READ THE article BY WB6NOA IN CQ PAGE 46

As long as we are correcting spelling AMATEUR is correct, AMATUER is not

 

Somehow, your application of logic has failed you.

No rule bars you from making "comments" to another ham unless that "comment" is on the behalf of your employer. 97.111 (a)(1) provides you the authorization to exchange messages with another amateur station. If you are making the "comment" to another ham on behalf of your employer then I sincerely doubt it would be classified as a "comment". It would be classified as a communication on behalf of your employer.

Again, your logic fails you. Unless you are making the "comment" on the behalf of your employer it is not covered by the proscription in the rules.

SOSDD! You are simply trying to generate heat without lighting a match. Your arguments are old and not accepted by anyone familiar with the rules.

Jim
WA0LYK

KF7CG[/QUOTE]

 

right

so right...amatuer is amateurish.

I now have time to read the article...

I am sure that this one won't mention all those operators that use a tunner with there verticle antennas!

 

[/QUOTE]

If you read the rules, you will not that the pecuniary interest statement stands on its own as does the on behalf of his employer statement. They may be in the same sentence but they are independent conditions.

If you were promoting you professional services that would be pecuniary interest. Except for the explicit in the rules exemption, the sale of personal items runs afoul of the pecuniary interest section.

Communications on behalf of your employer do not have to have pecuniary interest. If your employer asked you to pass their best regards to someone this is a violation of "on behalf of". No pecuniary interests, just a violation.
Hopefully person to person messages if one of the persons is your superior are exempt.

The only problem I have with the whole rules is what is yet to be said or determined. I have long been aware that common sense does not apply to regulations.

KF7CG

 

Let's see if we can condense all this stuff.

"Amateur radio is amateur radio. It is NOT public safety radio."

There! I did it. All in two short sentences.

Works for me.

Ed

 

done deal

by golly, I think you did it Ed.

 

They were never interpreted that way until mid 2009. The "pecuniary benefit" interpretation is still on the official FCC web site.

Then how can emplyees of the ARRL transmit communications on behalf of their employer? They have no exemption for that, just an exemption to be paid to operate the station.

For 16 years, the rule was interpreted a certain way. Then one day in 2009, the word "pecuniary" was dropped from the definition, when given at Dayton. I don't recall anyone soliciting comments on whether or not to drop the word "pecuniary".

Joe

 

I'm saying that if you are employed with either Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County or the State of California, you'd see that your question could very well become a "reality" in the future. Those three huge governement entities would love to "take over" amateur radio for their own use(s). I know it sounds far fetched, but if you worked for one of those three, you'd understand my point. If "they" could take the amateur air waves "legally," they'd have already done it!.

Also, let's not forget what the term "amateur" really means:

am⋅a⋅teur <SCRIPT language=javascript>AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript>var interfaceflash = new LEXICOFlashObject ( "http://sp.ask.com/dictstatic/d/g/speaker.swf", "speaker", "17", "15", "<img src=\"http://sp.ask.com/dictstatic/g/d/speaker.gif\" border=\"0\" />", "6");interfaceflash.addParam("loop", "false");interfaceflash.addParam("quality", "high");interfaceflash.addParam("menu", "false");interfaceflash.addParam("salign", "t");interfaceflash.addParam("FlashVars", "soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fsp.ask.com%2Fdictstatic%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FA03%2FA0370200.mp3&clkLogProxyUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fwhatzup.html&t=a&d=d&s=di&c=a&ti=1&ai=51359&l=dir&o=0&sv=00000000&ip=475447ea&u=audio"); interfaceflash.addParam('wmode','transparent');interfaceflash.write();</SCRIPT><OBJECT id=speaker class=inlineimg title="Big Grin" border=0 codeBase="codebase=" alt="" classid="clsid</OBJECT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT> /ˈ Show Spelled Pronunciation [am-uh-choor, -cher, -ter, am-uh-tur]
–noun


1. A person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons.
<TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dnindex width=35></TD><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
"Let's keep the "professionals" out of AMATEUR radio......." -Me

 

ARRL LOOKING TO CHANGE 97:113(a)(3)

For those unaware, the ARRL will be asking for a rules change on this:

See http://www2.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/01/19/11294/?nc=1

See Item 3 under topic marked "The Board concentrated much of its deliberations on Emergency Communications at this meeting."

