Applying the same argument that it could be easily modified to operate on the 11 meter band, I suppose the same prohibition could be applied to my Johnson Viking One with its VFO-122. All you have to do is spin the dial. Same thing with a lot of the older items that are commonly traded among many in our hobby. In my view, this is a very slippery slope... I find it irksome when someone from within our own ranks feels the need to push an issue like this to protect us from ourselves. I'll bet they're gleefully cheering for themselves, alone, in some dark room. I'm sorry that you even had to waste your time with this matter. 73, Rob W1AEX
That's true, if you can find a radio that was produced and imported and purchased prior to the promulgation of the restrictions, you'd be hard pressed to be forced to surrender it. However, in most all cases, that isn't what we're dealing with. These are new radios or recent vintage...
Banned radios I think that this is sensless any way - - - - - - who listens to 11 meters. That is why ham radio needs a license.
Ban the junk !!! I normally but do not post my thoughts to these forums however I must strongly agree with N2RJ. I hear these radio’s being used on ten meters and three out of five have technical issues. Did I mention most of the the operators do not know how to properly adjust them ---- Splatter, FMing, Distortion and Drift. Most are trash......... Set the example here and ban the junk and forget the bucks.
When Sears Roebuck began selling a re-branded Midland (or Uniden) "ham" radio for 2M there was a huge outcry demanding point-of-sale restrictions. The government declined to impose any kind of rule that would have required a buyer to present a valid license, saying at that time that the radio itself was a permitted, certificated piece of hardware. The key point made then, as it may apply now, is that the government felt its place was in the enforcement arena, not the purchasing phase. If an unlicensed person bought a Sears 2M rig, they'd better watch out if they got on the air with it because THEY'D GET YOU. In the case at hand, if the policy were consistent, the government would again avoid stepping into the marketplace and drawing prejudiced conclusions about intended use, and only go after those who are found to have used the hardware for an illicit purpose. The "type accepted" thing is probably ripe for a court test when taken in the context of a hobby where the government encourages licensees to build and operate transmitters on certain designated spectrum. (Isn't the League sue-happy at the moment? Maybe we can get them to do something.) A few months ago on this site, we had a discussion about a smalltime retailer who was selling low-powered AM transmitters like the kind used by real estate agents for drive-by sales pitches at houses on the market. What puzzled me then, and again today, is why they went after that specific retailer, and not the U.S. based manufacturer who apparently was wholesaling these units to that retailer and others who remain in business selling the very same model, with potentially the identical violation.
Fred, I'll agree it's heavy handed. But it IS a public forum. "Trafficking" in such items, at least on a retail or wholesale basis is patently illegal, but individual sales amoungst Amateur licensed individuals is specifically permitted in §Part 97. IF the FCC is going to use a "spent Uranium" fist upon QRZ, then they at least have a moral and legal obligation to do exactly the same to ePay, eH*M, and ALL other swapmeet sites that deal with such items.
The FCC (time and again) has stated that the ban is against importation for the purpose of marketing (meaning sale and/or lease) not for individual posession or use.
De facto, maybe, but where does it specifically say in the regulations that you may not possess, for noncommercial purposes, such-and-such make/model of radio, of any vintage? It doesn't. But now it seems that we just moved one step closer to that. The key here is whether or not the boards and publications could reasonably have been expected to know that the sales being facilitated were, in fact, illegal under whatever regulations existed at the time. In those cases where the board or publication was found liable it was because they could have reasonably been expected to know that what the seller was engaged in was illegal. If someone posts one of those 11M POSs for sale, one time, no big deal. If the same individual posts the same or similar 11M POSs for sale on a regular basis, alarm bells would (or should, at any rate) go off and further inquiry is warranted.
I can see it now, "Free RCI radio", but $250 in shipping. Well, I perceive it is entirely possible. Andrew
So, let me understand this. The law says, you can't manufacture it, you can't import it, you can't sell it. How are you going to obtain it?
Fred, It's NOT about supporting freebanders. It's about some (often newbies) interpreting the law the way THEY see fit, and want to quash anyone who doesn't agree with THEIR interpretation. If Riley hasn't actually left the FCC, I'd hope HE would have an official comment on the matter, as there have often been many contradictory statements made to underlings at the FCc on this very issue.
I need to report to Prison !!! I sold a FT-817 that I used the CAT cable and software and modified it to operate on 60 meters.....Oh and it would operate on 11 or the NOAA weather freqs or ..... I love the way government is getting their nose in my life again. I seem to remember that policical correctness like this was alive and well on Sept 10, 2001.
