ILLEGAL CB TRANSCEIVER LIST
W7DVJ
The FCC’s Office of Engineer and Technology (OET) has evaluated the devices
listed below and has concluded that these devices are not only amateur
transceivers but can easily be altered for use as Citizens Band (CB)
transceivers as well. As such, OET has further concluded that these devices
cannot legally be imported or marketed within the United States for the
reasons discussed below. Further, the FCC General Council has issued a
decision in a specific case involving one manufacturer and has concluded
that dual use CB and amateur radios of the kind at issue may not be approved
under the Commission’s rules and are in violation of several rules including
the RF power level limits of 47 CFR 95.639. (letter from Christopher J.
Wright, FCC-OGC to John F. Atwood, US Customs Service, dated May 17, 1999).
Transceivers used in the Amateur Radio Service below 30 MHz do not require
FCC authorization prior to being imported into or marketed within the United
States, but transceivers for other services, including the CB Radio Service
(CB), do require Commission approval. The transceivers listed herein and
other similar models operate in the amateur "10-meter band" and are often
referred to as "10-meter" radios or "export" radios. The amateur 10-meter
band uses frequencies that are very close to the channels set aside for use
in the CB service. Some of the transceivers that manufacturers call
"10-meter" radios either operate on CB frequencies as manufactured and
imported or are designed such that internal circuits can readily be
activated by a user, a service technician or a dealer to operate on CB
frequencies. According to Section 95.603(c) of the Commission’s rules, a CB
transmitter is a transmitter that operates or is intended to operate at a
station authorized for the CB service. 47C.F.R. § 95.603(c). The Commission’
s equipment authorization experts in the FCC Laboratory have determined that
the transceivers listed herein and other similar models at issue here are
intended for use on the CB frequencies as well as those in the amateur
service because they have built-in capability to operate on CB frequencies.
This capability can be readily activated by moving or removing a jumper
plug, cutting or splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple
means. Thus, all the transceivers listed herein and similar models fall
within the definition of a CB transmitter. See 47C.F.R. § 95.603(c). A CB
transmitter must be certificated by the FCC prior to marketing or
importation. 47 C.F.R. §§ 95.603(c); 2.803.
Moreover, the dual use CB and amateur radios of the kind at issue here may
not be certified under the Commission’s rules. Section 95.655(a) states:
"….([CB] Transmitters with frequency capability for the Amateur Radio
Services … will not be certificated.)" See also Amendment of Part 95,
Subpart E, Technical Regulations in the Personal Radio Services Rules, FCC
88-256, 1888 WL 488084 (August 17, 1988). This clarification was added to
explicitly foreclose the possibility of certification of dual use CB and
amateur radios, see id, and thereby deter use by CB operators of frequencies
allocated for amateur radio use.
In addition, the Commission’s equipment authorization experts have
determined that these devices violate or appear to violate a number of the
rules governing CB devices. For example, they may use emission types not
permitted, or emit RF power at a level in excess of the levels permitted in
the CB radio service. See 47 C.F.R. § 95.639.
In view of the foregoing, the following "10-meter" transceivers are not
acceptable for importation or marketing into/within the United States.
Importation and marketing of these units is illegal pursuant to Section
302(b) of the Communications Act and Section 2.803 of the rules. Willful
violations of the Rules and the Act may subject the violator to a monetary
forfeiture of not more than $11,000 for each violation or each day of a
continuing violation. The Commission continues to review this type of
equipment, and additional makes and models may be added to this list in the
future.
LIST OF TRANSCEIVERS
ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET
GALAXY - models: DX33HML, DX 44V, DX55V, DX66V, DX 73V, DX 77HML, DX 88HL,
DX99V and Saturn Turbo
CONNEX - models: 3300, 3300HP-ZX, 3300 PLUS and CX-3800
MIRAGE - models: 44, Galaxy 88, 9900 and 2950EX
NORTH STAR - models: NS-3000 and NS-9000
PRESIDENT - models: Grant, J.F.K., Jackson, Lincoln, HR-2510 and HR-2600
PRO STAR - model: 240
RANGER - models: AR-3500, RCI-2950 and RCI-2970
TEK - model: HR-3950
UNIDEN - models: HR-2510 and HR-2600
SUPER STAR - model: 121
For further information concerning the listed transceivers or similar
models, contact Ray LaForge or Gary Hendrickson at the FCC Laboratory, 7435
Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, MD 21046, (301) 362-3041 or (301) 362-3043
respectively, or E-mail: rlaf...@fcc.gov and ghen...@fcc.gov
tn...@mucks.net
snip
> The Commission’
>s equipment authorization experts in the FCC Laboratory have determined that
>the transceivers listed herein and other similar models at issue here are
>intended for use on the CB frequencies as well as those in the amateur
>service because they have built-in capability to operate on CB frequencies.
>This capability can be readily activated by moving or removing a jumper
>plug, cutting or splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple
>means.
snip
>LIST OF TRANSCEIVERS
>
>ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET
>GALAXY - models: DX33HML, DX 44V, DX55V, DX66V, DX 73V, DX 77HML, DX 88HL,
>DX99V and Saturn Turbo
ect ect
snip
Let's see?............"and other similar"........Icom706, Kenwood 940,
Yaesu 767.ect ect.
They should all be made "ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET"
because they all are "readily activated ".
Runnin Man
<tn...@mucks.net> wrote in message
news:kk1evucsj15o47e27...@4ax.com...
Tnom, they are for use by amatuers why should they be illegal to import?
because a few CBer want to break the law and use them. That is like saying
cops shouldn't use guns be cause criminals break laws with them. Yoour being
stupid.
Reg1647
modified for cb or 11 meter, what ever you want to call it. The others you just
mentioned are just simpler to do. Give me a break. LOL.
Twistedhed
>Tnom, they are for use by amatuers why >should they be illegal to
import? because a >few CBer want to break the law and use them. >That is
like saying cops shouldn't use guns be >cause criminals break laws with
them. Yoour >being stupid.
What you're saying is essentially the same as "guns should be illegal
except for by the cops." Non-related and certainly not pertinent.
Hambo Nebo
tn...@mucks.net
>> Let's see?............"and other similar"........Icom706, Kenwood 940,
>> Yaesu 767.ect ect.
>>
>> They should all be made "ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET"
>> because they all are "readily activated ".
>
>
>Tnom, they are for use by amatuers why should they be illegal to import?
>because a few CBer want to break the law and use them.
CBers use Yaesus Icoms and Kenwoods to do exactly the same thing. Make
them ALL illegal to import or market.
>That is like saying
>cops shouldn't use guns be cause criminals break laws with them. Yoour being
>stupid.
>
So an amateur should have access to radio gear and non amateurs
shouldn't? I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.
tn...@mucks.net
Quotes from document:
**********************************************************************
"The transceivers listed herein and other similar models" "AND
OTHER"? Hardly specific enough to be taken seriously if
challenged.
**********************************************************************
*********************************************************************
"the transceivers listed herein and other similar models at issue here
are intended for use on the CB frequencies as well as those in the
amateur service " AND OTHER? Hardly specific enough to be taken
seriously if challenged. "INTENDED FOR USE"? How do they know?
Presuming a bit to much for a legal document.
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
"readily activated by moving or removing a jumper plug, cutting or
splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple means."
OR OTHER? Hardly specific enough to be taken seriously if challenged.
************************************************************************
Although this document does come from the FCC it has serious
weaknesses in its lack of specificity and its presumptions.
Ch15a
>
>ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET
The FCC is like an old dog, all they do is lay around and let out a fart now
and then. These radios are easily available on the net, and at radio shops all
over. The same goes for so called 10m amplifiers. Look into 10 big trucks and
see how many have a radio on the list. What's the point of posting this crap
here?
SILKY (Da Jeff Davis Pimp)
HR-2510 is A LEGAL radio for Ham Use you DUMB SHIT!!
Quit posting your communist,dick-torial bullshit on this NG!!
GO HOME!!!!
"W7DVJ" <w7...@hotwax.com> wrote in message
news:DkDJ9.464$3F.101...@news.inreach.com...
> station authorized for the CB service. 47C.F.R. ง 95.603(c). The
Commission'
> s equipment authorization experts in the FCC Laboratory have determined
that
> the transceivers listed herein and other similar models at issue here are
> intended for use on the CB frequencies as well as those in the amateur
> service because they have built-in capability to operate on CB
frequencies.
> This capability can be readily activated by moving or removing a jumper
> plug, cutting or splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple
> means. Thus, all the transceivers listed herein and similar models fall
> within the definition of a CB transmitter. See 47C.F.R. ง 95.603(c). A CB
> transmitter must be certificated by the FCC prior to marketing or
> importation. 47 C.F.R. งง 95.603(c); 2.803.
>
> Moreover, the dual use CB and amateur radios of the kind at issue here may
> not be certified under the Commission's rules. Section 95.655(a) states:
> "..([CB] Transmitters with frequency capability for the Amateur Radio
> Services . will not be certificated.)" See also Amendment of Part 95,
> Subpart E, Technical Regulations in the Personal Radio Services Rules, FCC
> 88-256, 1888 WL 488084 (August 17, 1988). This clarification was added to
> explicitly foreclose the possibility of certification of dual use CB and
> amateur radios, see id, and thereby deter use by CB operators of
frequencies
> allocated for amateur radio use.
>
> In addition, the Commission's equipment authorization experts have
> determined that these devices violate or appear to violate a number of the
> rules governing CB devices. For example, they may use emission types not
> permitted, or emit RF power at a level in excess of the levels permitted
in
> the CB radio service. See 47 C.F.R. ง 95.639.
Dave or Debby
Dave!
"Hambo Nebo" <tim...@aol.com10-106> wrote in message
news:20021211140605...@mb-fs.aol.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dave or Debby
The point is, to advance communism against the WIMPS that may be here !
Dave!
"Ch15a" <ch...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021211183107...@mb-fk.aol.com...
Dave or Debby
You forgot the HR 2600, which can't even get CB !
Settle down, don't you KNOW that the promoters of communism are NEVER
accurate ? !
Dave!
"SILKY (Da Jeff Davis Pimp)" <nof...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MsQJ9.27538$NV.5...@news.direcpc.com...
Runnin Man
<tn...@mucks.net> wrote in message
news:nv8fvu0psegpl2ftd...@4ax.com...
> snip
> So an amateur should have access to radio gear and non amateurs
> shouldn't? I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.
Yes amateurs have access to approved amatuer gear that they are allowed to
use, what are they supposed to talk on? What Planet are you from? Cbers
have access to "CB Radios"
tn...@mucks.net
wrote:
And CBers have legal access to amateur radios also.
Tom Sevart
<tn...@mucks.net> wrote in message
news:pccfvuol6k22uamae...@4ax.com...
> **********************************************************************
> "readily activated by moving or removing a jumper plug, cutting or
> splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple means."
> OR OTHER? Hardly specific enough to be taken seriously if challenged.
> ************************************************************************
>
> Although this document does come from the FCC it has serious
> weaknesses in its lack of specificity and its presumptions.
That's the problem I have with the government trying to regulate what radios
we can use. I used a 2510 on 10 meters while mobile for a few years and I
enjoyed using that radio. Now the government wants to get rid of them
because some people use them on 11 meters. The problem with that FCC
document is that it's so vague that just about any HF radio can be
considered to be an "illegal CB transceiver." My Kenwood TS-140 ham rig can
be converted to full 1500 kHz - 30 MHZ transmit just by removing two diodes.
Tom
Runnin Man
"Tom Sevart" <n2uhc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:at9uq8$11pq8c$1@ID->
> That's the problem I have with the government trying to regulate what
radios
> we can use. I used a 2510 on 10 meters while mobile for a few years and I
> enjoyed using that radio. Now the government wants to get rid of them
> because some people use them on 11 meters. The problem with that FCC
> document is that it's so vague that just about any HF radio can be
> considered to be an "illegal CB transceiver." My Kenwood TS-140 ham rig
can
> be converted to full 1500 kHz - 30 MHZ transmit just by removing two
diodes.
>
> Tom
Tom, what is so vague. They list all the radios, your Kenwood is not being
sold as a pseudo "legal" cb like the galaxys etc.
Can it be modified sure can, but it has met the FCC's Type aceptance and
certification while these phony 10 meter radios have not. What is so vague
about that.
>
tools
damn thing will work on 10, how, exactly, are they "fake"
"Runnin Man" <rcranus@hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:24CcnQbjq6j...@comcast.com...
DLHicks
"tools" <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:V82K9.2097$MV5.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Seems that the FCC has banned them because they can be modified. If the
> damn thing will work on 10, how, exactly, are they "fake"
Now that's a good question.
Deb
W7DVJ
"SILKY (Da Jeff Davis Pimp)" wrote in message
> W7DVJ just doesn't know a DAMN Thing about radios!!
>
> HR-2510 is A LEGAL radio for Ham Use you DUMB SHIT!!
> Quit posting your communist,dick-torial bullshit on this NG!!
> GO HOME!!!
It's not my list... It's QTH.COM's list dumbshit!
http://swap.qth.com/fcc/fcc-cbtable2.htm
Jerry Oxendine
tools <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:V82K9.2097$MV5.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> damn thing will work on 10, how, exactly, are they "fake"
This is purely conjecture, but the way I understand it is that it is more
than the modifiable aspect
that makes these radios unapproved. Most all of these sets are "CB-style"
in that they have incre-
mental "channel" indices as well as the frequency display; traditional 10
meter rigs have only the
frequency display and, sometimes, "memory" positions displayed in the same
window. The other
thing that causes them to come under FCC scrutiny and be referred to as
"fake", are the BAND
switches. Reasoning is that if a radio is truly a 10 Meter radio, it should
cover that one band. Therefore, those A thru F "bands" indicate something
other than what the radio is represented to be:
that is, a MULTI-band radio that will operate on more than the one band its
name refers to. These
radios, ergo, are NOT what they SAY they are. Yes, they will operate on 10
meters, but by having those switches for "them extree channels", they become
fraudulent. By the strictest legal def-
inition, the wording of the ban may not be tight enough, but that would easy
to remedy. Hollings-
worth, for example, is an attorney and, BTW, this wording thing HAS already
been brought to his
attention.
Nobody is being fooled by the Galaxy and Connex radios. We all know what
they "really" are (wink, wink), and that their marketing methods are a ploy
to get around bans on their importation.
I have said this before, but it bears repeating: IF these radios were not
being used on illegal freq-
uencies and were not beeping and squeaking all over 10 meters, I don't think
anyone would even
CARE about them. No one would CARE if they put out 10 watts of dead key and
had 60 watts of
"swang". But Noooooooooo! Some users have to have theirs and everybody
else's, too.
Jerry
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/26/02
tools
band switches, then your position is leaky. If they require a modification
to do something illegal, then it is the mod to complain about. The damn
radio is only a piece of equipment. As to the implied ease to do the mod,
that is a matter of conjecture , some can , some can't. About "CB Style",
you now want to control the style of peoples radios? Why don't you take a
nice long walk along the RR track, and think about this for a while.