"* The Board instructed the ARRL staff to seek a change in Section 97.113(a)(3) of the FCC rules to permit amateurs, on behalf of an employer, to participate in emergency preparedness and disaster drills that include Amateur operations."

 

Yup Ed I think we all got off topic on this and what you said just summed it up. Not sure about the spelling of summed so don't kill me for it!

Rick/WA6ES

 

I'm conflicted on a number of ways.

Former SAR person here - back in the day, had the no-code license been available, we would all have gotten our tickets I'm guessing - we had one frequency allocated to us in the Public Service band. We were all unpaid volunteers of a team that was a private non-profit group. Don't know if it would be legal anymore - but since most of our use would have been deep in the mountains, it could have been handy.

As a current radio person - I got hit to join RACES the week I got my Tech ticket - did not get the ticket to join RACES. In my area, I question the overall need, but since it's a checkmark in the FEMA book for the county, well we have it!

Unless I'm mistaken, there are two or three EOC employees who have their tickets, but they are not paid as communicators - I don't know where they fall in the scheme of this - Since they don't normally participate in drills anyway, I guess they have no issues.

My biggest objection to this is that Gordon West has a lot of money on the line in training public safety officals to get their amateur licenses. I'm sure his heart is in the right place but who says the next guy will be?

I look at the small slices of band we have and all the weath of the bands pissed away on useless stuff - cell phone calls about getting haircuts, etc., I say let the PS agencies build their own support systems - they actually have the money for hardened radio installations and robust systems.

I believe their is a case for the RACES groups to have public safety frequency allocations or county provided 800 mhz trunking equipment.

 

I recall Charlie Tuna. He stood virtecel on the ocan floor. But he was thrown back a lot of times. He was a rank amatuare.

Ed

 

Our SAR operates on 155.160 mhz. Most of them are actual police officers, not hams, though they volunteer their off duty time. Here the State Police is in charge of SAR. There are, though, a few hams involved, but I think most of those also have police connections.

Rarely is SAR handled on amateur frequencies. The exception is way back in the mountains where a ham repeater has better coverage than the 155 simplex frequency. That happens now and then. There are a couple of ham repeaters that are well suited to the coverage back in the canyons. I can't see a problem with that. It is unpaid, volunteer work, and the guys using the ham repeaters are hams, and not SP officers. Most of the SP officers are not hams. They stick to the 155.160 frequency.

There is a potential for rules violations if an SP officer also happens to have a ham license and operates on the ham repeater during an SAR situation. So far, it has, as far as I know, been kept separate. The amateurs operate on the amateur repeaters, and are not SP officers, and the SP guys operate on 155.160. If there have been exceptions, there may not be any more, after the FCC ruling.

Gordon West called me a couple of nights ago to ask if he could send me a copy of his article, in PDF format. I agreed, but I downloaded it on a system that does not have a recent version of Adobe, so I have to transfer it to my newer computer before I can read it. (Or download a new Adobe to the old system!) I'm afraid I was not very communicative with him on the phone, my mistake. I will know more after I read the article.

I do plan to read it, though, as I am curious about opinions, both that agree with me and that don't. Which is why I don't 'ignore' anyone here - I read - and value - ALL opinions, not just my own. I can't comment on the article until I read it which may not be until tonight.

Anyway, as I said earlier, "Amateur radio is not public safety radio," and I believe deeply that should remain true. There already IS a public safety radio. And it does a very good job. We are amateurs, and we do a very nice time of having fun!! Different from a 'job.'

Ed

 

"SAVE LIVES"

Stupid-dumb. Why would a new Ham want to "learn to save lives"???? Please stop all this and just leave all this stuff up to the qualified, well paid, insured, professionals. Enjoy Ham Radio.
73
Tom K4SUS

 

Agreed !

Most of the new generation of hams are finding their way in to the service based on the mistaken premise that Amateur Radio is all about emergency communications. I've even heard a few ramble on about the supremacy of EMCOMM on one of the local repeaters a few weeks ago. Do they even know that Amateur Radio was shut down during WWII ? The technical and operating competence of these very same people is in many cases sorely lacking.

It is readily apparent to me that we are now witnessing the downside of "Restructuring".