luckily he found a city clerk with half a brian, explained to them that the FCC handles these matters, and they left him alone. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hams are kooks. Hope they do it. Just listen to 14.275 any weekend.
Justification 4 the same. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
(OT) : Another Anti AM&FM Radio Bashing Post -by- Gallant 17 | Shortwave | |||
Shortwave Listening (SWL) Noise in Urban {Downtown) Location - Anti-Jammimg {Anti-Man-Made-Noise} Shortwave Antenna System | Shortwave | |||
Why Not Air America Radio ? - We really need an Anti-Bush'clan... | Shortwave | |||
Anti-Bush - Anti-Blair MP3s For Free Download | Broadcasting |