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:m%3K9.28467$X%3.2...@news.bellsouth.net...
BenDowers
all the heipful info I could get my hands on. I soon got tired of the same old
anti American Socialist Hambo crap and quit comeing back . Well I see it hasn't
changed. Whats amazing is the same old crap I seen two years ago is still being
recycled. This list is old news that never accomplished any thing of great
value.
It is truley sad to see members of what use to be a good organization turn into
protectionist who's main goal in life is to destroy the very thing they care
the most about. I suspect that people like the original poster will directly
cause the death of Ham Radio within the next two generations because of his
hatred of the so called law breakers. You Ham boys had better figure out a way
to include the so called out laws into your hobby, or your hobby will die out.
Twistedhed
Shux, several of our resident hammies are trying to figure out a way to
have the freebanders accept THEM...they just haven't figured it out
yet.......like ducks out of water...happy holidays.
Runnin Man
"tools" <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:V82K9.2097$MV5.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> damn thing will work on 10, how, exactly, are they "fake"
No they are being sold as phony 10 meter radios to Cbers , easily modified
to work on 11 meters, they are not for sale to Hams echo,roger beeps,
channel selector these are not amateur radios. Cry all you want the intended
market is not amatuer radio they would need to be type certified.
tools
your bubble, but, some hams have and use those radios. I have no idea how
many, and it does not matter.
Where did you see one advertised as a "PHONY 10 METER RADIO , FOR CB! ????
"Runnin Man" <rcranus@hotmailcom> wrote in message
news.verizon.net
Read this message and you'll understand exactly what this means through
analogy.
"W7DVJ" <w7...@hotwax.com> wrote in message
news:DkDJ9.464$3F.101...@news.inreach.com...
> ILLEGAL CB TRANSCEIVER LIST
[ SNIP ] - Legal Jargon
>
> In view of the foregoing, the following "10-meter" transceivers are not
> acceptable for importation or marketing into/within the United States.
> Importation and marketing of these units is illegal pursuant to Section
> 302(b) of the Communications Act and Section 2.803 of the rules. Willful
> violations of the Rules and the Act may subject the violator to a monetary
> forfeiture of not more than $11,000 for each violation or each day of a
> continuing violation. The Commission continues to review this type of
> equipment, and additional makes and models may be added to this list in
the
> future.
Basically what this says is that these radios cannot be
imported/manufactured in the united states.
Nor can those radios be marketed in the United States.
No problem, because I don't think Uniden has made those models for a few
years now. Same with cars... They won't pass emissions, and don't have
airbags. Hence, they cannot manufacture or import those vehicles.
HOWEVER!
That 1969 Ford Galaxy is still perfectly legal to drive, own, sell, barter,
trade, and work on.
Why?
It's called the grandfather clause. You should have learned that in 6th
grade civics.
Now some make the analogy that these units are analagous to handguns.
You need a permit to carry a handgun. You also need a license to operate
these radios.
One thing is different about it though. If someone does key the radio on 11
meters it's a far cry from causing any physical harm. That is why the
handgun analogy doesn't hold up.
I'd think of operating those units on 11 meters more as a parking violation
than I would a random shooting, that's for sure. Because after all it's the
operator that is responsible. Granted the fine is astronomical in comparison
to a parking violation, but my point remains no physical harm is done.
Now, as far as this Neo Fascist scare tactic.
If you've read down this far you'll notice that the subject of the message
contains the word illegal.
The sender chose that subject to instill a sense of fear. I read nowhere in
that memo any thing about the radios being contra-band. It just states that
they cannot be imported into the United States.
For those of you not in the United States that have read down this far I
humbly apologize for the length of this memo regarding this explanation. On
the other hand you're probably laughing at the whole message thread.
The HR2510 is not Contra-Band... You can own one, sell one, etc... Just
don't operate it on 11 Meters!
I would also recommend not parking in front of a fire hydrant, or exceeding
local speed limits!
I would suggest that as of this very moment they would indeed qualify as
collectors items. Just like the 1957 Chevy, 1960 Cadillac Convertible,
etc....
Anyone who owns one should realise the sudden increase in value due to this
FCC Memo as there will be no more units coming into the United States
anymore.
And that's all there is to this tiny little matter blown completely out of
proportion by the original poster who chose a subject in an attempt to scare
you out of your radio.
It was very well done... I'd almost regard it as New York Times Material...
VOTE FOR GORE OR WE'RE GONNA STARVE!!! -- get real --
Fear... If you can find the humor in it you'll realize why the bible refers
to the devil as a prankster.
I really wish these fascist scare tactic fear mongering dipshits like the
guy who posted the original message in this thread would go find something
else to scare. He'd probably have to resort to puppies, kids, and animals
though... Nice Try!
>
> LIST OF TRANSCEIVERS
>
> ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET
[ SNIP ] We know what they are.
1957 Chevy Impala.
1958 Chevy Corvette.
1975 Cadillac Eldorado.
1977 Monza Spyder
-- Could you imagine ?? --
>
> For further information concerning the listed transceivers or similar
> models, contact Ray LaForge or Gary Hendrickson at the FCC Laboratory,
7435
> Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, MD 21046, (301) 362-3041 or (301) 362-3043
> respectively, or E-mail: rlaf...@fcc.gov and ghen...@fcc.gov
If you're still not sure about this after reading this post, contact the
people above. That's what they're there for. They get paid to answer your
questions. It's what they do for a living!
ILLEGAL... I'm still chuckling about it... I gotta wonder as a child if
the original poster of this message lit dogs tails on fire for 'jollies'?
I'd hate to light up a smoke, pass gas, or wear leather in front of this
guy... And yet, it's people with his very same attitude that piss on the
seats in public rest rooms, then tell the waitress someone before him did
it. Very unconstructive behavior. Wastes a lot of time.
Well folks, coffee's worn off....
ERROR: Coffee not found, operator halted. Will auto restart in T- 8 hours.
sideband
-SSB
sideband
then the person behind it most likely is as well. Perhaps N8 in
another disguise?
-SSB
hillbilly3302
drc
"W7DVJ" <w7...@hotwax.com> wrote in message
news:l54K9.533$bX3.11...@news.inreach.com...
Hambo Nebo
Runnin Man
"sideband" <KRNO8...@cac.net> wrote in message
news:3DF9D9FA...@cac.net...
Tom Sevart
"news.verizon.net" <karl.ve...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2cfK9.5005$ce5...@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> If you've read down this far you'll notice that the subject of the message
> contains the word illegal.
And who else used to post the "illegal CB transceiver list" all the time?
Initials A.V., though not his real name.
> 1977 Monza Spyder
My brother had one. I think it was his first car.
> ILLEGAL... I'm still chuckling about it...
And as we've heard first-hand from the FCC, they are not illegal to own, nor
are they illegal to use by licensed hams on 10 meters.
You know, the whole discussion about "phony 10 meter radios" is pretty silly
when you come right down to it. The same could be said of 2 meter radios.
After all, most of them are single-band radios with extended coverage,
usually around 139-174 MHZ. Most of them can be easily modified to operate
over this range. In fact, I own two of them that can be, but aren't. I bet
when MURS takes off, people will be griping about all the "phony 2 meter
radios" being sold to people who just want to use them on the MURS freqs.
And the FCC will probably feel the need to put a ban on imports.
Tom
W7DVJ
" hillbilly3302" <daves...@alltel.net> wrote in message
> why is w7dvj not listed on qrz???
I'm getting a lot of email asking why my callsign does not appear
on QRZ or Buckmaster so I'll try to explain.
Some of us, myself included, work for agencies that require that we
maintain a level of anonymity in order to protect our families and
neighbors. As a result, information such as real name, address,
etc., etc. are not listed in public databases for public viewing.
No, I'm not in law enforcement but work for a government agency
that monitors foreign communications related to terrorism, hence
the need for anonymity.
I assure you it's a real call, had it since 1967 and currently hold
a advanced class license active in SSTV and digital modes of
communication. Once in a blue moon I do a little ten meter stuff
when the band is active.
tools
Runnin Man
>
> " hillbilly3302" <daves...@alltel.net> wrote in message
>
> > why is w7dvj not listed on qrz???
>
> I'm getting a lot of email asking why my callsign does not appear
> on QRZ or Buckmaster so I'll try to explain.
>
> Some of us, myself included, work for agencies that require that we
> maintain a level of anonymity in order to protect our families and
> neighbors. As a result, information such as real name, address,
> etc., etc. are not listed in public databases for public viewing.
> No, I'm not in law enforcement but work for a government agency
> that monitors foreign communications related to terrorism, hence
> the need for anonymity.
That is absolute bullshit.
Runnin Man
>
> "news.verizon.net" <karl.ve...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:2cfK9.5005$ce5...@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
> >
> > If you've read down this far you'll notice that the subject of the
message
> > contains the word illegal.
>
> And who else used to post the "illegal CB transceiver list" all the time?
> Initials A.V., though not his real name.
What is your proof of that Tom?
> And as we've heard first-hand from the FCC, they are not illegal to own,
nor
> are they illegal to use by licensed hams on 10 meters.
Can you tell me where it says that? Can you use a Yaseu that hasn't recieved
it's type certification yet?
Twistedhed
why is w7dvj not listed on qrz???
I'm getting a lot of email asking why my callsign does not appear on QRZ
or Buckmaster so I'll try to explain.
Some of us, myself included, work for agencies that require that we
maintain a level of anonymity in order to protect our families and
neighbors. As a result, information such as real name, address, etc.,
etc. are not listed in public databases for public viewing. No, I'm not
in law enforcement but work for a government agency that monitors
foreign communications related to terrorism, hence the need for
anonymity.
AHHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAhaHAHAHAHAHH!
Twistedhed
the person behind it most likely is as well. Perhaps N8 in another
disguise?
-SSB
---
You have Dogie, Lelnad, and George posting in poorly choreographed
threads...getting their jollies playing their "who am I now"
game........if you look close enough you will see each of their attempts
at pinching Dave on the bum, giving him "warm fuzzies" and telling him
how much they respect and value his opinion...they see the lies of the
Phelps, his hypocritical amp usage, his claim about a cber getting
popped for disorderly conduct, his "borrowed" college email addy,
etc....it's just too much..... his personal affliction with the
compulsion to lie rather than face the music forces their hand. Vermin
rally.
Jerry Oxendine
> Care for some cheese with that? If they only reach 10 meters, even with
the
> band switches, then your position is leaky. If they require a modification
> to do something illegal, then it is the mod to complain about. The damn
> radio is only a piece of equipment. As to the implied ease to do the mod,
> that is a matter of conjecture , some can , some can't.
About "CB Style",
> you now want to control the style of peoples radios?
Only to the extend that for CB radios, "band" switches aren't necessary--nor
for dedicated 10 Meter radios either. For example, Cobra radios don't have
band switches nor do they have frequency displays; it isn't necessary. For
legal CB operation, all that is required is a channel
number. True 10 Meter radios have VFOs where twirling the dial displays an
infinite number of
frequencies within the band and, usually, a number of memories where certain
preferred frequencies
can be programmed for quick reference. The "style", if you will, is already
laid out in FCC rules; it
isn't up to me. The point is that those Galaxy and Connex radios, for
example, are designed, NOT
as *true* 10 Meter rigs, but to be marketed to CBers. Once again, IF the
users of such radios used them within the 40 channels ONLY, I don't believe
even FCC would go after them. But the
fact remains that, whatever "style" you want to call it, those radios are
facilitating illegal operations
within the ham bands by unlicensed operators, some of whom may not even be
aware that they
are eventually going to get into trouble; the rest (the militant illegals
who KNOW what they are doing and don't give a damn) deserve to be tarred and
feathered and run out of town on a rail, IMHO! LOL! Those of us licensed
for those bands, particularly the ones of us who care to preserve our bands
for future generations, are actively seeking to find ways of getting the
word
out to operators that they are not supposed to be there without license, and
also of punishing those
who think they have the "right" to operate a radio anyway and anyWHERE they
choose and to hell
with the licensed users from whom they usurp frequencies. It WILL come to
pass, BTW, and I
await that day with anticipation of snickering and laughing aloud at the
sorry idiots! THAT is why
hams are actively seeking to abate the sale and use of those radios--NOT
because of any hatred for
CB (at least among most of us)
Jerry
Why don't you take a
> nice long walk along the RR track, and think about this for a while.
PS. I spent my working career walking alongside railroad tracks. Why would
now be any different? It's something I was TRAINED (pardon the pun) to do.
<<g>>
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/25/02
Jerry Oxendine
> So according to you, "Hams" cannot want echo / roger beep? I hate to burst
> your bubble, but, some hams have and use those radios. I have no idea how
> many, and it does not matter.
> Where did you see one advertised as a "PHONY 10 METER RADIO , FOR CB! ????
The only people I see flocking to truck stops are truck drivers AKA CB
operators. I hardly ever
see a multitude of hams gathered there--or at a nearby CB shop. And guess
what. Everytime I have seen those "export" radios, it was in a Flying J or
a Pilot Truck stop---OR in a hole-in-the-wall CB "shop". You know: the
ones that do those $29.95 "Peak and Tune" jobs, or add those
"connex" boards and echo, or beeps and squeaks. The Amateur retailers I
deal with don't seem to
ever HAVE those "export" radios--only Icom, Kenwood, Yaesu, and accessories
related to those
brands. A few DO sell Ranger brands. None of these have those banal beeps
and squeaks nor
idiotic "talkback". If a radio is talking back in the speaker, it usually
means that there is RF in the
shack. I sure don't want it doing that on purpose! <<g>>
Jerry
Tom Sevart
>
> " hillbilly3302" <daves...@alltel.net> wrote in message
>
> > why is w7dvj not listed on qrz???
>
> I'm getting a lot of email asking why my callsign does not appear
> on QRZ or Buckmaster so I'll try to explain.
>
> Some of us, myself included, work for agencies that require that we
> maintain a level of anonymity in order to protect our families and
> neighbors.
Give me a freakin' break! This is so lame I hope you don't expect anyone to
believe it.
Tom
tools
>
> tools <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:zq4K9.2295$MV5.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > Care for some cheese with that? If they only reach 10 meters, even with
> the
> > band switches, then your position is leaky. If they require a
modification
> > to do something illegal, then it is the mod to complain about. The damn
> > radio is only a piece of equipment. As to the implied ease to do the
mod,
> > that is a matter of conjecture , some can , some can't.
>
> About "CB Style",
> > you now want to control the style of peoples radios?
>
> Only to the extend that for CB radios, "band" switches aren't
necessary--nor
> for dedicated 10 Meter radios either.
For example, Cobra radios don't have
> band switches nor do they have frequency displays; it isn't necessary.
