You're carrying the wrong message. If the FCC really didn't want us to take ALL matters into our own hands, they would be monitoring our airwaves 24/7 and enforcing rule violations. But they don't, because: a) they don't have the resources to do so, b) we are, by and large, a well-behaved bunch, and c) they've got much bigger fish to fry. So what *might* they say? They *might* say "leave the enforcement to us." And I would do just that, and so has the guy in the video. Enforcement belongs to the FCC because enforcement requires authority, a standard of proof and the delivery of a defined punishment. Finding a guy and talking to him is NOT enforcement and IS something we should all strive for. It is the basis of the whole OO program, and is done on the ham bands and in elmering situations every day. Let's say you're swimming laps in a pool, and the posted rule is to stay to the right side of the lane. You're swimming your lap on the right side and collide, head-on, with another swimmer in your lane. Do you immediately call the pool manager over? No. You'd say something...maybe a "watch it buddy" or a nicer "Hey, the rule is you should be on the other side." Then you watch what they do next - are they defiant? THEN you report them. But if they say "sorry" and go to the other side...then that's it, it ends, no need for the FCC. It's that simple.
I am carrying the message of the law. **There is NO 'OO' program.** There is now a 'VM' program, with a very different approach, devised and overseen by the FCC and ARRL. You are confusing 'message' with 'process'. Process is the invocation of enforcement on Federal law vis a vis the FCC. It has nothing to do with 'soccer' type analogies, or swimming pools, or teachers chiding students in kindergarten by analogy. The FCC actively discourages Part 97 licensees from taking matters of resolving or correcting said violations into their own hands. The VM program is extensive and directly reports actionable violations to the FCC. It does not notify violators. It DOES, however, CONTACT AND COMMEND outstanding operations and operators. Look at it as carrot, not stick. The FCC holds the ENTIRE stick. OTOH, the FCC recognizes that unintentional and limited violations are not on its list of 'actionable' pursuits. It also recognizes, but is at best neutral, on the notion that 'hams should point out unintentional violations' to other hams. If you hear someone is out of band, drop them a friendly e-mail. That is an unintentional violation you are discussing. However, know your limits: You should never, ever, confront in-person an intentional violator of Part 97. If you believe the VM's are NOT aware of certain repeated, intentional, violations, then drop an email to N1ND at the ARRL, or Riley. It is uninformed to assume that the repeated, intentional violations will proceed as 'business as usual' as they have in the past. Assume the VM's are well aware of the repeated issues on various specific frequencies on 40m,20m, and 75m. This is how things work. I did not concoct the process. I am merely reporting it for the edification of you and others, here. You should absolutely feel free to check it out with the FCC, or its liason, Riley. He is friendly Please: no more 'correction' on my statements of fact. I have provided you ,now, TWICE, the means to verify my statements. Thanks. 73 Chip W1YW
I am not telling you 'what to do'. I am informing you of how the FCC sees the process, and how it wants us to proceed. Please check with Riley. He is always available and friendly on discussing these matters. He is a ham-attorney who is retired FCC. He is K4ZDH. Email on his bio page. Let me paint a scenario, which is more realistic than it sounds-- an intentional violator is tracked down by a ham, and the face to face results in a physical conflict, in which the ham is in the wrong. Now-- the ham claims 'enforcement of ham radio rules'. The state or municipal court then points out that the FCC is solely responsible for enforcement, and that the ham had no basis whatsoever for confronting the violator. Ergo, the ham is in the wrong. The ham loses, goes to jail or pays an outrageous fine and lawyer fees. Not defending, just informing. 73
Most Northerners don't get Southerners. Many Northerners intrepret Southerners' polite and respectful approach as a weakness that means they can be pushed around or pushed aside. I AM a Northerner and I know full-well not to mess with Bubba! And as I got into 'senior' territory, I realized how WELL the Southern approach works !
Serious Serious stuff? Thats a joke. The FAA could care less about what goes on with the ham bands, and one pass thru the freq’s seeing all the lack of “ham ethics” in operating proceedures shows that much of the ham community cares less as well. Good luck on seeing any type of procecution, ever.
