We lost a co-sponsor on ARPA

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KU0O, Dec 22, 2015.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
  1. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    The League's pecuniary interest is a losing proposition.

    They pay an attorney to be their lobbyist and to offset that probably 50,000 more hams would have to join the League, since their 'profit' from membership is zero, but they can make money on selling different publications and advertising.

    I don't believe for a second that's their motivation; the real motivation is allowing more hams to actually be active and do something on the air, which helps validate the spectrum resources we use.

    If FCC monitors tuned the ham bands and didn't hear anyone using them, they'd be gone very quickly.
     
  2. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I believe in Santa, and his eight tiny reindeer.
     
    K4JDH and WA7PRC like this.
  3. KV3D

    KV3D Ham Member QRZ Page

    I find it funny that some of the people here who have claimed that lobbying by other single-issue organizations is only done for money now essentially claim that the ARRL is doing this out of the kindness of its heart. It's also funny how all the greedy lobbying is only done for issues that they personally disagree with, but the "good" lobbying is done for issues that they fully support.

    Anyway, I'm really sad to learn that we lost a co-sponsor. I don't know how I'm going to cope. :rolleyes:
     
    K4JDH and WA7PRC like this.
  4. K4JDH

    K4JDH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Let us not forget the Easter Bunny. Or is that the Eostre Bunny?
     
    WA7PRC likes this.
  5. NX6ED

    NX6ED Ham Member QRZ Page

    Just put up a tower with a BIG log-periodic antenna.... Tell the neighbors it is for your TV...
     
  6. AD0AC

    AD0AC Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think people are missing the bigger picture. The number of new neighborhoods with restrictive covenants and mandatory HOA governance is increasing, not decreasing. The number of hams in this country is increasing, but the number of active hams are decreasing. Most of these new covenants and restrictions forbid ANY type of radio transmission within the neighborhood, so even if you manage to hide an antenna in your attic, you are still in violation and may be fined if the HOA finds out what your doing. Several have bragged on here that they are avid "little pistol DXers" regardless, and droned on and on about the sanctity of private contracts, yet they are in breach of their precious covenants just by operating a hidden station!

    If there are 750,000 hams in this country, and we'll be optimistic and say that 350,000 are active. Maybe half of those are active on HF, or want to be more active, so let's say 175,000 potential HF operators. If 60% live in a restricted neighborhood, that's 105,000 who are prevented from getting on the air.

    Now, let's say ARPA passes. Those people will now be able to legally operate. Given the cost and time to put up a tower, maybe 1% have the ability to do that, so 65 million Americans may have to put up with 1,750 towers. Ever done a local commercial tower search? This would have a negligible impact on those 65 million Americans' ability to enjoy their property or its value considering every neighborhood will be open to reasonable antennas.

    If it passes, I'm going to celebrate by putting up a new tower, and will become a life member of the ARRL. Their interest is not pecuniary, as "they" are the "membership". They spend resources to lobby Congress and the FCC on the members' behalf.
     
  7. N3AWS

    N3AWS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Doesn't everybody?
     
  8. K1VSK

    K1VSK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Only two points to clarify:
    1. You state "most of these (restrictions) forbid ANY type of radio transmissions..."

    I have heard anecdotal stories of a few. Can you elaborate specifically regarding your characterization "most"? If not, I understand why., and

    2. If, as you speculate, there are "1750 towers" which could be erected, how many neighbors does each one have?
    Corollary - of the "105,000 prevented from getting on the air", because of antenna limitations, how many neighbors do they have?
     
    WA7PRC likes this.
  9. AD0AC

    AD0AC Ham Member QRZ Page

    1. My county of residence (Jackson County, MO) has an online system that allows the public to view recorded land documents. When I researched new property developments, the overwhelming majority used model covenants promulgated by national developer's associations that specifically preclude radio transmission of any sort, as well as antennas. In addition to local research, my job (in house counsel for a non profit organization), requires that I handle various real estate transactions on a daily basis, all over the country and some limited international transactions. The overwhelming majority of restrictions I have viewed for property constructed in the last 30 years in the United States precludes both antennas and radio transmissions of any kind.

    2. This is a rhetorical question.
     
  10. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I've seen the "no radio transmissions" statement in some docs before but don't have readily available copies of them. Most CC&Rs aren't on line anywhere, you have to acquire them individually as needed.

    Since you've seen this a lot more times than I have, can you get hold of some of these printed restrictions, scan them and post them? I believe you, as I've seen them myself but I'm not in that business and don't retain documents for properties I never bought. It would be "convincing" to see some printed copy and even know where it came from (what part of the country, or municipality, CID, HOA, etc).
     

Share This Page