For
> legal CB operation, all that is required is a channel
> number. True
10 Meter radios have VFOs where twirling the dial displays an
> infinite number of
> frequencies within the band and, usually, a number of memories where
certain
> preferred frequencies
> can be programmed for quick reference. The "style", if you will, is
already
> laid out in FCC rules;
it
> isn't up to me. The point is that those Galaxy and Connex radios, for
> example, are designed, NOT
> as *true* 10 Meter rigs, but to be marketed to CBers. Once again, IF the
> users of such radios used them within the 40 channels ONLY, I don't
believe
> even FCC would go after them. But the
> fact remains that, whatever "style" you want to call it, those radios are
> facilitating illegal operations
> within the ham bands by unlicensed operators, some of whom may not even be
> aware that they
> are eventually going to get into trouble; the rest (the militant illegals
> who KNOW what they are doing and don't give a damn) deserve to be tarred
and
> feathered and run out of town on a rail, IMHO! LOL! Those of us licensed
> for those bands, particularly the ones of us who care to preserve our
bands
> for future generations, are actively seeking to find ways of getting the
> word
> out to operators that they are not supposed to be there without license,
and
> also of punishing
those
> who think they have the "right" to operate a radio anyway and anyWHERE
they
> choose and to hell
> with the licensed users from whom they usurp frequencies. It WILL
In your dreams.
come to
> pass, BTW, and I
> await that day with anticipation of snickering and laughing aloud at the
> sorry idiots! THAT is why
>
some old tired, brain dead, whiney, hams are
actively seeking to abate the sale and use of those radios--NOT
> because of any hatred for
> CB (at least among most of us)
>
>
>
> Jerry
> Why don't you take a
> > nice long walk along the RR track, and think about this for a while.
>
> PS. I spent my working career walking alongside railroad tracks. Why
would
> now be any different? It's something I was TRAINED (pardon the pun) to do.
We know that you were a choo choo man. Take a long walk anywhere.
tools
>
> tools <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:JR6K9.2390$j_4.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > So according to you, "Hams" cannot want echo / roger beep? I hate to
burst
> > your bubble, but, some hams have and use those radios. I have no idea
how
> > many, and it does not matter.
> > Where did you see one advertised as a "PHONY 10 METER RADIO , FOR CB!
????
>
>
> The only people I see flocking to truck stops are truck drivers
AKA CB
> operators. I hardly ever
> see a multitude of hams gathered there--or at a nearby CB shop.
And guess
> what. Everytime I have seen those "export" radios, it was in a Flying J
or
> a Pilot Truck stop---OR in a hole-in-the-wall CB "shop".
You know: the
> ones that do those $29.95 "Peak and Tune" jobs, or add those
> "connex" boards and echo, or beeps and squeaks.
Some people, hams, like those things.
The Amateur retailers I
> deal with don't seem to
> ever HAVE those "export" radios--only Icom, Kenwood, Yaesu, and
accessories
> related to those
> brands. A few DO sell Ranger brands.
So you have limited sorces? So???????
None of these have those banal beeps
> and squeaks nor
> idiotic "talkback". If a radio is talking back in the speaker, it usually
> means that there is RF in the
> shack. Unless the radio was set up to do so.
I sure don't want it doing that on purpose!
So do what YOU want.
Hillbilly3302
bet....
k5drc
"W7DVJ" <w7...@hotwax.com> wrote in message
news:IVoK9.610$O67.12...@news.inreach.com...
Jerry Oxendine
> In your dreams.
You might've been right IF those radios were being used within the 40
channels--or even on what
so many call the "freeband". But if you think that unlicensed operation is
going to be tolerated on
LICENSE-REQUIRED bands, then YOU are dreaming. Believe what you want, but
those importers and truckers both are in for a nasty surprise.
J
sideband
pretend they're something they're not.
Most likely a new SN for n8wwm.
-SSB
sideband
You don't show up on the FCC site either..
Others who's names/addresses/etc show up on the FCC site as callsign
only, as a placekeeper, so the callsign shows as valid.
Your supposed amateur callsign has nothing to do with your supposed
job, unless you're stupid enough to be transmitting on the frequencies
you're supposed to be listening to.
so, you're now doubly a liar.
Have a nice day.
de KR8LR, Chris
-SSB
Jerry Oxendine
>
> "Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:LmqK9.8215$n12....@news.bellsouth.net...
> >
> > tools <medt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:JR6K9.2390$j_4.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > So according to you, "Hams" cannot want echo / roger beep? I hate to
> burst
> > > your bubble, but, some hams have and use those radios. I have no idea
> how
> > > many, and it does not matter.
> > > Where did you see one advertised as a "PHONY 10 METER RADIO , FOR CB!
> ????
> >
> >
> > The only people I see flocking to truck stops are truck drivers
> Some of which are hams.
> AKA CB
> > operators. I hardly ever
> > see a multitude of hams gathered there--or at a nearby CB shop.
> So?????????
> And guess
> > what. Everytime I have seen those "export" radios, it was in a Flying J
> or
> > a Pilot Truck stop---OR in a hole-in-the-wall CB "shop".
> So now it's about how hammie a shop is????????????????????????
No, it's about clientele. Many products have a target market. The target
market for Galaxy and
Connex "reddios" is T R U C K E R S. So they are S O L D in truck stops,
not at Amateur Electronic Supply, or Ham Radio Outlet, or Communications
Headquarters, or R & L Electronics,
and a multitude of other retailers who target HAMS, not CBers or truckers.
You find those radios
in question at Flying J or Pilot or those little CB shops stuck off in a
corner of the truck stop lot
where you will find truckers. On the 'net, you find those radios with the
rebel flags on the face , et al, at dealers who cater to CBers--like
Pacetronics, or Copper, or H & Y. In spite of your efforts
to dilute the market for such radios, they are, indeed, targeted at CBers
and truck drivers. That shouldn't be hard to grasp.
J
\
ALLSTEEL77
this a cb radio , ham radio or both?Time to look in your own backyard.
JJ
BS if it is an issued ham call it will be in the FCC data base and
a matter of public record. Nice try.
Runnin Man
"ALLSTEEL77" <allst...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021213211833...@mb-mk.aol.com...
> Jerry,how about Ranger radio's you find them in Ham Radio Outlet
catalog.Is
> this a cb radio , ham radio or both?Time to look in your own backyard.
A Ranger is to me a CB radio, the manufacturer knew how to get around the
rules when converted you have the CB Channels show up on the display as
they do.Modifiy any real ham radio and you won't have the 40 channel
display like ranger.
ALLSTEEL77
frequency just like a Kewood or any other radio.So that means all ham radios
should be on the list because all can be modified to work on 11 meters as easy
as a Galaxy Ranger etc.....You can pick up a nice old FT-757 and flip a switch
and it is 11meter ready now thats a nice design!
Richard Cranium
> "Tom Sevart" <n2uhc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:at9uq8$11pq8c$1@ID->
> > That's the problem I have with the government trying to regulate what
> radios
> > we can use. I used a 2510 on 10 meters while mobile for a few years and I
> > enjoyed using that radio. Now the government wants to get rid of them
> > because some people use them on 11 meters. The problem with that FCC
> > document is that it's so vague that just about any HF radio can be
> > considered to be an "illegal CB transceiver." My Kenwood TS-140 ham rig
> can
> > be converted to full 1500 kHz - 30 MHZ transmit just by removing two
> diodes.
> >
> > Tom
>
>
> Tom, what is so vague. They list all the radios, your Kenwood is not being
> sold as a pseudo "legal" cb like the galaxys etc.
> Can it be modified sure can, but it has met the FCC's Type aceptance and
> certification while these phony 10 meter radios have not. What is so vague
> about that.
> >
Bzzzzt; wrong again. Amateur radios are not "Type Accepted" at all. No
certification is required for ham equipment. It IS required for CB
radios, however.
And, as pointed out by another poster, the "vagueness" is in the
wording of the Rule itself, and pretty much makes it unenforceable.
Jerry Oxendine
catalog.Is
> this a cb radio , ham radio or both?Time to look in your own backyard.
I mentioned that Ranger is sometimes sold by ham outlets in another post. I
haven't looked at them closely, but I don't think they include the "channel"
indices, do they? I have never actually paid that much attention to Ranger
since I prefer all-band rigs like Icom--or a homebrew AM rig for 80 and 40
meters.
Jerry
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/26/02
Jerry Oxendine
And that could be one of the results of the illegals operating out of band;
that is, making the
rigs completely unable to be modded for such things as CAP or MARS. Just
like the ban on
amps that operate out of the box between 24-30 MHZ, hams will be
inconvenienced because of
the selfishness of a number of CBers. Instead of being able to legally use
ONE HF rig on Amateur and MARS, one would then be required to buy a
dedicated commercial radio such as a Motorola
Micom II for around $1500 a pop. That would deal a death blow to great
volunteer programs such as MARS, thanks to those people that think their
activities are perfectly fine and can't see any "harm" to their hobby of
stealing frequencies that don't belong to them and yapping for naught where
they don't belong.
Jerry Oxendine
Richard Cranium <richc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c5ecbb69.02121...@posting.google.com...
And that can be changed--which has already been suggested to the FCC legal
department
and enforcement bureau.
Gary Danaher
1. Is the radio channelized? Without a vfo with frequency display, it's hard to imagine it being very useful to many amateurs.
2. Does it ship from the factory set to transmit on 10 meters, but has a jumper block that can be changed with a pair of needle nose pliers in 5 minutes? The tradtional amateur brands can be changed but require a little heat to do the job and it normally isn't all that obvious.
Tom Sevart wrote:
<tn...@mucks.net> wrote in message news:pccfvuol6k22uamae...@4ax.com...********************************************************************** "readily activated by moving or removing a jumper plug, cutting or splicing a wire, plugging in a connector, or other simple means." OR OTHER? Hardly specific enough to be taken seriously if challenged. ************************************************************************ Although this document does come from the FCC it has serious weaknesses in its lack of specificity and its presumptions.
Go Deep
> > certification while these phony 10 meter radios have not. What is so
vague
> > about that.
> Bzzzzt; wrong again. Amateur radios are not "Type Accepted" at all. No
> certification is required for ham equipment. It IS required for CB
> radios, however.
They require type certification to be sold. They must also meet minimum
requirements to be operated by hams no matter if it is a homebrew radio or
amp. Those radios being sold do not meet those FCC Specifications that is
why they are not Type Certification Issued on those radios.
(d) A modification which results in a change in the identification of a
device with or without change in circuitry requires a new application for,
and grant of certification. If the changes affect the characteristics
required to be reported, a complete application shall be filed. If the
characteristics required to be reported are not changed the abbreviated
procedure of § 2.933 may be used.
(e) Equipment that has been certificated or formerly type accepted for use
in the Amateur Radio Service pursuant to the requirements of part 97 of this
chapter may be modified without regard to the conditions specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, provided the following conditions are met:
(1) Any person performing such modifications on equipment used under
part 97 of this chapter must possess a valid amateur radio operator license
of the class required for the use of the equipment being modified.
(2) Modifications made pursuant to this paragraph are limited to
equipment used at licensed amateur radio stations.
(3) Modifications specified or performed by equipment manufacturers or
suppliers must be in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraph
(b) of this section.
(4) Modifications specified or performed by licensees in the Amateur
Radio Service on equipment other than that at specific licensed amateur
radio stations must be in accordance with the requirements set forth in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(5) The station licensee shall be responsible for ensuring that modified
equipment used at his station will comply with the applicable technical
standards in part 97 of this chapter.
Go Deep
> certification is required for ham equipment. It IS required for CB
> radios, however.
Then explain this then Dickhead.
FCC Enforcement Case Highlights FCC Amplifier Certification Rules
NEWINGTON, CT, Oct 2, 2001--The FCC's Riley Hollingsworth used the occasion
of a recent Warning Notice to hammer home the FCC's position on the sale of
RF amplifiers that have not received FCC certification--formerly called
"type acceptance." In a September 19 letter to Extra licensee Sidney Lee
Martin, KD4YBC, Hollingsworth reiterated an earlier FCC warning to Martin
that he cease commercial marketing of non-certificated external RF
amplifiers and amplifier kits capable of operating below 144 MHz.
In 1978, the FCC banned the manufacture and sale of any external RF
amplifier or amplifier kit capable of operating below 144 MHz without a
grant of certification from the FCC. The rules specifically prohibit
manufacture and sale of amps that operate between 24 and 35 MHz as a means
to stem the flow of illegal Citizens Band amplifiers.
The case arose from a February 11, 2000, warning to Martin from the FCC's
Detroit office as a result of a classified ad Martin had run in QST. The ad
featured the sale of external Amateur Radio RF amplifier kits for HF and 6
meters. The FCC letter admonished Martin that selling or offering such units
for sale violated §2.815 of the FCC's rules.
Martin--who operated a one-man business called RF Electronics in South
Carolina--countered with his interpretation that he was allowed, under FCC
Part 97 Amateur Service rules, to sell such kits as one amateur to another
under an exception to the certification rules. Martin argued that §97.315 of
the Amateur Service rules permitted his licensed customers to purchase from
him--as another licensee--and construct or modify one model of a
non-certificated RF power amp or kit per calendar year for that licensee's
personal use.
The FCC rejected that analysis, however. Hollingsworth emphasized that
§2.815(c) of the FCC's rules requires all external RF power amplifier kits
that can operate below 144 MHz after assembly be FCC-certificated before
they can be made, sold, leased, marketed, imported, shipped or distributed.
He noted that other provisions of §2.815 apply only to certain already
fabricated amplifiers and do not exempt amplifier kits, particularly those
capable of operating between 24 and 35 MHz after assembly.
Hollingsworth said §97.315 also "specifically prohibits the use in the
Amateur Service of an amplifier that the operator had constructed from a
non-certified kit." He also noted that, in addition to kits, Martin's RF
Electronics Web site had been selling non-certificated, assembled RF power
amplifiers for use below 144 MHz. Hollingsworth said at least three of the
assembled models were advertised as operational between 24 and 35 MHz.
Hollingsworth said FCC rules permit an individual amateur to construct or
modify a non-certificated RF power amplifier once per calendar year for use
at that amateur's own station--although the unit may not be built from a
kit--and the amateur may then sell the amplifier to another licensee or
dealer. The rules do not provide for mass marketing or manufacturing and
marketing kits or assembled amplifiers as part of a business, Hollingsworth
said.
"Any and all marketing of external RF power amplifiers or amplifier kits
capable of operation below 144 MHz must be in strict compliance with §2.815
of the Commission's rules," Hollingsworth warned. He said the FCC would
prosecute any violations and take enforcement action against Martin's
amateur license.
Martin's Web site no longer offers any RF amplifiers for sale.
Unknown
wrote:
>
><tn...@mucks.net> wrote in message
>news:nv8fvu0psegpl2ftd...@4ax.com...
>> snip
>> So an amateur should have access to radio gear and non amateurs
>> shouldn't? I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.
