ad: M2Ant-1

HOA's Take Aim at Our Hobby!

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by WA2SQQ, Aug 14, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. N2SR

    N2SR Ham Member QRZ Page

    No NASA. The moon landings were illegal. No ISS. No Mars rovers, no Horizons spacecraft.

    Also no motorized vehicles, since they cannot be regulated.
     
  2. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    I still got a couple AND a BD77. One of the DM35's still is "new" having never been operated. I bought it at a hamfest nigh 40 years ago. It was always good to have a spare:cool:. One of these days. ( and you know how that goes), I'm gonna make up a replica HF transmitter with a modern transceiver. This is for my '51 Jeep. It'll be a regular ham HF rig IC 706 maybe), but I'll come off the keying circuit to the dynamotor which I'll install just for history's sake. The dyno won't actually DO anything, it'll just start and run (CLACK! RRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrr):p while the mike is keyed. I've still got a couple of Ford starter solenoids to start it with;) Just like the old days. Since the Jeep is painted USAF blue with decals, it adds a little realism. I'll take an ammo box and mount the radio inside on the fender near the antenna. Just a fun project......some day.
     
  3. K4KWH

    K4KWH Ham Member QRZ Page

    I had a cousin who lived in LA. He told me a lot of people (including him) established a "residence" in Nevada complete with a street address and a PO box because licensing and insurance in Cali was astronomical. If anyone in Nevada questioned it, he was a "traveling salesman" home on weekends. If he was questioned in Cali, he was "visiting friends". Don't ask me how he got away with it. :confused: But he DID, until he retired and returned to NC.

    BTW, this thread reminds me how lucky I am NOT to have to put up with an HOA. This day, a gorgeous Saturday afternoon, I am in the back yard doing fall clean up. This is "freebie" week when the city picks up stuff they wouldn't normally pick up. So I'm separating out trash, plastics, cans, "junk", metal. Part will go to the city dump, the rest goes to the scrap metal yard. Right now I've got stuff scattered out, pulled out of the garage, all over back here. If I had an HOA, I'd bet there'd be some little snot comin' over here to lecture about how I couldn't have this mess in the back yard. But I have no such thing, all is quiet as I work, and it'll be all cleaned up this evening. Some up at the street for pick up, the rest in my pickup truck for hauling away Monday.;) Now was "break time" and time for "tea". Time to get back at it!!!!;)
     
  4. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I think some people still do that, but it might be more difficult today to get away with it for long. The law stipulates you must register your vehicle here within 10 days I think it is after moving here. Maybe it's 30 days, I didn't look it up -- but it's not long.
     
  5. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    The Constitution was a brilliant document in 1789 and the Bill of Rights seemed appropriate in 1791.

    Unfortunately, it provides the mechanism for changing it, which is close to impossible, which is why it hasn't been changed much.

    It needs a lot of change. That it includes a separate branch of government just to interpret it is very telling.

    I think the Founding Fathers had a great sense of humor.
     
  6. K0MHP

    K0MHP Ham Member QRZ Page


    i suggest the reading ARTICLE ONE.... SEE enumeration of Congress (the House). and make a note that "congress" did not and does not have the power to create its own MAXIMUM enumeration for the House to a FIXED number when it does not match the requirement set in the Constitution... see Art1 Clause 3,

    bottom line... when the enumeration of the House became less than the Constitutional design in Art. One.... everything became moot. Quote: THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE FOR EVERY THIRTY THOUSAND... each state shall have at least one.

    435 may have been correct in 1910 or so when the number was set to 435, but not now....

    TRY this.... divide the US population by 30,000 and you get a number much greater than 435. so it is still "taxation without representation." BETTER YET take the US population and divide it by 435... AND see how UNDER REPRESENTED YOU ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2015
  7. N1EN

    N1EN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Honestly, I think the independent judiciary and the high hurdle imposed for change are two of the Constitution's stronger points.

    But I tend to be skeptical of the random whims of the rabble, and those who cater to them.

    While I wouldn't disagree that the Constitution needs updating, I'd be concerned about how much bigger a mess delegates to a Constitutional convention would make of it.
     
  8. N1EN

    N1EN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    You might want to reread that.

    The maximum number of representatives is one for every 30,000 (or about 10,700 at current population).

    The Constitution prescribes no minimum number (aside from one per state).
     
  9. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    What we'd need are delegates who are not politicians. I'd disqualify anyone who holds an elected office.:p
     
  10. N1EN

    N1EN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Considering the voters are the ones sending those politicians to office...I'm not sure I'd trust the voters to pick delegates.
     
  11. K0MHP

    K0MHP Ham Member QRZ Page

    i do not think either of us are misreading it. ??? YES to no minimum number. ??

    BUT 435 has been the minimum for right around a century.


    And yes. we agree on what i quoted???? it is to be one per 30,000 (see art 1, sec 2 clause 3) AND SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE FOR EVERY THIRTY THOUSAND....

    my point is that it does... and congress since the mid 1900's has not corrected it -- as the population grew.representation did not grow, accordingly, as the "fathers" meant for it to do.


    we agree (?): the Constitutional ratio shall not exceed one per thirty thousand .. and per your math, 435 falls way short of one per thirty thousand

    so what is it we are not in agreement with? what am i missing? i said the House size of 435 is not correct Constitutional Representation and per your math you seem to agree ?????

    do the math from the other end.... if the 2010 (last enumeration) US population was say 311,000,000 or so roughly, and divide the estm'd 2010 population by 435 House seats then each Representative represents over 714,000 people NOT THE CONSTITUTIONAL one per 30,000 (311,000,000 / 4 = 714,943)


    House size of 435 is not the correct Constitutional Representation.. per your own math when you got a House with over ten thousand members at the correct one per 30,000 ratio.

    and in Art. 1, Section 8 there is no expressed power that relates to the setting a perpetual fixed number of House seats... at 435 since around 1910 -- nor will the necessary and proper clause work since it relates to the foregoing powers in Art 1 Section 8.[/QUOTE]
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2015
  12. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Constitution needs some serious updating.
     
  13. K0MHP

    K0MHP Ham Member QRZ Page


    that is an understatement in the area of enumeration of House seats...

    IT IS REALLY an issue of enforcement of the document that has failed us..NOT the document -- it has been loose constructionalism or as i call it "who needs a blue print construction"

    but long term it has functioned well... UNTIL the courts became the co-executive branch and when that does not suit them they become the co-legislative branch... as noted recently by Justice Thomas.
     
    KV3D likes this.
  14. WA4ILH

    WA4ILH Subscriber QRZ Page

    There is the common misconception among consumers and even some municipalities that a radio transmitting antenna mounted high on a radio tower is more likely to cause interference to consumer grade electronic equipment than a smaller antenna mounted closer to the ground. Actually, the exact opposite is true. Most amateurs employ the least amount of power necessary to communicate with a distant station As an antenna is raised higher above the ground it becomes more efficient in radiating RF energy in the direction of a distant station. Also, as the antenna is elevated, the RF “field” is greatly reduced closer to the ground. The RF field near the ground is reduced even more when the amateur is able to reduce his transmit power because of the increased efficiency of the antenna at higher elevations. Some of the newer transmitting equipment will actually reduce output power automatically. Most cell phones and PCS devices have been employing automatic power reduction technology for years.
    Tom WA4ILH
     
    WA7PRC likes this.
  15. N1EN

    N1EN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Article One reads "the number of representatives shall not exceed..." NOT "the number of people represented by a representative shall not exceed..."

    If you think gridlock is bad now, imagine how long it would take Congress to do anything if you have over 10,000 politicians clamoring for their time to talk, rather than just the 435 yammerers we have today.

    If the concern is ensuring an individual has adequate representation in government, it would be far more effective to do something about our one-representative-per-district/winner-takes-all structure we have today.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: elecraft