[Kenwood] Question of Credibility

Fri, 25 Jul 2003 07:49:07 -0400

This all sounds fine in theory, but you must remember that conditions 
vary by country. In this case we are talking about an issue with the 
USA, the "Land of Lawyers". It has been stated that it isn't illegal to 
sell the radio, just to transmit with it. It has been stated that the 
seller can't be held responsible, only the person that uses it. Sounds 
great but then tell me why there are so many lawsuits against firearm 
(could as easily be radio) manufacturers and lawsuits against firearm 
(could as easily be radio) dealers and lawsuits against former firearm 
(could as easily be radio) owners when it turns out a crime is committed 
by a third party using a firearm (could as easily be a radio) that was 
previously manufactured, sold or owned by a person who had absolutely no 
control over the end use of that firearm (could as easily be a radio). 
There is no common sense involved here, it is how good a case a lawyer 
can make in defending his client. In the case of guns we often see the 
defense use words like "if my client hadn't had such easy access to guns 
he wouldn't have committed the crime" and an equally compelling case 
could be made "if my client hadn't been sold the radio by that 
unscrupulous ham radio nut/store then he wouldn't have been inticed into 
transmitting illegally". Can't happen? Tell my insurance carrier who has 
raised my rates many times over the last few years to cover potential 
lawsuits against my sporting goods business due to otherwise frivolous 
suits. All it takes is one lawyer to smell blood (money).

And see how it works both ways: in one case a ham radio store is sued 
because they DON'T sell a radio and in another case a gun store is sued 
because they DO sell a gun yet in neither case did the store have any 
control over what use the radio/gun was put to once sold.

Yeah, I know people will jump on me and say comparing radios and guns is 
like comparing apples and oranges and yes that is true on one sense, but 
in another sense they are both just items of commerce, something that 
can be bought and sold and the rules of "who is ultimately responsible" 
aren't common sense, although they should be. In fact it's more 
difficult with firearms because we have to have both Federal and State 
dealer licenses and very strict laws we obey as to who we can sell to, 
yet we are still being sued on a daily basis for things that happen 
totally outside our control, even after following all the rules, laws 
and regulations.

So while it isn't "illegal" to sell your radio to someone who may or may 
not use it illegally with or without your knowledge, with today's 
leanings of "it's the other guys fault, I'm not responsible", don't be 
surprised if someone comes back to you 10 years after you sold something 
and try to hold you accountable for something done illegally with that 
radio at sometime in the future, just like they are doing now to the 
firearm industry.

Ray, W2EC

John Shafer wrote:

> I was told a few years back that Ham Radio Outlet (possibly the Oakland 
> CA store) was sued for refusing to sell transceivers to a non-licensed 
> person.  If I remember correctly, the store lost the case and had to 
> stop asking to see licenses before the sale.  Does anyone else recall 
> something like this?
> 
> A shortwave listening friend of mine bought a TS-450 because it was "not 
> much more expensive than the receive only version", and he "didn't want 
> to limit himself" should his interests change.  He did get interested in 
> more than listening, and later he became my elmer.
> 
> After getting one refusal from a seller to sell an HF rig to a no-code 
> tech (me at the time), I bought my TS-690 from someone else.  And then 
> listened to the W1AW code practice sessions to work on my upgrade.
> 
> Owning a rig without a ticket isn't the issue. What a person does with 
> it is their responsibility, and it is their penalty if used outside of 
> the law.  He could send you a copy of his ticket, then still operate out 
> of band.  The enforcement letter goes to... the one most deserving I hope!
> 
> Does the above imply that I disagree with listening to your inner voice? 
>  Not at all.  I have and will continue refusing to help CBers add 
> linears or modify for out of band.  Would I sell to a non-ham?  That 
> depends on the circumstance and the indicators that affect the comfort 
> zone.
> 
> That's what this issue is, neither a right or wrong issue but as you 
> said, a conscious issue.  I respect you Dave for still having one and 
> caring.  The outcome of the sale won't change that.
> 
> John W6PTT
> 
> 
> 
> Paul McInnish/Home wrote:
> 
>> Dave... I would not sell to him... morally you potentially could be 
>> aiding
>> and abetting a violation of the Fed.
>>
>> Not to mention the fact that you will be able to look yourself in the 
>> face
>> and say, he may get it from someone else that does not care, but he 
>> sure has
>> heck did not get it from me & my conscience is clean & clear!
>>
>> You obviously care or you would not have sent this e-mail message 
>> out... a
>> tip of the hat to you!
>>
>> Paul - K4BET
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Leisman" <[email protected]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 9:56 PM
>> Subject: [Kenwood] Question of Credibility
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a question for the group that I never have anticipated
>> befpore.  I recently advertised a TS-830s for sale through the QTH.com
>> classifieds.  Almost immediately the rig was sold to a gentleman in
>> Florida.  Cashiers check arrives a couple of days later and as I ready
>> evrything I check, using qrz.com, the guy's call and find out the name
>> listed with the call and his name are very much different.  I also
>> notice that he has invited me to join him a "QOS" on a CB frequency
>> once the equipment arrives and he has everything set up.
>>
>> Part of me has a great problem with selling a piece of equipment like
>> the 830 to a glorified cb operator, especially since ham tickets are
>> easier to get now that code has been dropped.  I don't like it and I'm
>> inclined to send the guy's check back and tell him "No deal, I sell to
>> hams only". This is the moral part of the argument.
>>
>> But, another part of me says that if he doesn't buy my rig, he'll buy
>> one from someone else and transmit anyway.  So, essentially whether
>> it's a rig from me or someone else, it makes no difference, he's stil
>> going to violate the law, so why not sell the rig and be done with
>> it.  This part doesn't settle good with my conscience.
>>
>> Anyone had similar experience?  If so I'd be interested in comments.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dave, W8QW
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> - - -
> 
> Your moderator for this list is:
> Larry Wilson KE1HZ [email protected]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kenwood mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/kenwood
> 