>
>Yes amateurs have access to approved amatuer gear that they are allowed to
>use, what are they supposed to talk on? What Planet are you from? Cbers
>have access to "CB Radios"
>
**********************************************
Have you ever thought of building your own amatuer radio? The FCC does
allow that you know!
james
Unknown
>This is a joke. There is not a SO CALLED, FCC LEGAL HAM RADIO that cant be
>modified for cb or 11 meter, what ever you want to call it. The others you just
>mentioned are just simpler to do. Give me a break. LOL.
******************************************
Any tranciever made to operate between 25 and 30 Mhz can be made to
operate on 27 MHz. No matter what is done. Given the right amount of
circuitry it can be done. There is and there never will be an amature
hf transceiver that can not be modified. The question is,will it be
worth it?
james
Go Deep
<james> wrote in message news:s03ovuo6gd44p1o5g...@4ax.com...
> Have you ever thought of building your own amatuer radio? The FCC does
> allow that you know!
>
> james
No Shit James, it is easier and less time consuming to buy one.
ALLSTEEL77
the amps in pieces instead.Always away around ham rf police.Go to the web site
and read.
Go Deep
No I am not wrong about Martin he got busted by the FCC, That is a fact drip
chin. So he now has found away to still sell his amps by selling them in
parts Big whop He was still Bagged and tagged by the FCC, much to your
dismay.
Unknown
wrote:
***********************************
And another appliance operator heard from
james
tn...@mucks.net
>>No Shit James, it is easier and less time consuming to buy one.
>>
>***********************************
>
>And another appliance operator heard from
>
>james
So I take it YOU are using YOUR home made radio? If not then your
appliance comment shows your hypocrisy.
Go Deep
<james> wrote in message news:5odsvu4lm2h1i2t71...@4ax.com...
>No Shit James, it is easier and less time consuming to buy one.
> >
> ***********************************
>
> And another appliance operator heard from
>
> james
LOL, James take a hike you piker, I guess there are thousands and hundreds
of thousand appliance operators carrying ham licenses. I build my own
antennas, does that count? who cares what you think ..just because someone
doesn't have the time to build a radio they are a appliance operator.? Can
we see pics of your hombrew amps and radios.
Did you build your own car?
Unknown
*****************************************
I can operate both. I have built simple single band transceiver. I did
start to design and build a multiband tranceiver but lack of funds has
put that to a halt.
If I had my preferences I wpuld build my own.
james
Unknown
wrote:
>
****************************************************
Now Go Deep I shall drop down to your level of language.
Dear Mister Peckerhead:
Please go and place any part of your body up your ass and go away. You
ar a worthless tweedle dweeb and is not worth any mopre comments or
recognition.
regards
james
ALLSTEEL77
hits the keyboard.Can you say loser!
Go Deep
<james> wrote in message news:r2muvu0a0q71duve7...@4ax.com...
> >So I take it YOU are using YOUR home made radio? If not then your
> >appliance comment shows your hypocrisy.
> *****************************************
>
> I can operate both. I have built simple single band transceiver. I did
> start to design and build a multiband tranceiver but lack of funds has
> put that to a halt.
>
> If I had my preferences I wpuld build my own.
Every one doesn't have a preference or the know how, why did you let lack of
funds stop you another appliance operator heard from....
>
> james
>
Appliance Operator
<james> wrote in message news:c7muvushspb0n4i3e...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:43:57 -0500, "Go Deep" <rcranus@hotmailcom>
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><james> wrote in message
news:5odsvu4lm2h1i2t71...@4ax.com...
> > >No Shit James, it is easier and less time consuming to buy one.
> >> >
> >> ***********************************
> >>
> >> And another appliance operator heard from
> >>
> >> james
> >
> >
> >LOL, James take a hike you piker, I guess there are thousands and
hundreds
> >of thousand appliance operators carrying ham licenses. I build my own
> >antennas, does that count? who cares what you think ..just because
someone
> >doesn't have the time to build a radio they are a appliance operator.?
Can
> >we see pics of your hombrew amps and radios.
> >Did you build your own car?
> >
> ****************************************************
>
> Now Go Deep I shall drop down to your level of language.
My level of Language? I called you a piker not a PeckerHead, perhaps I
should have you started hurling the insults in typical Hammie fashion. And
then can't back up the bullshit you post. You don't operate homebrew
equipment so I am assuming you classify yourself as a appliance operator, as
per you that is what you are if you don't build your own radio. Jim do us
all a favor we don't need you in this NG another Hammie with an
attitude....Lose it your not all that Peckerhead...
> Dear Mister Peckerhead:
At least you got the Mr. right.
Appliance Operator
> James, you took the words right out mouth.George shows his real worth when
he
> hits the keyboard.Can you say loser!
I sure can say Loser watch ALLSTEELLL77 how is that I think that says it all
. Hey why don't you go fuck yourself too asshole.. I didn't say a word to
the guy, until he started kinda like you can you say asshole... I am sure
you didn't see that.
Barking Pumpkin
"Appliance Operator" <rcranus@hotmailcommie> wrote in message
news:FBidnZEMW8I...@comcast.com...
> Jim do us all a favor we don't need you in this NG another Hammie with an
> attitude....Lose it your not all that Peckerhead...
Surrre George, you hypocrite, ...you go on and just believe your own bullshit.
Tom Sevart
"Gary Danaher" <gdan...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3DFBEA1B...@attbi.com...
> There are two specific nails that seal the coffin for certain radios.
> 1. Is the radio channelized? Without a vfo with frequency display, it's
> hard to imagine it being very useful to many amateurs.
The Uniden 2510, which is on that list, has a VFO with a frequency display.
> 2. Does it ship from the factory set to transmit on 10 meters, but has a
> jumper block that can be changed with a pair of needle nose pliers in 5
> minutes? The tradtional amateur brands can be changed but require a
> little heat to do the job and it normally isn't all that obvious.
Once again, the 2510 ships from the factory operating on 10 meters only. To
change it to 10/11 meters, you had to cut a trace and solder in a resistor
somewhere, if I remember correctly. However, on newer units you have to
purchase and install a completely new processor chip, from what I've heard.
With my Kenwood, it ships from the factory transmitting on 160-10 meter ham
bands only. All that needs to be done is clip two diodes for full transmit.
Tom
Tom Sevart
<james> wrote in message news:s03ovuo6gd44p1o5g...@4ax.com...
> Have you ever thought of building your own amatuer radio? The FCC does
> allow that you know!
I've built a couple so far. One of them is shown here:
http://www.geocities.com/n2uhc/sw20.html
I plan to build more in the future.
Tom
ALLSTEEL77
W7DVJ
> > Have you ever thought of building your own amatuer radio? The FCC does
> > allow that you know!
>
> I've built a couple so far. One of them is shown here:
> http://www.geocities.com/n2uhc/sw20.html
>
> I plan to build more in the future.
>
> Tom
>
QRP? No way peanut boy, QRO for me!
tn...@mucks.net
>On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:56:14 -0500, tn...@mucks.net wrote:
>
>>
>>>>No Shit James, it is easier and less time consuming to buy one.
>>>>
>>>***********************************
>>>
>>>And another appliance operator heard from
>>>
>>>james
>>
>>So I take it YOU are using YOUR home made radio? If not then your
>>appliance comment shows your hypocrisy.
>*****************************************
>
>I can operate both.
But why? Any homebrew radio of equal cost can't compare to
any decent store bought radio as far as ease of use, stability,
specifications ect ect.
>I have built simple single band transceiver. I did
>start to design and build a multiband tranceiver but lack of funds has
>put that to a halt.
>
>If I had my preferences I wpuld build my own.
>
>james
The only place for homebrew radios is in the classroom. They aren't
worth the bother otherwise.
Unknown
*******************************************
It is obvious that you have never been involve with the manufactureing
or design of commincation electronics. If one takes care, one can
build their own tranceiver that will meet or exceed many commercially
manufactured radios. Especially anything that is designed for the CB
Band. Cost wise it will be slightly more. What you failed to realize
commercial manufacturers are driven by profit. So they will sacrifice
specs for cost control.
james
tn...@mucks.net
>> The only place for homebrew radios is in the classroom. They aren't
>>worth the bother otherwise.
>*******************************************
>
>It is obvious that you have never been involve with the manufactureing
>or design of commincation electronics. If one takes care, one can
>build their own tranceiver that will meet or exceed many commercially
>manufactured radios. Especially anything that is designed for the CB
>Band. Cost wise it will be slightly more. What you failed to realize
>commercial manufacturers are driven by profit. So they will sacrifice
>specs for cost control.
>
>james
It is obvious your reading comprehension is lacking. On a cost basis a
homebrew radio falls short. Way short.
As far as "It is obvious that you have never been involve with
the manufactureing or design of commincation electronics."
Manufacturing, no I haven't but why re-invent the wheel if it isn't
cost effective?
Unknown
******************************************************
Because even modest increase in cost can yield superior performance
that many mid tier to low end of high tier radios. Even the Japanese
transcievers are driven first by cost of manufactureing. Performance
is secondary. A home constructed unit can be driven by performance
over cost.
Granted if one is striving to just meet commercial manufactured
specification then you are right why re-invent the wheel. But if one
wants to exceed say sensitivity and selectivity specs of most
commercial transcievers, then a home built transceiver that pays
attention to shielding and layout can far exceed radios costing in the
$1000 to $1500 range for about the same amount of money. Granted the
cabinetry will not be a pretty and the lights and flashy stuff may not
be there, but then that is what helps sells those radios.
james
news.verizon.net
"Runnin Man" <rcranus@hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:waydnZqpq4k...@comcast.com...
> > And who else used to post the "illegal CB transceiver list" all the
time?
> > Initials A.V., though not his real name.
>
> What is your proof of that Tom?
It's not an accusation, it's an observation.
Who has the pattern of behavior? Who exhibits it? We all know who
farted... Come on... I wasn't going to point the finger, and I'm not going
to pull the finger of the person who pointed neither.
I can't believe that these fascist knuckle headed scare tactic fear mongers
have nothing better to do now than scare people out of their own equipment.
Since I was last seriously into this newsgroup this country has been through
a lot. Heck, in my neck of the woods they nabbed 6 Al Qaeda alone.
I simply cannot believe that after all we have been though, and what we are
about to go through that they would still take time out of their lives to
further put fear into the minds of us Americans.
To the original poster of this thread: While you got your head buried in
the sand, why don't you take some time and think about where your ass is at?
My Advice: Find something more constructive to do with your time. Go to
the mall, go see a movie, rent a pay per view. Go christmass shopping! Put
together a puzzle! Anything...
You know, if he'd follow his own logic he'd probably have to junk his own
car!!!! lol
I'll tell ya, people never cease to amaze me. The stupid ones especially.
I've seen some whoppers in my time, but to think that one of my own
countrymen would subscribe to the very premise that our own government would
make people's own personal property contra-band is just absolutely
astounding. Especially when the most physical harm that the consumer
product could possibly do would be to stub a toe when dropped from a
significant height.
I mean wow... He took the effort to post, so he must actually believe that
WE THE PEOPLE would EVER let that sort of thing happen.
For fun, let's just suppose for a moment that something like that could
actually happen in this fine and upstanding nation. But let's say that
instead of a Radio Activist it was an Animal Rights Activist that succeeded
in lobbying for the contra-ban of leather products.
What would happen?????
1.) Everyone would have to get a new wallet or purse. But that's kind of
hard when the sign on the door says no shirt, no shoes, no service and it's
only lil ole you in your tube socks for fear of being arrested wearing your
timberlands or Nikes.
2.) The German-Americans want to make sure their cultural heritage isn't
affected, would want a variance covering their lederhosen pants because it
infringes on (my heritage as well) cultural heritage. It takes months to
tune up a good pair of lederhosen, and lots of sauer kraut & beans too! You
can't get the same tone out of Vinyl. The low notes just don't have the
impact desired.
3.) Tandy (parent company of Radio Shack) shreds all documents that ever
suggested that it ever sold any leather products. This in turn gets the SEC
involved in an investigation brought on by the fascist janitor who notices
extra shreddings in the trash from the accounting department. This
immediately causes massive green peace protests in front of various Radios
Shacks. When the CEO of Radio Shack was questioned about the protests he
replied, "I do not have an answer."
4.) Bikers across the nation...................... It gets more and more
rediculous...
BUT THANKS TO THE WISDOM OF THIS NATIONS FOUNDING FATHERS!
We have the grandfather clause... Which insures that something as
rediculous as the above cannot happen.
What's really scary though is that some people (original author fingered)
seem to think that the government controls the citizens. I would bet that
he probably doesn't know the difference between a civilian and a citizen.
And if asked would probably call himself a civillian.
China has Civillians.
Iraq has Civillians
The U.S. has Citizens. Why?? Because each and every single one of us is
guaranteed those rights. Interesting observation though... Very few people
educated in public schools seem to know or understand what those rights are.
What's even worse is that the vast majority of those that don't know what
their rights are actually consider themselves smart enough to vote! AND!!
Of those I would bet most consider it more of a popularity contest than a
decision.
Can't we have Civillians in the U.S. ??
Yes... Civillians in the U.S. are from another nationality. A Canadian
within the borders of the U.S. is a Civillian. All U.S. Citizens are ALSO
civillians. But one would not refer to a Luxury Cadillac as a mere "car".
A Hyundai hatchback is a car, but I'd rather have a" luxury vehicle" any day
of the week.
Al Qaeda are not Civillians because they are millitary AND if within the
United States are considered behind enemy lines. They are in most cases not
U.S. Citizens and since they are military are covered by military law. Not
the U.S. Constitution. Which means that if they don't succeed in killing
their own hopeless miserable lives we give them a fair trial, then shoot em.
;-)
Al Qaeda that are U.S. Citizens is still a grey area, however I have a
feeling that the distinction would boil down to an individual basis. IE,
were they Al Qaeda before or after becoming a U.S. Citizen? Before? They
are spy... After, they are McVeigh.
If U.S. Citizen before Al Qaeda are they traitors?
No. Why? Because they were not a commisioned officer in any branch of the
U.S. Military. When one becomes a commisioned officer in the United States
armed forces (rank above sergeant) one swears an oath to the President of
the United States, to carry out those orders faithfully. The crime of
traitor is generally reserved for commisioned officers in the U.S. Armed
Forces and do not apply to civillians. If Al Qaeda and in the U.S.
Military but not commisioned, they are again spy. If commisioned they are
Traitor.
Are non-commisioned military personnel Civillians?
Obviously not. When one becomes a member of the U.S. Armed forces ones own
self becomes G.O.P. (Government Owned Property), and yes... Technically a
sodier can be charged on the grounds of destruction of government property
after getting a tattoo on their own person that has not been approved by
their commanding officer.
Then aren't soldiers slaves?
No. They are paid a wage, and they volunteer unless drafted which is
another matter entirely.
Another thing I think that needs to be clarified while I'm at it...
MILITIA: Who can give me an example of one? And I don't mean the Army
National Guard. It is a branch of the military and cannot be regarded as
Militia.
