Glenn Baxter, K1MAN Fined $21,000

What did he do and I am not paying 45 Dollars to find out. Short and brief answers please.

 

I am of the opinion that Glenn started out with reasonable intentions, given the lack of ARRL initiative on some key aspects of amateur radio. This is back 30 years ago now....

What has happened in the last 20 is appalling, IMO, and he has veered far off a reasonable course to a land of illegality.

Your opinion may differ. But maybe not.

73,
Chip N1IR

 

Enforcement in this country is 'reactive': there have to be legit complaints before the FCC feels it's OK to move. I think the FCC could have moved sooner if there had been a better coordination in submitting legit complaints.

I'm not talking recent year's issues--such as Chuck and Brian are aware-- I mean, say, 10 years ago.

The coordination in recent months has been excellent and emphasizes the facts. IMO.

73,
Chip N1IR

 

Simple. He saw one rule in a way that's not correct. In essance he took the "one way communication rule" the same one that ARRL uses for thier bulletins, and radio news and did it wrong. Meaning that he started his "radio news broadcasts" on top of exsisting qso's he did not check for it he just started. Unlike W1AW who will check and move accordingly. He also broke several rules with a "call in" show and used amateur radio for monitary gain. The only thing he did not do at least I don't know how much truth is in this but he did not sware on the air. But who knows. I didnt listen to him. I did however fall victim to his folleys.. Not much I could do about it.

He took the rule and bent it so far out of shape that he upset the Amateur radio community in whole. And he does not care. He said for the FCC to come to him, he had a friend waiting for Hollingsworth.

He thought he was in the right and he didn't care what the FCC or the rest of us thought. He said if ARRL can broadcast then so can he. He then blamed the FCC abusing his first admenment rights. If you want to read his webpage do a search on google for k1man and you will find his site.

There you will see just how "special" he is.

 

No. Didn't send money to K1MAN, didn't send money to the ARRL. I'd rather see my money go into clubs that will use it than some lobbyist or lawyer's pocket.

WELL then you can send it to the WA4GCH needs new radio fund I'll see it gets wisely used ....

 

Ok, here's a question, Was K1MAN's transmissions directed to the general public, or were they directed to the Amateur Radio Service? You see for it to be consider a "broadcast" the transmission must be directed to the general public. If it's directed to the general public then it's Illegal, BUT, if it directed to the amateur radio community and consists of material of interest to the amateur radio service, then it's legal. One of the problems I have with amateur operators over this thing is that amateur believe that the content that is directed to the amateur radio service must be the same type of format as the ARRL bulletin. (a newscast) yet there is nothing in the rules or regulation that states that, nor is there a FCC order that states that either. It up to the station on how they want to disseminate the information. Section 326 of the Communication Act prohibits the FCC from "controlling the content of ANY radio station" So I would really like to know where it states it has to be a certain format. The next thing is Amateur's have to realize that one, 47CFR 97.3 (a)(25) and 47 CFR 97.111(b)(6) is here to pretty much to stay the last time some one tried to change them and was denied the FCC said they would not hear on the matter any more, Secondly, those two rules is not just for the ARRL, anyone may operate a information bulletin, just like anyone can run a beacon. As the FCC stated in their April of 2004 letter to Baxter and is also on their website "there is no time limit on information bulletins." So there is some real questions regard Baxter and the FCC.
1. was it directed to the general public or to the amateurs?
2. was this enforcement "content neutral"? (the FCC under the law is to make content neutral dissensions in regards to making rules and enforcement action.)
3. Should the FCC clarify the rules a little better?


Todd N9OGL

 

Yes I have one of his QSL cards and photograph of the area he lives.

 

I received a quick report from K1MAN and was told by a jammer to "shove my mic up my A@@" I replied keep to the codes of a radio ham, his reply "WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEACH IN THE STATES" ............. Do you??

 

k1lwi- good point  I heard alot of it  myself , tried  to Hear newsline and could not a lot of the time Because of others keying on him , sure it was ok for them to key on him they dont talk about that , 73 Bill

 

I received a quick report from K1MAN and was told by a jammer to "shove my mic up my A@@" I replied keep to the codes of a radio ham, his reply "WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEACH IN THE STATES" ............. Do you??

 

I wondered how long this thread would go before K1MAN's fan club president would sign in. You dont need to ask the questions here, just type "k1man" into your wiki. Answer is short and sweet.

 

Only if the answer is absence...no entry listed on 'k1man'.

 

With the advent of the Internet there is no reason what so ever for W1AW to be "Broadcasting" on amateur frequencies as well. Especially with the ARRL pushing amateur access Internet e-mail via Winlink 2000. It's past time to eliminate all Broadcasting on amateur frequencies.

 

I'm not the president of anyone club, K1MAN or anyone else. The difference between me and you all is I don't get my emotion roughed up for something as stupid as ham radio; I HAVE A LIFE outside this HOBBY. What I've seen and what abuses I've taken by some of the people who signed that "petition against K1MAN" it seems to me that amateur operators are too emotion on this issue and this is a PERSON VENDETTA against K1MAN by those people. And whoever even questions the issue gets branded a president or a fan and these people goes after those people who ask questions, like they've gone after me. The reason I believe is that can't answer the question, or their afraid that what I'm say might be true.

Todd N9OGL

 

He is a sad man.

Nothing he did was correct by any standards of good amateur practice. It does not matter what you think his reasons were nor do you need to find justification for them. He violated federal law.

He was wrong and it caught up with him.

Picture this, a "senate hearing" on passing some portion of the amateur allocations over to commercial use. The amateurs do the norm about history, tradition, and public service. Then the lawyer for the commercial side plays a tape of his foul language and wandering rants.

The "senate" falls all over themselves laughing, and gives up our portion of the band.

People like this nut case are in the same league as Jack Gerritson. They need you to fell sorry for them, feel some issue of free speech is at work, and have you fall into the trap of "but there is always two sides to look at......."

They are failures in life, and they need you to bolster the weak egos they have. The number of posts that have sympathy and support for this fruitcake are the reasons they get away with what they do, for so long.

Amateur radio is a “licensed service”, and you need to adhere to the rules as given. There is no constitutional amendment that protects this behavior, in our service. With this license come responsibility and the strength not to fall into this kind of loser’s world.

You can banter all you want about this rule and that rule, and your interpretation. He got caught, and now must pay the price. Just sad it took so long, but that’s the free society we live in. Legal protection for all, even weak-minded dolts like him.

We wish him bon voyage and his soul mate Jack, (wonder if they ever met).
May they enjoy a “helmet free” world under the best of medication…………

He is a sad man.