Fears Sweden's new driving regs may hit amateurs

Why not keep a copy of the directive in the car, for the officers to read? I know that Norwegian hams have successfully taught inspecting officers that the regulation in Norway applies to mobile phones communicating through a "public network", while all others are exempt.
73 de Frode LA6VQ

 

The old definition of statistics is that if you have one foot in the oven and the other in the freezer, on the average you're comfortable.

Andy, personal experience beats data collection and statistics every time because all data collection follow predefined/predicted parameters and [usually] does not include everyone affected or with a supposedly valid opinion.

Drivers texting while mobile is an all-consuming activity in most cases and even checking the caller's ID or to see who sent the message is not nearly like a quick glance to see which knob to twist. In fact, that quick glance at a radio is a fraction of the time consumed when we check the rear-view mirrors and instrument panel on the car as all good driving instructors teach their students to do as often as once per minute.

Thanks much for your insight. I also note that you are from a Commonwealth state which says a lot in this case.

 

The data is pretty clear that "hands free" does not reduce the level of distraction of cell phone call.

All the distracted driving laws, crafted ostensibly to deal with the problem of cell phones, are specifically crafted to insure cell phone operation is permitted. Sanitization by "hands free" pretty much does nothing except inhibit TXTing where there aren't other laws that govern that.

The last thing we need it to make ham radio more immersive by use of headsets and vox to make it more like using a cell phone. Creating a problem where one doesn't exist is pointless.

 

Not in Oregon, but have driven thru 32 states with my mobile and law enforcement thus far has shown a rather pronounced lack of curiosity about antennas or my equipment. Very much unlike the general public. There been a couple instances when I been stopped on the side of the road and an officer asked if I was okay and was gone in a heartbeat when I said there was no problem.

 

I would like to sell you a rock that prevents cancer. I've not gotten cancer in the entire time I've owned this rock. Certainly, my personal experience trumps epidemiology and decades of oncology research. I can sell you this rock, all for the low price of whatever a KPA-1500 is going for.

 

You're standards are far too low. I'd offer a better rock for this!

 

Swedish hams should not be operating this type of radio while driving!

 

It appears that rock you want to hustle came from your head...

 

I doubt it. You don't "study" something if there's nothing to study. IOW, no smoke, no fire. Cell phones ARE a mainstream issue. 1. They get almost constant use; some of simply cannot let go of it. 2. Far more people USE cell phones than amateur/CB/two way/commercial radio. 3. The cell phone operates differently from a two way radio. That in itself is significant and a reason one can not easily find incidents attributable to a two way radio.

And precisely WHAT does the president of the NSC actually KNOW about operation of amateur (and other) radios? Could she explain the difference in operation of a TWO WAY and a cell phone? (Guess where my money is going?) By her very words she is ass-uming a risk to be at a level that meets HER expectations, or what she would WANT it to be. IOW, "because AH said so, its a risk". In order to meet the requirements of her last sentence, one would have to freeze solid or not drive at all.

You would be correct in that assumption. That is a LOT of guilt to assign to such large area of real estate and so few operators to assume it. Here's one who has driven for over 50 years with only minor incidents to report. At no time was any accident I was involved in resulted in large damage, nor was any minor bump the result of use of a two way radio.

 

Its what I've been yelling about for awhile now! It is an unfortunate fact that we as a people have been, are being groomed to be obedient sheep while at the same time for "somebody" to protect us from everything, at every time, at every move, at all times. for all time while giving up all vestige of self-determination. We are to trust somebody villingly ...I mean 'willingly'.......to do everything for us, and we must likewise villingly...OOPS...I mean, willingly surrender our own Will and purpose in trade for security and long life which no one can guarantee. But we want so desperately to believe that "zommbody hass ourrrrrrrrr best interests at heart, we will gladly surrender everything---ANYthing to have it. Ve (I mean) We want our cars to stop for us. We want cruise controls to keep our high speed spacing between us (that is the most aggravating piece of s*** ever invented). We want them to even DRIVE for us ( hope its after I'm gone). 1984 is running late, but it is here! Und Ve jussss can't vaiiiit for it. Let me zee your paperz, pleeze, und your chains are vaiting for you!

 

I do have a copy in my car, trouble is I do not have a mobile rig at this time LOL

 

Update on the US side of this issue. I wrote to FCC on 18 January to ask for guidance and information as to whether states may directly attempt to restrict, or otherwise regulate mobile amateur radio. I have received further guidance from FCC as to who/where to direct my Petition for Declaratory Ruling. Since the first letter has seemed to disappear into the soup, I have corrected the address and addressee and sent an amended letter this date (2-28). While others do not agree, I am of the firm conviction that states 1) may regulate driving behaviors that are reckless or dangerous, 2) may regulate speed and direction of travel, 3) other operations of a motor vehicle including the use of games, phones, texting, emailing; they may not "regulate" amateur radio or other devices that are directly licensed by the Federal Government (FCC and other entities) including CB and two way (Parts 90, 95, and 97) without intervention or consultation with, or permission OF FCC. These Rules are already in place, and with regard to amateur radio, its operating parameters and permissions as to what one can and cannot do are already set in stone. With the exception of CB radio as regards certain interference complaints, states MUST refer to, defer to, YIELD to FCC. In THAT case, interference enforcement (CB) was permitted with the cooperation and assistance OF FCC. If I understand it at all, local authorities may NOT issue rules, regulations, local laws that either supercede FCC regulations, nor may they countermand or contradict existing Part 97 Rules. There is already precedent where FCC stepped in (?) when locals attempted to "regulate", stop, impede, or otherwise interfere with amateur radio operation. Preventing mobile operation of amateur radios IS preventing the absolutely legal use of our equipment under Federal law. IMHO, its the same as a city enacting an ordinance prohibiting amateur radio transmissions (electronic emissions, etc). That is not permitted under Federal law. And one then can come back to Docket 91-36 where FCC states absolutely without qualification that "................
the strong federal interest in supporting the
emergency services provided by amateurs cannot be fully accomplished unless
amateur operators are free to own and operate their stations to the fullest
extent permitted by their licenses and are not unreasonably hampered in their
ability to transport their radio transmitting stations across state and local
boundaries for purposes of transmitting and receiving on authorized
frequencies............................."

For all these reasons, I have made a Petition for Declaratory Ruling to exempt amateur, CB AND commercial two way radio from unnecessary laws, harassment, or tickets. Such laws will do absolutely NOTHING to curb distracted driving because two way radio itself is not the problem. It is the overwhelming use of the CELL PHONE that has brought this upon us. I think FCC will agree with me.

 

Well, I'm not very concerned about this.. there are different options ... I am more concerned on the PTS (swedish FCC) are having a draft of only lowering the power limit down 200 watts PEP (1 KW right now) to go over it you have to have a special permission ... this not complying with EU regulation... back to the USSR... //Mats

 

The new rules by the PTS are long overdue and they have my full support.

For decades, full privileges have been handed out to unqualified people who have
passed "exams" that border to be able to write your name leglibly.

In other countries that take amateur radio somewhat seriously,
comparable competence levels give maximum power levels of about 100 W.

To be awarded higher power privileges, a much harder examination than today should be passed first.

73/
Karl-Arne
SM0AOM

 

Am I to understand that in Oregon you cannot turn on the GPS receiver (which is to guide you while driving in unfamiliar territory) in your vehicle when it is moving?