Here is a prime example folks... Very recent history too! Remember the
passengers on board that airliner that crashed in Pennsylvania 9/11? Those
very people who ASEEMBLED and took the matter into their own hands on board
that very plane are the very definition of Militia. If you think the
national guard is the militia you're severly mistaken. If the militia on
board that plane did accomplish securing their own lives I would find it
hard pressed to find some half cocked attorney to charge them with assault.
If you did find one I guarantee their law degree is from harvard.
Quote of the day: "The truth is easy to spot... It doesn't smell like
bullshit!"
Jerry Oxendine
news.verizon.net <karl.ve...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:51LM9.67130$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
> "Runnin Man" <rcranus@hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:waydnZqpq4k...@comcast.com...
> > > And who else used to post the "illegal CB transceiver list" all the
> time?
>
> I can't believe that these fascist knuckle headed scare tactic fear
mongers
> have nothing better to do now than scare people out of their own
equipment.
No one is proposing that people be deprived of the use of CB Radio! What is
happening is
that those radios that have already been determined NOT to meet the FCC's
technical specs
are allowing an ever bolder group of people to operate on frequencies for
which a license is
required.
>
>
> I simply cannot believe that after all we have been though, and what we
are
> about to go through that they would still take time out of their lives to
> further put fear into the minds of us Americans.
It is not to put fear into people's minds. What you conveniently forget is
that those people
who received authorization to use those bands are being interfered with by
unlicensed persons.
Those people have "rights", too. They have every reason to expect that
their turf will be protected
just as much as CBers have the right to use channel 1 thru 40.
>
>
> I'll tell ya, people never cease to amaze me. The stupid ones especially.
> I've seen some whoppers in my time, but to think that one of my own
> countrymen would subscribe to the very premise that our own government
would
> make people's own personal property contra-band is just absolutely
> astounding.
Property that is not legal to import to begin with, and wouldn't even cause
a raised brow
IF they were being used on the regular 40. But that property is being used
in the commission of
an illegal act; that being operation on frequencies for which the users have
no license.
Especially when the most physical harm that the consumer
> product could possibly do would be to stub a toe when dropped from a
> significant height.
See above that OTHER people have a reasonable expectation of protection from
intrusions
on their frequencies from unlicensed bandit operators.
>
> I mean wow... He took the effort to post, so he must actually believe
that
> WE THE PEOPLE would EVER let that sort of thing happen.
Continue to believe that nothing can or will be done about the use of those
Galaxy and
Connex radios on the ham bands without license. There are efforts and
discussions about
how to combat this at this time, and you can expect to see *some* publicity
about this sometime
this year. There are several hams that are in Congress, at least one of
which is on the powerful
Committee on Communications. I know for a fact that that ham is aware of
this problem. Sure, there are other more pressing things going on, but they
WILL get around to this---just like they
did with the PL106-521.
>
> For fun, let's just suppose for a moment that something like that could
> actually happen in this fine and upstanding nation. But let's say that
> instead of a Radio Activist it was an Animal Rights Activist that
succeeded
> in lobbying for the contra-ban of leather products.
Rights have (read slowly) N O T H I N G to do with the use of a radio. In
this country, the
government (Congress) has sole control of the airwaves and may allow or deny
the use of same
as it sees fit. So the fact remains that certain radios do NOT meet the
government's technical requirements for use on CB, nor are they to be
imported. Again, if the bandit operators hadn't
strayed onto 10 and 12 Meters, you wouldn't even be hearing about this.
THEY are the ones to
blame for any negative results that Congress may impose.
>
>
> BUT THANKS TO THE WISDOM OF THIS NATIONS FOUNDING FATHERS!
>
> We have the grandfather clause... Which insures that something as
> rediculous as the above cannot happen.
There is NO grandfather clause (this a patently stupid premise) governing a
product that is
banned from import into the US.
>
> What's really scary though is that some people (original author fingered)
> seem to think that the government controls the citizens. I would bet that
> he probably doesn't know the difference between a civilian and a citizen.
> And if asked would probably call himself a civillian.
Exactly, BUT our government seeks to treat ALL fairly under the existing
law. In your defense of
one group (those who import, sell, and use those Galaxys, etc), you fail to
take into account the
protection given to those affected by illegal operators. Once again, none
of us have a "right" to use
a radio; it is a privilege granted by the government that they can also
deny.
>
>
> The U.S. has Citizens. Why?? Because each and every single one of us is
> guaranteed those rights. Interesting observation though... Very few
people
> educated in public schools seem to know or understand what those rights
are.
> What's even worse is that the vast majority of those that don't know what
> their rights are actually consider themselves smart enough to vote! AND!!
> Of those I would bet most consider it more of a popularity contest than a
> decision.
Rights. Those are C I V I L rights, none of which applies to CB radio.
>
> ;-)
Jerry
>
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/29/02
ALLSTEEL77
the states.Just like amps and everything else.You forget this is America people
think for themselves.If there is a demand there will be a supply.Now the other
good news is ,you could just buy any older ham(or new one$) radio and with just
the clip of a diode you have full band.As your ham freqs.disappear there will
be a big market for used ham radios.With the advent of computers thats already
happening.Good luck on your quest Jerry.
news.verizon.net
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1_QM9.6466$0v3...@news.bellsouth.net...
[ snip ]
>
> No one is proposing that people be deprived of the use of CB Radio! What
is
> happening is
> that those radios that have already been determined NOT to meet the FCC's
> technical specs
> are allowing an ever bolder group of people to operate on frequencies for
> which a license is
> required.
Yes! Precisely! It's not the equipment, it is the action taken with the
"tool".
You can use an axe to split wood, OR you can use it to break an entering.
But the axe by itself is perfectly legal to own, operate, etc...
You are mistaken about one thing. Most of those radios on the list were
marketed as Amateur Radio Equipment. Which means that there is no "type
acceptance". The amateur band was set aside for experimenting with radio.
Hence, there cannot, and will never be "type accepted" equipment, because
experimental gear cannot be "Type Accepted". You'd have to approve the
theory, before you implement the design. And that impedes on research.
And for those of you who think us Amateurs are a bunch of gardening gluttons
talking about the trade in value on our rider lawn mower, I got some
examples of history for ya. But next time you make a digital cell phone
call, you can thank Phil Karn ( KA9Q ) for the technology that made it
possible.
The problem with the models listed in the new regulations is that they are
easily modifiable to 11M. Where the fact of the matter is that most 10M
rigs can easily be modified to go down to 11M. I think what the FCC desires
is that any further 10M rigs that are manufactured and marketed within it's
borders have sufficient protection built into them so that they cannot be
modified to transmit on 11M. Now how to do that cost effectively and
maintain a profit is another matter entirely.
Because of that fact what would a good business decision be for an RF
Manufacturer? Make 10M Amateur rigs and sell them at a loss, or stop making
them entirely? You do the math, but I can't name one good buggy whip
manufacturer, I can tell you that.
I'll say it again... "COLLECTORS ITEMS"... Why? Because they won't be
available anymore. Just like Model T Fords, 59 Corvettes, but yet people
will still want them. As far as what the market is willing to pay for them,
that's another matter entirely, and from what history tells us of these very
same situations is that the price goes up. Fact: When they stop making them
there is a set quantity, now demand sets the price.
How to get these off the air?
Let's use the good old reliable history flashlight to shed some light on the
subject and see if we can identify this situation. Hmmmm, I've seen this
before.
Have demand set the price so high that one would dare not connect one to an
antenna for risk of lightning damage.
Either that or let history take it's toll and wait for most units within the
borders to breakdown and malfunction themselves out of existance.
So just like Model T's, 59 Corvettes, etc... The less units functional, the
more the price increase. How many 59 Corvettes outside of Las Vegas are
there? I think I spotted one about a year ago. I have however seen lots of
Kia, Hyndai, and other new products from Japan. Wonder why everyone isn't
driving 59 Vettes these days...
In my humble opinion, that's how I see this whole matter playing out.
Now, some people are going to cry for legislation involving type acceeptance
on the HAM bands to try and insure that this situation never happens again.
That I am pretty certain of. But there is a problem with that. And here it
is in a nut shell.
If Amateur gear had to be type accepted before it could be used on amateur
bands I'm sure you'd find a rapid decline in RF technology progress.
Here's why:
The Ham bands were set aside for exactly what KA9Q did with them. They
weren't set aside so that Japan could market the worlds smallest handheld 2M
rig to us year after year perpetually.
[ snip ]
> > I'll tell ya, people never cease to amaze me. The stupid ones
especially.
> > I've seen some whoppers in my time, but to think that one of my own
> > countrymen would subscribe to the very premise that our own government
> would
> > make people's own personal property contra-band is just absolutely
> > astounding.
>
> Property that is not legal to import to begin with, and wouldn't even
cause
> a raised brow
> IF they were being used on the regular 40. But that property is being used
> in the commission of
> an illegal act; that being operation on frequencies for which the users
have
> no license.
Yes. And I'm sure that the axe has also been used throughout criminal
history in burglaries, etc... Yet, it's still perfectly legal to own an
axe. The only difference here is that there are no regulations on the
manufacturing of axes, and a 10M radio cannot be construed as a physical
weapon.
You must realize the distinction between the action and the object. You
still seem to be confusing it.
>
>
>
> Especially when the most physical harm that the consumer
> > product could possibly do would be to stub a toe when dropped from a
> > significant height.
>
> See above that OTHER people have a reasonable expectation of protection
from
> intrusions
> on their frequencies from unlicensed bandit operators.
First off, they aren't "YOUR" frequencies. They're commisioned by the
regulatory agency for use by licensed stations within the borders of the
United States.
How many unlicensed drivers are out on the road today?
You've hit the nail on the head though with the other part, "Reasonable
Expectations." When I was younger I expected to be able to ride my bike
without the fear of getting mugged for it. I think that's a reasonable
expectation. I expect and demand all sorts of things in life, but I don't
get seriously upset over being disappointed.
People will continue to park in front of a fire hydrant, speed down the
highway in a construction zone and key their non type-accepted radio. Some
people for some reason desire to be considered "outlaws." I think the root
of the psychology involved would also be present in compulsive gamblers.
How to keep the compulsive gambler from gambling?
Make the minimum bet large enough that they can't afford it.
Right now the equipment is fairly cheap, and it takes effort to catch them
and fine them. It's easier to eliminate the equipment than it is to go out
and chase them. (Which is what the radio pirate wants - a chase -. It's part
of the "thrill". ) So, stop the manufacture and import of the problem, and
wait for the behavior to stop.
Just like cars that don't have pollution control, air bags, etc...
[ snip ]
> > BUT THANKS TO THE WISDOM OF THIS NATIONS FOUNDING FATHERS!
> >
> > We have the grandfather clause... Which insures that something as
> > rediculous as the above cannot happen.
>
> There is NO grandfather clause (this a patently stupid premise) governing
a
> product that is
> banned from import into the US.
Are you telling me that because a 1959 corvette does not have pollution
control on it that I cannot own one? Are you telling me that because a 1959
corvette does not have air bags that I cannot drive one? Are you telling me
that beause a 1959 corvette won't pass government crash tests that I cannot
drive one down the road today?
There is no fundamental difference between the car and any other personal
property.
Just like the Radios on the list, a car manfacturer today could not
manufacture, import, or otherwise sell a BRAND NEW 1959 corvette.
So, your whole statement about there not being a grandfather clause is
definitely false. Better take some civics lessons.
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution states:
"...nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws."
Hence, the radio is not contra-band. HOWEVER!!! If you key it up on 11M,
then yes the unit can be seized, and whatever process is set forth for that
crime then takes place. IE, equipment seizure, fine, etc... Since it's the
FCC's territory I'm not sure if the Judicial branch is even involved. I'm
not that familiar with how the FCC imposes a fine, and if it has to go
through the judicial branch at all to impose the fine. The question is when
it comes to FCC regs is "what is the due process?". I may be mistaken, but
I think the forfeiture and fine are mandatory.
But you still can own one, and if licensed by the FCC use it on 10M in full
compliance with FCC Regulations. Just as you can own, and operate a 1959
Chevy Corvette at no more than the legal speed limit on any state or local
municipality roadway. If you do it without a license, then you are
committing a crime. Do it without a license, and speed on top of it?
That's double jeopardy. ( - more thrill - ). But my observations tell me
that people do this sort of thing time and time again. Turn on Cops and
watch an episode. It's blatantly apparent. People do incredibly idiotic
things every day of the week knowing full well they're taking a chance.
This isn't a national problem. It's a localized problem. And I bet a lot
of truckers out there use these rigs. Why doesn't the state or local
enforcement care about the radio on the dash as they're writing out the
ticket for the 75 in a 55? Because they have no incentive to do so. They
don't receive dime one of the fine imposed.
I'm not sure of what legislation made having a portable scanner in the
vehicle deemed "burglary tools", but I suspect that if similar legislation
was imposed with the following conditions that the infraction would catch
the interest of the local authorities:
Conditions ( This part is obviously subject to debate ):
1.) Neither the driver, or the owner of the station/vehicle, or passenger(s)
are licensed amateur operators with HF Privleges.
2.) If unlicensed, a microphone or other such key up and modulation device
must be located in ?close? proximity to the transmitter.
I'm not suggesting that the above be taken verbatim, I'm merely stating that
it is a possible outline.
The root of the inability to handle this problem is that the local
enforcement doesn't have any interest in enforcing. That is due to the fact
that the RF Spectrum is not their jurisdiction.
That's the whole conundrum in a nutshell. That is why nothing is being done
about it.
So the question is, how to get local enforcement involved. How do you make
it worthwhile, how do you make it so there isn't a jurisdiction conflict.
Fear Mongering is not the way to solve the problem. That's what I find so
entertaining about this entire thread.
> >
> > What's really scary though is that some people (original author
fingered)
> > seem to think that the government controls the citizens. I would bet
that
> > he probably doesn't know the difference between a civilian and a
citizen.
> > And if asked would probably call himself a civillian.
>
> Exactly, BUT our government seeks to treat ALL fairly under the existing
> law. In your defense of
> one group (those who import, sell, and use those Galaxys, etc), you fail
to
> take into account the
> protection given to those affected by illegal operators. Once again, none
> of us have a "right" to use
> a radio; it is a privilege granted by the government that they can also
> deny.
-- Yes, I think I said that above, shortly after you referred to the radio
waves as your property. I'm glad we're both clear on that now. ;-)
I'm not defending the criminal behavior, I'm just saying that it will happen
and there is a distinction between the object and the action.
I outlined above with examples of history, and what I expect the whole
outcome of this situation to be, and I feel I was exceptionally clear
through analogy on what the impact of the new FCC Regulations mean.
It's the fear mongering tactic the author took that got me interested in
dispelling the myth being created.
I'd rate Mr. Voobner a 6 out on 10 "spin" wizard any day of the week.
Selective facts, and a misleading headline. That's 5 points there. But
this thread has been the best one of his yet. So I gave him a +1 for extra
credit.
[ snip ]
>
> Jerry
> >
news.verizon.net
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1_QM9.6466$0v3...@news.bellsouth.net...
[ snip ]
>
is
> happening is
> that those radios that have already been determined NOT to meet the FCC's
> technical specs
> are allowing an ever bolder group of people to operate on frequencies for
> which a license is
> required.
First off, it's not a right, it's a privledge to be licensed for operation.
A lot of people seem to forget that. Secondly you're not identifying the
problem. In a nutshell the problem isn't a physical object, it's the
behavior. I summarized what could be done to prevent the behavior in my
other post. Read the section on handheld police scanners, and possible
legislation that could be done to further prevent the behavior.
> >
> > I simply cannot believe that after all we have been though, and what we
> are
> > about to go through that they would still take time out of their lives
to
> > further put fear into the minds of us Americans.
>
> It is not to put fear into people's minds. What you conveniently forget
is
> that those people
> who received authorization to use those bands are being interfered with by
> unlicensed persons.
> Those people have "rights", too. They have every reason to expect that
> their turf will be protected
> just as much as CBers have the right to use channel 1 thru 40.
First off, it isn't a right, it's a privledge. And as far as the "fear" and
whatnot that I refer to, I'm not saying that the FCC is causing the fear,
what I am saying is that the original author of this thread used selective
facts, and a misleading headline in order to cause the audience (you, me,
etc..) to get the wrong impression. I am certainly not suggesting that the
FCC is fascist. Quite the contrary.
> >
> > I'll tell ya, people never cease to amaze me. The stupid ones
especially.
> > I've seen some whoppers in my time, but to think that one of my own
> > countrymen would subscribe to the very premise that our own government
> would
> > make people's own personal property contra-band is just absolutely
> > astounding.
>
> Property that is not legal to import to begin with, and wouldn't even
cause
> a raised brow
> IF they were being used on the regular 40. But that property is being used
> in the commission of
> an illegal act; that being operation on frequencies for which the users
have
> no license.
>
I'm not sure I follow you here, but if I understood you correctly what
you're suggesting is that the units (are not) but should be contra-banned
because they can be used for an illegal activity. Much the same could be
said for cars, motorcycles, and let's not forget using an axe to break an
entering. Everyone seems to be forgetting that there is a very clear
distinction between the physical object, and the action taken with it.
That's why I use the car analogy time and time again. For a car you must be
licensed, and operate it on roadways and obey the traffic laws. For a 10M
radio you must be licensed, and operate it within a range of frequencies,
and not exceed the maximum effective radiated power. ( Combination of watts
and dB gain w/ antenna. )
You can use a car on the roadways, or you can exhibit your total lack of
respect for your neighbors by driving it across their front lawn. Same by
operating 10M radio on 11M. And just like the car, some unlicensed jerk can
take a 10M on a joy ride all over 11M.
The 10M radio just like the car is "property".
You can be unlicensed, and own a car. But you must not operate it.
There is a clear distiction between the action and the object here.
What the author of the original message did was an attempt to mislead the
public into believing that it was an illegal act to own one of these units.
Which is analagous to saying that it's illegal to own a car if you don't
have a drivers license. Both are equally rediculous.
Hence those that own these radios should not worry about ownership. It's
not an illegal act to sell it, touch it, oogle it, just don't operate it on
11M. That's where you're gonna get in trouble.
>
>
> Especially when the most physical harm that the consumer
> > product could possibly do would be to stub a toe when dropped from a
> > significant height.
>
> See above that OTHER people have a reasonable expectation of protection
from
> intrusions
> on their frequencies from unlicensed bandit operators.
Just as one would expect reasonable protection from burglars breaking an
entering. Yes, I fully agree with that. You're absolutely correct. Yet
homes and businesses get broken into all the time. That's the reality of
the situation. And yes, some/most of the time those that break an entering
are prosecuted, fined and jailed.
But you can't stop the behavior by making it illegal to own the object
capable of doing that action.
Pick your object... You can't ban screwdrivers because some thugs use them
to steal cars with. You can't ban rocks because some local punks use them
to smash car windows with. And you can't ban cars because some unlicensed
jerks drive them in playgrounds late at night.
You can only prevent the action of doing so.
>
>
> >
> > I mean wow... He took the effort to post, so he must actually believe
> that
> > WE THE PEOPLE would EVER let that sort of thing happen.
>
> Continue to believe that nothing can or will be done about the use of
those
> Galaxy and
> Connex radios on the ham bands without license. There are efforts and
> discussions about
> how to combat this at this time, and you can expect to see *some*
publicity
> about this sometime
> this year. There are several hams that are in Congress, at least one of
> which is on the powerful
> Committee on Communications. I know for a fact that that ham is aware of
> this problem. Sure, there are other more pressing things going on, but
they
> WILL get around to this---just like they
> did with the PL106-521.
My other article in the newsgroup does just that. I suggested that similar
legislation be debated such as with having a police scanner in the car is
considered burglary tools. The intent with the legislation is how to get
local enforcement involved without infringing on property rights possibly
setting a very dangerous premise.
> >
> > For fun, let's just suppose for a moment that something like that could
> > actually happen in this fine and upstanding nation. But let's say that
> > instead of a Radio Activist it was an Animal Rights Activist that
> succeeded
> > in lobbying for the contra-ban of leather products.
>
> Rights have (read slowly) N O T H I N G to do with the use of a radio. In
> this country, the
> government (Congress) has sole control of the airwaves and may allow or
deny
> the use of same
> as it sees fit. So the fact remains that certain radios do NOT meet the
> government's technical requirements for use on CB, nor are they to be
> imported. Again, if the bandit operators hadn't
> strayed onto 10 and 12 Meters, you wouldn't even be hearing about this.
> THEY are the ones to
> blame for any negative results that Congress may impose.
We're clear on the transmitting part not being a "right"... What you seem
to be forgetting is that the radio just like a car is property. Owning one
is perfectly legal. Operating it, that's another matter entirely.
> > The U.S. has Citizens. Why?? Because each and every single one of us is
> > guaranteed those rights. Interesting observation though... Very few
> people
> > educated in public schools seem to know or understand what those rights
> are.
> > What's even worse is that the vast majority of those that don't know
what
> > their rights are actually consider themselves smart enough to vote!
AND!!
> > Of those I would bet most consider it more of a popularity contest than
a
> > decision.
>
> Rights. Those are C I V I L rights, none of which applies to CB radio.
I can't believe what I just read... If I understand you correctly, what you
are suggesting is, "CIVIL property rights don't apply to the owner because
it can be operated as a CB radio?"
Ok... Let's take that logic and apply it to a car. "CIVIL property rights
don't apply to the owner because a car can be operated in an unlawfull
manner."
That's certainly not what the FCC Regulations state. The FCC Regulations
state that you can't make them, and you can't import them. Just like the
DOT Regulations state that you cannot make the Mazda 280ZX any more. It
won't pass DOT crash or emissions tests.
> > ;-)
>
> Jerry
Jerry Oxendine
>
> "Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:1_QM9.6466$0v3...@news.bellsouth.net...
> >
> > Rights. Those are C I V I L rights, none of which applies to CB radio.
>
> I can't believe what I just read... If I understand you correctly, what
you
> are suggesting is, "CIVIL property rights don't apply to the owner because
> it can be operated as a CB radio?"
CIVIL Law and ADMINISTRATIVE Law are not exactly the same. The FCC
regulations
fall under Administrative Law whereby Congress has passed an enabling Act to
govern a particular
area, created an agency to ADMINISTER said law under US Code with
regulations that guide how such activities are to be conducted. Those very
regulations, WRT CB Radio, already specifically outline what equipment can
or cannot be used in a CB station. By the mere act of picking up the mike
and transmitting, you have agreed to abide by those rules. In essence, by
using
the CB, you have already contracted, if you will, with the government to
operate the station within the applicable rules. Therefore, if you break
those rules, you will answer to an administrative law judge, not in regular
civil court. It does, indeed, mean that such equipment being used to commit
the offense CAN be considered contraband and subject to seizure. Even more
so if that equipment
is already deemed to be illegal to import to begin with. Yes, darn it, you
can buy one of those bootleg Galaxys, sit it on the shelf and look at it,
and nobody can just arbitrarily come and take it away. You can buy an X
Force amp, sit it on the shelf, and it would sit there forever. No one's
gonna know you even have it, right? Because no crime has been committed
with it. But splatter over your neighbor's TV--even without the amp in
line--and the agents come to call, they CAN confiscate it under current law;
read the regulation, it's there. Try applying "property rights" in the
above scenario, sorry---you'll lose!
Therefore, in the case of the Galaxy and Connex radios because they are
already enjoined from
import, you are splattering over Mrs. Jones TV, the Galaxy is sitting on the
shelf, when the agents
come to call, they CAN seize it (it's called "in rem seizure") because the
rules state that if you have a
piece of equipment that is not allowed at your CB station, they can and will
assume that you have or
are using it. Never draw the wrong kind of attention, and that Galaxy could
gather layers of dust.
I am fully aware that I do not "own" spectrum, and I fully understand the
regulations that govern my
station. But I HAVE been granted a license to operate on certain
frequencies by fulfilling the requirements set forth by the FCC. In that
sense, I have "paid" the price of use whereas the bandits
have not. Amateur Radio is somewhat self-policing, unfortunately less so
than it once was. Witness the yahoos that sometimes embarrass me with their
infantile behavior, and it is not only a desire of mine to attempt to rid
those airwaves of unlicensed operators, it is my duty to do so! The idea of
some "romantic", adventuresome, and lawless cowboys running roughshod over
everybody else
screaming "Ah've got mah r'ahts" and to hell with everybody else is not
going to fly. It is with that in
mind that many of us who are being affected by this crap are attempting to
do something about it; wrong is wrong, and right is right. Whatever the
outcome (and what I'm being told doesn't agree with what the outlaw
operators want us to believe), it won't be without the strong efforts of
hams
worldwide to get rid of this sh**.
Jerry
>
> Ok... Let's take that logic and apply it to a car. "CIVIL property
rights
> don't apply to the owner because a car can be operated in an unlawfull
> manner."
>
> That's certainly not what the FCC Regulations state. The FCC Regulations
> state that you can't make them, and you can't import them. Just like the
> DOT Regulations state that you cannot make the Mazda 280ZX any more. It
> won't pass DOT crash or emissions tests.
>
> > > ;-)
> >
> > Jerry
>
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/25/02
JJ
news.verizon.net wrote:
>
> That's why I use the car analogy time and time again. For a car you must be
> licensed, and operate it on roadways and obey the traffic laws. For a 10M
> radio you must be licensed, and operate it within a range of frequencies,
> and not exceed the maximum effective radiated power. ( Combination of watts
> and dB gain w/ antenna. )
Can you explain just what this maximum effective radiated power
is? As far as I know the amateur regs do not state anything about
antenna gain in reference to the legal power limit.
Unknown
<karl.ve...@verizon.net> wrote:
>It's been a while, but I see the fascists haven't stopped their activities.
>
>Read this message and you'll understand exactly what this means through
>analogy.
>
>"W7DVJ" <w7...@hotwax.com> wrote in message
>news:DkDJ9.464$3F.101...@news.inreach.com...
>> ILLEGAL CB TRANSCEIVER LIST
>[ SNIP ] - Legal Jargon
>
>>
>> In view of the foregoing, the following "10-meter" transceivers are not
>> acceptable for importation or marketing into/within the United States.
>> Importation and marketing of these units is illegal pursuant to Section
>> 302(b) of the Communications Act and Section 2.803 of the rules. Willful
>> violations of the Rules and the Act may subject the violator to a monetary
>> forfeiture of not more than $11,000 for each violation or each day of a
>> continuing violation. The Commission continues to review this type of
>> equipment, and additional makes and models may be added to this list in
>the
>> future.
>
>Basically what this says is that these radios cannot be
>imported/manufactured in the united states.
>Nor can those radios be marketed in the United States.
>
**************************************************************
actually the quoted material yu so amply have shown says nothing about
manufacturing. I believe that is states that the FCC has reviewed and
found a list of units that are not to be imported or marketed into the
US.
If a company wanted to manufacture here and export to a country that
allows such units then the FCC has no objectionto that. In fact they
can not stop a compnay from doing that.
**************************************************************
>No problem, because I don't think Uniden has made those models for a few
>years now. Same with cars... They won't pass emissions, and don't have
>airbags. Hence, they cannot manufacture or import those vehicles.
>
************************************************************
Yes many are no longer manufactured. The order of no marketing also
applies totheused market. In fact if yo ugo back to 1977 when the 40
channel radios wer introduced they did the same thing. They forbid the
resale of 23 channel radios. While it is easier to go after a vendor
or CB shop that sells units,used and new, it much more difficult to go
after individual sales.
************************************************************
>HOWEVER!
>
>That 1969 Ford Galaxy is still perfectly legal to drive, own, sell, barter,
>trade, and work on.
>
>Why?
>
>It's called the grandfather clause. You should have learned that in 6th
>grade civics.
>
*****************************************************************
Not exactly. The order, or at least the part that you attempt to
explain, does not grandfather these radios in. It is still illegal to
operate them . Your analogy of operating a '69 Ford today is not
valid.
*****************************************************************
>Now some make the analogy that these units are analagous to handguns.
>
>You need a permit to carry a handgun. You also need a license to operate
>these radios.
>
****************************************************************
You need a permit to carry a concealed weapon!
Correct you do need a license to operate a transmitter in the US. On
certain bands of frequency that license maybe a blanket license issued
by the FCC. In that case there is no application filed by the user.
This also means that the user upon using the transmitter has agreed to
the rules and regualtions covering the service opertinf in. Ignorance
ot he rules and laws is no acception. FRS and the CB band are inthat
ruling.
***************************************************************
>One thing is different about it though. If someone does key the radio on 11
>meters it's a far cry from causing any physical harm. That is why the
>handgun analogy doesn't hold up.
>
***************************************************************
In nearly all cases no physical harm is done inusing a legal or
illegal radio. Because no physical harm is done does that mean it is
not illegal operation?
An anolgy.
If you are driving on a road at say 2AM in the morning. There are no
other cars on the road. You come to a stop sign. If you do not stop
are you guilty of running a stop sign? If you did not stop was anyone
harmed?
***************************************************************
>I'd think of operating those units on 11 meters more as a parking violation
>than I would a random shooting, that's for sure. Because after all it's the
>operator that is responsible. Granted the fine is astronomical in comparison
>to a parking violation, but my point remains no physical harm is done.
>
***************************************************************
Correct in the analogyof the severity of the offense. It really is not
one for great detriment to national security and for what ever that
means. Your arguement is now more on the line of decriminalization.
***************************************************************
>Now, as far as this Neo Fascist scare tactic.
>
***************************************************************
The FCC must operate under the guidelines set down by legislation from
Congress. Do you now insist that Congrees is Neo-facists?
***************************************************************
>If you've read down this far you'll notice that the subject of the message
>contains the word illegal.
>
>The sender chose that subject to instill a sense of fear. I read nowhere in
>that memo any thing about the radios being contra-band. It just states that
>they cannot be imported into the United States.
