[Lowfer] New Ham Licensing

[Dexter McIntyre W4DEX]

Bill Ashlock wrote:

> I respectfully say 'Yes'. I understand that a lot of you see the code
> requirement as a way of screening out the undesirables that would turn the
> Ham bands into a uncontrolled CB-like hodgepodge. I see the code test as a
> side issue - not one that makes this group of people with wide disciplines
> basically get along pretty darn well.  My prediction is that there will be
> sufficient policing action from the 'caring' Ham population, which will
> always be there in sufficient numbers, to prevent most of the 'negatives'
> from happening.

You live a sheltered radio life Bill.  Got a scanner?  Listen to the 2 meter FM
band for a while.


> Need I point to the success of the Lowfer, Medfer, and Hifer
> bands where there is no written test, no code test, no official license, and
> yet has extremely stiff power and antenna restrictions?

We're a few dozen guys who don't' fit in elsewhere.  The masses rule.

Dex

>
>
> Bill A
>
> >No.
> >
> >Mike>WE0H
> >
>
> >I suspect this is part of an ARRL strategy to save allocations by
> >increasing occupancy and use.  But the ultimate question is, will the
> >result be worth saving?
> >
> >Mark  WA9ETW
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Rethink your business approach for the new year with the helpful tips here.
> http://special.msn.com/bcentral/prep04.armx
>
> _______________________________________________
> >From the Lowfer mailing list
> Send messages to: Lowfer@mailman.qth.net
> To sub/unsub visit: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer