[SOC] Good grief...

Sat, 1 Feb 2003 23:41:33 -0800

Yes, but Americans are a little aghast at such over regulation.
Foxtrot-Charlie-Charlie prefers, in order to preserve federal preemption
over RF emissions, not to involve local jurisdictions.  And local police
prefer not
to involve itself in RF issues except to seize Rx or Tx euipment used to
facilitate crime and that ususally is seizing scanners when drug dealers are
arrested.

Taging RF devices is the only thing that makes any damn sense at all and is
the least instrusive.  But Foxtrot-Charlie-Charlie is way too busy trying to
enforce that one.  And it, nor any other federal agency, is about to issue a
regulation it knows it need not enforce.

In any event, as a lot of other US Hams most of my RF and related gear is
tagged with my call sign.  The ones I have not done so are those I just got.
And I also always carry my ham license when carrying RF gear away from my
QTH.

73 de tim kg6irh.
----- Original Message -----
From: "f5pbl" <[email protected]>
To: "SOC ML" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: [SOC] Good grief...

> Hi Rob,
>
> Saturday, February 1, 2003, 10:02:06 PM, you wrote:
>
> ==>>FCC INVITES COMMENTS ON AMATEUR-RELATED PETITION
> Rob> Reich has petitioned the FCC to require sellers of two-way voice or
data
> Rob> equipment to keep on file a buyer's name, address, telephone number
and
> Rob> "any future information when selling a radio that required licensing
under
> Rob> the current FCC rules." Information collected would remain private,
>
> We, YES, _we_ ham ops, have asked for that years ago. This has been
> denied by the French "FCC" 'coz of the lobbying of major gear shops
> here.
> Primary goal was of course to prevent (or try to limit) non-licensed
> people to get and use radios on ham bands: CBers, truckers, crane
> drivers, "bodyguards", a.s.o. a.s.o.
> Secondary goal was to sell equipment to people who, _in_theory_, are
> said to know how to correctly use it.
>
> But of course that would have been a _possible_ lost of money for pro
> sellers. Money is money, n'est-il-pas ?
>
> Just wondering why is it shaming to show your ham licence when buying
> equipment ? If you are ashamed of it, just give it back. IMHO.
> Personnaly, every time I buy ham related gear, I say who I am and this
> always leads to pleasant chat with the seller (who 95% of the time is
> also an ham).
>
> FCC would then be able to trace you and/or would get private info ?
> Are you naive enough to think that they do not _yet_ know what they want
> to know ? Or that they do not have other ways to get the info ? Tss,tss
...
>
> French law says : "You can buy everything you want - freedom of market
> - but you can use only if you have the right to do so (by licence or
> whatever it can be)". Do you see what I mean ?
>
> E.g. : Power limit in France on HF bands is 500W PEP.
> Do you really think you will not find 1+++ KW Power Amplifiers in our
> shops ??
>
> My K1 is running 5W CW and I feel much better and lighter (!) and
> "prouder" (read "happy of the established QSOs") than when I was
> running 100W out of my TS450S.
>
> Rob> Radio registration?  Gheesh!  Get a life dude!
>
> If you had to get a F ham test when I did (1989), then you would have
> had to be "checked" (some kind of interview - great memory BTW) by our
> "Renseignements G�n�raux" (I think you call yours something like
> "Internal Security Agency"). This is no more required since 1998. But you
> still have to declare to the Telecom Admin which equipement you have
> at home. But this being made on a voluntary basis ... do it if you
> want, of course.
>
> FWIW.
>
> 72!
> Claude, F5PBL
>
> Vi Minore, Plus Gaudium
>
> http://www.qsl.net/f5pbl  http://www.qsl.net/soc
>
> DIG #4451 - FISTS #7722 - SOC #503 - 10-X #71724
>
> _______________________________________________
> SOC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/soc