>
**************************************************************
Actually I thought he posted it as information. I think in your
interpretation of his post is where the fear lies.
**************************************************************
>For those of you not in the United States that have read down this far I
>humbly apologize for the length of this memo regarding this explanation. On
>the other hand you're probably laughing at the whole message thread.
>
>The HR2510 is not Contra-Band... You can own one, sell one, etc... Just
>don't operate it on 11 Meters!
>
**************************************************************
Clearly you did not listen to well in your 6 th grade civics clas or
may have been absent at that time. As I stated earlier, the FCC was
given permission to regulate and control of the usage and
distributionof transmitters in the US back in 1934 by an Act of
Congress. It was called the Communications Act of 1934. Under the
guidance of Congress, the FCC interprets the derective and powers
given them by Congress. One of those basically made operating an
HR2510 illegal on the CB band well over 40 years ago. But to you that
maybe acient history and not relavent law.
**************************************************************
>I would also recommend not parking in front of a fire hydrant, or exceeding
>local speed limits!
>
**************************************************************
I would not either. You may never get caught but that does not remove
the consequences.
**************************************************************
>I would suggest that as of this very moment they would indeed qualify as
>collectors items. Just like the 1957 Chevy, 1960 Cadillac Convertible,
>etc....
>
**************************************************************
I suggest you follow what was taught in that 6th grade civics class,
if you were present. Write your congress person. You have the right to
submit legislation to change the laws. You will need to get at least
one congress person to sign on to the bill and have them persue it. It
seems that you are into de-criminalization of the violations of the CB
band. You are within your right to do so. As also your are in the
rioght to petition the FCC and Congress for consideration of your
concerns. Suggest that others who agree toyour position do like wise.
Jus twuit sitting here on this news group and bitch about it and call
anyone who disagrees with your position a facist.
***************************************************************
>Anyone who owns one should realise the sudden increase in value due to this
>FCC Memo as there will be no more units coming into the United States
>anymore.
>
***************************************************************
Yes maybe they will increase some. but eventually with time they will
fall to lesser values. Consioder this that after ten years, ,Uniden
and others no longer are required to supply parts for repair. Thirty
years for now a none working unit will be worth what a cupof coffee
costs now.
**************************************************************
>And that's all there is to this tiny little matter blown completely out of
>proportion by the original poster who chose a subject in an attempt to scare
>you out of your radio.
>
**************************************************************
I don't think that it was a scare as it was posted as information. You
seem to be propogating the scare.
**************************************************************
>It was very well done... I'd almost regard it as New York Times Material...
>
>VOTE FOR GORE OR WE'RE GONNA STARVE!!! -- get real --
>
>Fear... If you can find the humor in it you'll realize why the bible refers
>to the devil as a prankster.
>
*************************************************************
What has the bible have to do with radio?
Did not Jesus say render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's?
*************************************************************
>I really wish these fascist scare tactic fear mongering dipshits like the
>guy who posted the original message in this thread would go find something
>else to scare. He'd probably have to resort to puppies, kids, and animals
>though... Nice Try!
>
*************************************************************
What are you afraid of? DO you feel that because a law is not worth
adhereing to, you just ignore it?
The law says that I can not possess a nuclear bomb. I would sure feel
more comfortable having a 100megaton thermal nuclear weapon in my
basement. Take out a whole bunch of commie bastards shoule they come
and try and knock down my door.
Now how rediculaus does that sound? Haveing a 100 megaton thermal
nuclear device is own's gasement does no one harm until it goes off!
******************************************************
>>
>> LIST OF TRANSCEIVERS
>>
>> ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET
>[ SNIP ] We know what they are.
>1957 Chevy Impala.
>1958 Chevy Corvette.
>1975 Cadillac Eldorado.
>1977 Monza Spyder
>-- Could you imagine ?? --
>
>>
>> For further information concerning the listed transceivers or similar
>> models, contact Ray LaForge or Gary Hendrickson at the FCC Laboratory,
>7435
>> Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, MD 21046, (301) 362-3041 or (301) 362-3043
>> respectively, or E-mail: rlaf...@fcc.gov and ghen...@fcc.gov
>
>If you're still not sure about this after reading this post, contact the
>people above. That's what they're there for. They get paid to answer your
>questions. It's what they do for a living!
>
>ILLEGAL... I'm still chuckling about it... I gotta wonder as a child if
>the original poster of this message lit dogs tails on fire for 'jollies'?
>I'd hate to light up a smoke, pass gas, or wear leather in front of this
>guy... And yet, it's people with his very same attitude that piss on the
>seats in public rest rooms, then tell the waitress someone before him did
>it. Very unconstructive behavior. Wastes a lot of time.
>
>Well folks, coffee's worn off....
>ERROR: Coffee not found, operator halted. Will auto restart in T- 8 hours.
>
********************************************************
yep T -8 hours! I thought you went backwards in time. Should you have
meant T + 8 hours?
Finally I find your comments as humorous as you will find mine. See
that is the beauty of this forum. Chances are that this will do
anything to change your belief is at best a prayer. I think the Sun
burning out tomorrow has a better chance. SInce you had the right to
express your idealogy, I do express mine.
Thanks and have a nice day
james
news.verizon.net
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:RmLN9.49699$C06....@news.bellsouth.net...
>
> news.verizon.net <karl.ve...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:i7IN9.73249$_S2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> >
> > "Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:1_QM9.6466$0v3...@news.bellsouth.net...
>
> > >
> > > Rights. Those are C I V I L rights, none of which applies to CB
radio.
> >
> > I can't believe what I just read... If I understand you correctly, what
> you
> > are suggesting is, "CIVIL property rights don't apply to the owner
because
> > it can be operated as a CB radio?"
>
> CIVIL Law and ADMINISTRATIVE Law are not exactly the same. The FCC
> regulations
> fall under Administrative Law whereby Congress has passed an enabling Act
to
> govern a particular
> area, created an agency to ADMINISTER said law under US Code with
> regulations that guide how such activities are to be conducted. Those very
> regulations, WRT CB Radio, already specifically outline what equipment can
> or cannot be used in a CB station. By the mere act of picking up the mike
> and transmitting, you have agreed to abide by those rules.
-- Bingo --
Let me quote: "By the mere act of picking up "....
It's an action, not equipment already deemed property of a U.S. Citizen.
Such as a 1969 Ford Galaxy, 76 Thunderbird, 59 Corvette.
The action, not the property!
> In essence, by
> using
> the CB, you have already contracted, if you will, with the government to
> operate the station within the applicable rules. Therefore, if you break
> those rules, you will answer to an administrative law judge, not in
regular
> civil court. It does, indeed, mean that such equipment being used to
commit
> the offense CAN be considered contraband and subject to seizure. Even
more
> so if that equipment
> is already deemed to be illegal to import to begin with.
-- Bingo - IMPORT!
Import and / or Market
Meaning: You can't make one and sell it, and you can't import one from
another country that makes one.
The ones that are already deemed property of U.S. citizenry are therefore -
in a nutshell - "Collectors Items".
Picking up the Mic and keying it on anything other an 10M without a license
is where the contract is broken and where the breach occurs, and where
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW comes into effect. Because the breach is what causes
"process".
> Yes, darn it, you
> can buy one of those bootleg Galaxys, sit it on the shelf and look at it,
> and nobody can just arbitrarily come and take it away.
-- Precisely!
I'm glad we're all clear on this now. What I didn't like about the original
thread was the fact that it led people to believe that it was illegal to
own, buy, sell or trade. USE is TOTALLY different.
The reason I got "concerned" was because some people do collect them, odd as
it may seem! Cabbage patch, hub caps, you name it, people collect it.
A lot of those units are from roughly the mid 1980's to mid 1990's. Roughly
the end of the C.B. fad which started off in the 70's.
For instance, some people I know have collections going all the way back to
the Tram D201 tube units.
Some have every 10M ranger/rci model ever made. There are a lot of people
who collect these units, and do indeed "shelf" them for one reason or
another.
I know one guy who has a barn full of mid 1940's AM Broadcast gear.
The point is, that just because FCC rules and regulations may change about
frequency allocation, the equipment that is part of that history and
property is not "contra-band".
It is the USE of that property that is/may-be inapropriate behavior. (FCC
Jurisdiction) And I don't only mean transmit either. IE, analog cell phone
band and scanners with mods, etc...
> You can buy an X
> Force amp, sit it on the shelf, and it would sit there forever. No one's
> gonna know you even have it, right? Because no crime has been committed
> with it. But splatter over your neighbor's TV--even without the amp in
> line--and the agents come to call, they CAN confiscate it under current
law;
> read the regulation, it's there. Try applying "property rights" in the
> above scenario, sorry---you'll lose!
-- YES!! PRECISELY!!!
Action, not property.
I outlined in another post how some legislation may be able to get the local
authorities involved. Cause the FCC can't justify the "fox hunt". Similar
legislation to having a portable scanner deemed burglary tools would
probably be enough to get local enforcement involved.
FCC fines $10K, so great... Put some legislation in so the state gets to
fine $2K on top of that. That'd get state enforcement involved. Question
is, how to do it in their "jurisdiction". Technically the local enforcement
has no jurisdiction over the airwaves, so perhaps this could be done under
the ?cause? of "intent to disrupt emergency communications"... Something
like that...
Yes, I acknowledge that certain individuals use these units in an un-lawfull
manner. It just goes to show how foolish they are when the parts become
more and more scarce, and the value of the unit keeps going up.
In short, it'll die.. Want it to die faster? Get local enforcement
involved somehow.
But dag it all... Don't start smashing museum pieces!
>
> Therefore, in the case of the Galaxy and Connex radios because they are
> already enjoined from
> import, you are splattering over Mrs. Jones TV, the Galaxy is sitting on
the
> shelf, when the agents
> come to call, they CAN seize it (it's called "in rem seizure") because the
> rules state that if you have a
> piece of equipment that is not allowed at your CB station, they can and
will
> assume that you have or
> are using it. Never draw the wrong kind of attention, and that Galaxy
could
> gather layers of dust.
A lot of the collectors I know all have cell phones and e-mail by now, and
most units are stored in closets, attics, garages, sheds, and I'm certain
several basements. Some have even owned shops and kept one of every model t
hey sold.
People collect the danrdest stuff! I can't explain it. It just happens.
From coins to buttons, pins, multi-sided dice, guitar amplifiers, stanley
bailey hand planes, and yes, for some unforsaken reason cabbage patch dolls.
I understand that ebay won't allow most/all of the units mentioned on their
site at all. And why should they? What good would controversy get them? ok
ok... Yes... Ratings...
But, ebay is proof that people collect the darndest things.
>
> I am fully aware that I do not "own" spectrum, and I fully understand the
> regulations that govern my
> station. But I HAVE been granted a license to operate on certain
> frequencies by fulfilling the requirements set forth by the FCC. In that
> sense, I have "paid" the price of use whereas the bandits
> have not. Amateur Radio is somewhat self-policing, unfortunately less so
> than it once was. Witness the yahoos that sometimes embarrass me with
their
> infantile behavior, and it is not only a desire of mine to attempt to rid
> those airwaves of unlicensed operators, it is my duty to do so! The idea
of
> some "romantic", adventuresome, and lawless cowboys running roughshod over
> everybody else
> screaming "Ah've got mah r'ahts" and to hell with everybody else is not
> going to fly. It is with that in
> mind that many of us who are being affected by this crap are attempting to
> do something about it; wrong is wrong, and right is right. Whatever the
> outcome (and what I'm being told doesn't agree with what the outlaw
> operators want us to believe), it won't be without the strong efforts of
> hams
> worldwide to get rid of this sh**.
Jerry... You're not seeing the forest for the tree's. The HAM band has
always been a self policed band. All you guys need is some way to make it
possible to call on local enforcement to knock on the door. You go fox hunt
the problem, then all you have to do is finger the local enforcement number
into a cell phone. Bammo. Problem solved, example made, things quiet down
real fast.
Without the local enforcement, the only option you have is to continue
whining, and using scare tactics. I don't mind the whining part. That
doesn't bother me one bit. But the scare tactics I don't get along with.
When I was young I used to get scared. Made me lose my appetite. Since
then I have gained 20lbs.
I've been on a few fox hunts. If you want to make the job really easy this
is what you need.
3 cars
3 people with cell phones (one w/ 3 way calling)
-- If in New York State driver must wear head set while jabbering on cell.
3 spectrum analyzers w/ directional antenna. (the more directional the
better.)
3 hand held GPS units.
At least one person with knowledge in mathematics, or one laptop and one
spreadsheet application.
HF is easy to track.
Microwave you sometimes find that one party in the 3 has been chasing an
echo. So 900Mhz and up is where it becomes interesting.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> >
> > Ok... Let's take that logic and apply it to a car. "CIVIL property
> rights
> > don't apply to the owner because a car can be operated in an unlawfull
> > manner."
> >
> > That's certainly not what the FCC Regulations state. The FCC
Regulations
> > state that you can't make them, and you can't import them. Just like
the
> > DOT Regulations state that you cannot make the Mazda 280ZX any more. It
> > won't pass DOT crash or emissions tests.
Presicely Jerry. That's exactly my point. I would also like to point out
that people often make an analogy to a gun instead of a car regarding these
units. ( and yes people collect those too! ) The gun analogy is not
applicable because the transceivers are no more physically harmfull than any
old blunt object that may present itself as a weapon. If anything of those
original units could be used in an un-lawfull manner I'd have to say it
absolutely positively has to be the microphone. And for two reasons:
1.) It can be used to key the radio in a fashion not in compliance with FCC
regulations..
2.) You could use the mic in a 12th century mace weapon.
In short, if someone comes at me swinging a heavy microphone with a battery
in it I'd deem it a threat. Someone throws one of those units at me I'll be
tempted to try and catch it. New in the box with owners manual I'd probably
jump for it if they missed. But I'd never duck, that's for sure!. ;-)
Now if that doesn't kill this dead horse of a subject I hope someone brought
the wooden stake and mallet.
news.verizon.net
<james> wrote in message news:u0ve0vcnla7gbe4dl...@4ax.com...
[ snip ]
> **************************************************************
> actually the quoted material yu so amply have shown says nothing about
> manufacturing. I believe that is states that the FCC has reviewed and
> found a list of units that are not to be imported or marketed into the
> US.
> If a company wanted to manufacture here and export to a country that
> allows such units then the FCC has no objectionto that. In fact they
> can not stop a compnay from doing that.
VERY VERY GOOD POINT!
But we don't make anything here Jerry. Unless you count stealth aircraft
and satcom gear.
>
> *****************************************************************
>
> Not exactly. The order, or at least the part that you attempt to
> explain, does not grandfather these radios in. It is still illegal to
> operate them . Your analogy of operating a '69 Ford today is not
> valid.
I suggest that it is valid:
1.) Both require an operators license.
2.) You may only operate them where intended. (frequencies / roadways)
3.) They can both be deemed personal property of U.S. Citizenry.
>
> *****************************************************************
> >Now some make the analogy that these units are analagous to handguns.
