ARRL Petition to Expand Technician Privileges

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K4KYV, Mar 2, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: L-MFJ
  1. K4KYV

    K4KYV Premium Subscriber Volunteer Moderator QRZ Page

    KK5JY likes this.
  2. NY7Q

    NY7Q Ham Member QRZ Page

    WB5MG, KI2H, K8AI and 14 others like this.
  3. W2AI

    W2AI QRZ Lifetime Member #240 Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    Quotes from the ARRL 's petition to the FCC for enhanced entry level Technician privileges:

    " The Commission’s reluctance (reiterated
    consistently over a very long span of time) to examine the operating privileges of entry level
    Amateur licensees is based on an argument that ARRL views as a non-sequitur: that it is not
    necessary to permit meaningful entry level operating privileges to Technician Class licensees
    because it is not burdensome for Technician Class licensees to upgrade their license class by
    taking a single written examination. ARRL understands and agrees with the Commission’s
    concern underlying that argument: that the panoply of entry level license operating privileges
    should not be so extensive as to create a disincentive to study and upgrade one’s license class.
    However, the current Technician Class operating privileges are insufficient to the point that they
    are not providing enough of an incentive to attract and retain newcomers in the first place."

    Non-sequitur?? Really, ARRL?? Maybe the FCC has a valid point in stating over the years that a Technician Class license can receive additional privileges by upgrading to General Class by passing a 35 question multiple choice written examination. Use of the term "non-sequitur" is quite condescending to the telecommunications attorneys employed by the Commission. If I was personally involved in reviewing this petition for possible rule making -- it would be placed in the circular file without further comment.
    NL7W and K5APB like this.
  4. KG7OG

    KG7OG Ham Member QRZ Page

    In before..

    First mention of CB.

    Tests were harder back in the day.

    No code operators are the devil.

    50 years ago, I took apart my parents TV and that made me a better OP.

    Appliance operators.
    M6LVC, KI4ODO, N2NH and 16 others like this.
  5. KA2CZU

    KA2CZU XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    so why don't they call themselves the NAAR?

    ".... ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, formally known as The American
    Radio Relay League, Incorporated (ARRL),...."
  6. WU8Y

    WU8Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    Because that's not its name. The League's name is "The American Radio Relay League, Inc." Its description is the national association for Amateur Radio.
    N6MEJ and KA2CZU like this.
  7. WU8Y

    WU8Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    It's a good thing this is Friday; I can see this thread being another massive DRINK!
    WZ7U likes this.
  8. KA2CZU

    KA2CZU XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    in the petition it said "formerly known as" "The American Radio Relay League, Inc.", so is that still true?

    or did they lie in the petition?

    "Name of Filer: ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio"
  9. WU8Y

    WU8Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    Not having read the petition myself, I often see people misuse "formerly" when they mean "formally." My church does that every month in the bulletin when they announce the membership class, and I've given up complaining about it. :) What really gets me is in books (usually self-published) where people have the first part called "Forward" and not "Foreword."
    W9JEF and KA2CZU like this.
  10. KS2G

    KS2G Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Didn't the moderators just lock a thread on this? :confused:

    This subject has been beaten-to-death, with --I'm sure-- not a single mind changed.

    Enough already!!!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page