> >
> >You need a permit to carry a handgun. You also need a license to operate
> >these radios.
> >
> ****************************************************************
>
> You need a permit to carry a concealed weapon!
>
> Correct you do need a license to operate a transmitter in the US. On
> certain bands of frequency that license maybe a blanket license issued
> by the FCC. In that case there is no application filed by the user.
> This also means that the user upon using the transmitter has agreed to
> the rules and regualtions covering the service opertinf in. Ignorance
> ot he rules and laws is no acception. FRS and the CB band are inthat
> ruling.
Who said anything about ignorance. I'm merely pointing out time and time
again that there is a distinction between the property and the action taken
with that property. As far as your mention of concealed weapon, yes, you
are correct. But a 10M radio is a far cry from a "weapon".
>
> ***************************************************************
> >One thing is different about it though. If someone does key the radio on
11
> >meters it's a far cry from causing any physical harm. That is why the
> >handgun analogy doesn't hold up.
> >
> ***************************************************************
>
> In nearly all cases no physical harm is done inusing a legal or
> illegal radio. Because no physical harm is done does that mean it is
> not illegal operation?
No not at all. I honestly don't see how you draw that conclusion. My point
is that the handgun analogy is invalid because the transceiver is not a
"weapon.". I don't know how you connected illegal acts directly to aspects
of physical property. I don't see your connection... That's because there
isn't one. If it were a weapon I'd be tempted, but not likely to agree that
there may be exceptions. But that's a matter for another whole thread.
[ snip ]
>
> ***************************************************************
> >I'd think of operating those units on 11 meters more as a parking
violation
> >than I would a random shooting, that's for sure. Because after all it's
the
> >operator that is responsible. Granted the fine is astronomical in
comparison
> >to a parking violation, but my point remains no physical harm is done.
> >
> ***************************************************************
>
> Correct in the analogyof the severity of the offense. It really is not
> one for great detriment to national security and for what ever that
> means. Your arguement is now more on the line of decriminalization.
No, far from it. You better check your glasses, I think you may have a spot
on one of the lenses because you're not connecting the right dots in this
picture. In my other posts what I have suggested is to find a way to make
the use of that unit (at least partially ) under local jurisdiction somehow.
I'm not going to go over that again, you'll have to read my other posts.
>
> ***************************************************************
> >Now, as far as this Neo Fascist scare tactic.
> >
> ***************************************************************
>
> The FCC must operate under the guidelines set down by legislation from
> Congress. Do you now insist that Congrees is Neo-facists?
Check yer corrective eyewear again. Not at all. What I suggest is that the
original author of this message thread is a Neo Fascist fear monger.
Through the use of selective facts and a misleading subject/headline I
suggest the original author intended for unsuspecting readers to get the
false impression any and all units mentioned in the FCC regulations were
deemed contra-band / illegal to own.
Can I spell it out any plainer? Laser pointer perhaps? Pictures?
Diagrams? Cause I don't think you've played connect the dots before.
>
> ***************************************************************
> >If you've read down this far you'll notice that the subject of the
message
> >contains the word illegal.
> >
> >The sender chose that subject to instill a sense of fear. I read nowhere
in
> >that memo any thing about the radios being contra-band. It just states
that
> >they cannot be imported into the United States.
> >
> **************************************************************
> Actually I thought he posted it as information. I think in your
> interpretation of his post is where the fear lies.
I think it was blatant misprepresentation of new regulation is what was
intended. Subject clearly states "ILLEGAL CB TRANSCEIVER LIST". When in
fact he's misleading on 2 counts. One. They aren't "illegal", Two they
aren't "CB's". I also suggest that through the use of quoted regulation
knowing full well that the average reader of this unsuspecting newsgroup is
at all capable of understanding such regulation as quoted by the author and
might otherwise be confused into accepting the subject chosen by the author
as that of fact without full understanding of regulations as quoted by the
author.
In short, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that most readers here aren't
attorneys, and would be swayed by merely the subject and limited content
provided by the original author.
>
> **************************************************************
> >For those of you not in the United States that have read down this far I
> >humbly apologize for the length of this memo regarding this explanation.
On
> >the other hand you're probably laughing at the whole message thread.
> >
> >The HR2510 is not Contra-Band... You can own one, sell one, etc... Just
> >don't operate it on 11 Meters!
> >
> **************************************************************
>
> Clearly you did not listen to well in your 6 th grade civics clas or
> may have been absent at that time. As I stated earlier, the FCC was
> given permission to regulate and control of the usage and
> distributionof transmitters in the US back in 1934 by an Act of
> Congress. It was called the Communications Act of 1934. Under the
> guidance of Congress, the FCC interprets the derective and powers
> given them by Congress. One of those basically made operating an
> HR2510 illegal on the CB band well over 40 years ago. But to you that
> maybe acient history and not relavent law.
Ok, I'll quote from your material, "regulate and control of the usage and
distribution of ".
Doesn't say anything about personal property. You key it, that's when you
enter the jurisdiction of the FCC.
>
> **************************************************************
> >I would also recommend not parking in front of a fire hydrant, or
exceeding
> >local speed limits!
> >
> **************************************************************
>
> I would not either. You may never get caught but that does not remove
> the consequences.
I'm glad we see eye to eye on this one. Otherwise I'd stop at the next
green light just in case you were coming the other way! ;-)
>
> **************************************************************
> >I would suggest that as of this very moment they would indeed qualify as
> >collectors items. Just like the 1957 Chevy, 1960 Cadillac Convertible,
> >etc....
> >
> **************************************************************
>
> I suggest you follow what was taught in that 6th grade civics class,
> if you were present. Write your congress person. You have the right to
> submit legislation to change the laws. You will need to get at least
> one congress person to sign on to the bill and have them persue it. It
> seems that you are into de-criminalization of the violations of the CB
> band. You are within your right to do so. As also your are in the
> rioght to petition the FCC and Congress for consideration of your
> concerns. Suggest that others who agree toyour position do like wise.
> Jus twuit sitting here on this news group and bitch about it and call
> anyone who disagrees with your position a facist.
I call em like I see them. The author did try and mis-lead people by fear.
I did pay attention in 6th grade civics class, and I don't have to write my
congress person to make a change to something that is perfectly fine to
begin with. I'm not going to write congressional representatives to
de-criminalize an object that isn't criminal to own in the first place!
Dear Hillary;
I'm writing to you about a problem that doesn't exist. I'm doing this
because one lone individual obviously doesn't understand the differences in
property laws, and Federal Communication Commision Regulations. I know your
time is valuable, and that's why I let this wing nut talk me into wasting
yours.
Yours Truly,
Ben Dover
PS: Enjoy the cigars. And did I mention that ever since my neighbor two
doors down assumed room temperature he's decided to become a democrat?
One word sums up the likeliness of me writing the above. NOT!
>
> ***************************************************************
> >Anyone who owns one should realise the sudden increase in value due to
this
> >FCC Memo as there will be no more units coming into the United States
> >anymore.
> >
> ***************************************************************
>
> Yes maybe they will increase some. but eventually with time they will
> fall to lesser values. Consioder this that after ten years, ,Uniden
> and others no longer are required to supply parts for repair. Thirty
> years for now a none working unit will be worth what a cupof coffee
> costs now.
Bear market, bull market... It's the markets decision.
>
> **************************************************************
> >And that's all there is to this tiny little matter blown completely out
of
> >proportion by the original poster who chose a subject in an attempt to
scare
> >you out of your radio.
> >
> **************************************************************
>
> I don't think that it was a scare as it was posted as information. You
> seem to be propogating the scare.
Look closely... 3 dots... Not Four.
>
> **************************************************************
> >It was very well done... I'd almost regard it as New York Times
Material...
> >
> >VOTE FOR GORE OR WE'RE GONNA STARVE!!! -- get real --
> >
> >Fear... If you can find the humor in it you'll realize why the bible
refers
> >to the devil as a prankster.
> >
> *************************************************************
>
> What has the bible have to do with radio?
>
> Did not Jesus say render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's?
Knew I shouldn't have written that paragraph, but I'm glad you took the
bait. What I'm pointing out is that often with fear mongering and scare
tactics it's often funny to see the individuals get spooked. Halloween
prank. That sort of thing. I didn't quote from it or nothing. Man...
You'd probably jump on holy hemoroids to keep commandments out of the hands
of children I bet! Seems those stone tablets are about as physically
harmfull as any 10M transceiver. Could stub a toe! Sandals or
commandments must go, or one could stub a toe! har dee har har... Excuse me
for "HAMMING" it up.
>
> *************************************************************
> >I really wish these fascist scare tactic fear mongering dipshits like the
> >guy who posted the original message in this thread would go find
something
> >else to scare. He'd probably have to resort to puppies, kids, and
animals
> >though... Nice Try!
> >
> *************************************************************
>
> What are you afraid of? DO you feel that because a law is not worth
> adhereing to, you just ignore it?
Dude. Dots... Are you feeling ok? You're confusing the issue of personal
property with that of an individuals action. What I'm saying is really very
simple.
>
> The law says that I can not possess a nuclear bomb. I would sure feel
> more comfortable having a 100megaton thermal nuclear weapon in my
> basement. Take out a whole bunch of commie bastards shoule they come
> and try and knock down my door.
Rollin out the holy hemoroids.. Just as I thought... Oh, hand gun doesn't
apply? I'll blow it completely out of proportion and make reference to
thermonuclear weapons.
I hear real estate is really cheap in Afghastan nowadays, but rumor has it
there will be several prime bunkers available outside of New Houston,
errrrr.. Baghdad opening up this spring. Perhaps you can get in on a time
share to see what the area is like before you make a final decision?
>
> Now how rediculaus does that sound? Haveing a 100 megaton thermal
> nuclear device is own's gasement does no one harm until it goes off!
I have never heard of a 10M radio getting to the point of critical mass, but
I have seen a few melt down. Not sure where you're going with this, but
I'll give ya some room for expression and my own entertainment.
Depends on reference. To have a point of reference in a 3D space, one must
have at least observe 3 known points in that space.
In other words, connect the dots. It isn't hard to do.
>
> Finally I find your comments as humorous as you will find mine. See
> that is the beauty of this forum. Chances are that this will do
> anything to change your belief is at best a prayer. I think the Sun
> burning out tomorrow has a better chance. SInce you had the right to
> express your idealogy, I do express mine.
That's what makes America great. Don't worry about the commies and
terrorists. They're easy to spot. They're the ones wanting to shake hands
after you give em the finger. I'm all for cultural diversity.
Some washed ashore up on lake ontario the other day. Looks like one of our
fine upstanding Canadian Neighbors talked em into thinking it was safe to
cross in the rapids above the falls! Knowing Canadians and their good
business sense I would expect the fine neighbor charged for each head.
Let's see... That's a $24.00 vinyl raft, $5,000 US a head * 6 terrosists
minus the $24.00 for raft, gas for van, and one free complimentary
flashlight with half dead batteries if I get a full tank. Picture it;
Abduhl, now remember the roaring you hear means you're getting close.
That's the noise of the evil capitalist beast.
>
> Thanks and have a nice day
Any time Jerry. Been fun. Bon Voyage! ;-)
>
> james
>
Landshark
Again very well said, but I believe you were
quoting James, not Jerry.
Landshark
Landshark
Very Well said Karl...............................
Landshark
--
Happy New Year to All
Bill Nelson
>> Let's see?............"and other similar"........Icom706, Kenwood 940,
>> Yaesu 767.ect ect.
>>
>> They should all be made "ILLEGAL TO IMPORT OR MARKET"
>> because they all are "readily activated ".
> Tnom, they are for use by amatuers why should they be illegal to import?
> because a few CBer want to break the law and use them. That is like saying
> cops shouldn't use guns be cause criminals break laws with them. Yoour being
> stupid.
Tnom has a point. Why should they be different, just because they happen to
cover more amateur bands that the "import" radios? They can readily be
modified to cover the CB band (often continuous coverage from the top end
of the broadcast band all the way to 30+ MHz). On my 757GX, that can be
done by simply flipping a slide switch.
Most of the Ham radios these days have some sort of computer chip. It would
be rather trivial to put non-changeable code into the chip that would block
usage in the vicinity of 11 meters (and some other frequencies as well).
Since that isn't done, I can only conclude that part of the selling point
for these Ham radios is the ready conversion to frequencies that are illegal
for Amateur use.
--
Bill Nelson (bi...@peak.org)
Serpico
"Bill Nelson" <bi...@spock.peak.org> wrote in message
news:avh071$9t4$3...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>I can only conclude that part of the selling point
> for these Ham radios is the ready conversion to frequencies that are
illegal
> for Amateur use.
Bill your conclusion is off base as usual, the Big Amatuer radios are made
in Japan, they are made to cover work a wide variety of freqs, since the
radios are sold to hams all over the world ,different countries have
different frequency requirements, so they make a radio that will be able to
be sold to amatuer all over the world who's freqs are different than those
in the us.
If a radio is to cover that the HF frequency range it would be somewhat
difficult and more costly to block certain frequency portions.
> --
> Bill Nelson (bi...@peak.org)
>
Bert Craig
news:xoycnUuKcrj...@comcast.com...
>
> "Bill Nelson" <bi...@spock.peak.org> wrote in message
> news:avh071$9t4$3...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
>
>
>
> >I can only conclude that part of the selling point
> > for these Ham radios is the ready conversion to frequencies that are
> illegal
> > for Amateur use.
>
>
> Bill your conclusion is off base as usual, the Big Amatuer radios are made
> in Japan,
Er, would that be the same Japan that openly violates the ITU treaty
agreement by allowing their no-code licensees on 10m? (Albeit at only 10
watts.)
<snip>
> If a radio is to cover that the HF frequency range it would be somewhat
> difficult and more costly to block certain frequency portions.
That should be news to Ten-Tec. Try to get one of their rigs on illegal
freqs...good luck.
--
73 de Bert
WA2SI
Serpico
"Bert Craig" <wa...@arrl.netNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:pa6T9.20918$FT6.4...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> Er, would that be the same Japan that openly violates the ITU treaty
> agreement by allowing their no-code licensees on 10m? (Albeit at only 10
> watts.)
> <snip>
Yeah your point is? those radios are made for use all over the world each
governemt has different frequencies that are used, they don't make a
different radio for each country. It wouldn't make sense
>
> > If a radio is to cover that the HF frequency range it would be somewhat
> > difficult and more costly to block certain frequency portions.
> That should be news to Ten-Tec.
What should be news to them that it is more costly? or somewhat difficult ?
> Try to get one of their rigs on illegal freqs...good luck.
No thanks Bert why would I want to hack up a good amatuer radio to use on
CB..I guess you have tried Bert?
> 73 de Bert
> WA2SI
>
>
Twistedhed
>No thanks Bert why would I want to hack up a >good amatuer radio to use
on CB..I guess you >have tried Bert?
73 de Bert
WA2SI
__
CB freqs. aren't illegal. You have *got* to stop thinking in those
terms.