Repeater Use and Restrictions

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KI7LFD, Jan 9, 2020.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
  1. KC3EPA

    KC3EPA Ham Member QRZ Page

    You are most likely correct.
    Now if one banned one from a repeater because they were Jewish or talked about Judaism and the FCC decided in repeaters favor the lawsuits would come and hard.
    So believe me the FCC is not going to NILLY Willy side with repeater owner.
    In fact they could if they wanted use a rule or such to revoke license especially if investigator is Jewish or Catholic or other.
  2. W4NNF

    W4NNF XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Maybe. Seeing as how the FCC does nothing about 7200 or 14313, or a large part of the General segment of the 75 meter phone band, I rather doubt they will do a blessed thing about someone saying stupid things on some freaking 2-meter repeater.
  3. KA9JLM

    KA9JLM Ham Member QRZ Page

    There is a repeater in California that has a daily Bong Net, And they talk about the best pot available and what they smoked that day.
  4. KC3EPA

    KC3EPA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I would try to work with group with specified times.
    What if they banned or some how blocked an emergency request.
  5. W4NNF

    W4NNF XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    As I said, if a group with a special interest want to be on a 2-meter repeater, their best course may be to set up a repeater of their own. THAT SAID...given the lack of activity on most 2-meter repeaters and the relative scarcity of survivalists in most areas, I have a hard time believing that a few hams talking about freeze-dried goulash and the efficacy of tin-foil hats would cause a problem. I'd welcome them on our (usually dead) club repeater here. :D
  6. AI3V

    AI3V Ham Member QRZ Page

    That show's how much you know...

    It's pointless to freeze dry mashed potatoes, just dehydrating them is as good as it gets....


  7. AG6QR

    AG6QR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I'm not so sure. Courts don't rule on general notions of what's good or right. They rule based on what a body of law says, and based on how previous courts have interpreted the law.

    Discrimination based on religion is clearly illegal in employment situations, and in public accomodations, because laws have been passed covering those areas. Outside of those areas, if a law hasn't been passed to prohibit it, it's allowed, right or wrong.

    If an individual wants to hold a private dinner at his home, and make up the guest list by inviting or excluding people based on religion, we may not approve, but the government won't intervene. If an uninvited guest tries to sue, the suit will be dismissed. If he tries to crash the party and the homeowner calls the police for help in kicking out the intruder, the police won't force the homeowner to feed and entertain the uninvited guest.

    Now, if a court had to decide a repeater case, would they treat it like a private dinner party, or a public accomodation? I don't know, but it really seems a stretch to assume the public accomodation law would have to apply, even if we think it should. The courts will often interpret the law as the legislature wrote it, instead of how we think they should have written it.

    Anyway, while I'm not sure how they'd rule, I'm confident that it could be extremely expensive to take a case to court where the law is unclear. Most repeater clubs don't want to spend that kind of money, so my opinion is that they should stick to clearly stated, reasonable, nondiscriminatory policies based solely on behavior.
    KX4O likes this.
  8. K0RGR

    K0RGR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Those rules must have been put in place for some reason. My guess would be that the repeater system was abused at one time or another by the groups in question. There are certainly many church groups around who want to use ham radio when Armageddon arrives as part of their plan to survive. I've been contacted by more than one of them here in MN. There is no law against the church using the repeater for on-the-air meetings, but if that was not the intent of the repeater owner, and he doesn't agree with it, he is allowed to ban it. If we can't use it to plan how we will use it in an emergency, it is even more worthless for emergency use, so I don't think that interpretation even begins to fly.
    K7JEM and K0UO like this.
  9. AI3V

    AI3V Ham Member QRZ Page

    If you think about it from a radio point of view, tossing "preppers" off a repeater is actually doing them a favor!

    When the zombies re-animate, get all tangled up in the electric lines and wipe out the grid, all the repeaters are going to go off the air.

    Might as well practice communications without them. :rolleyes:

    AG6QR and K0UO like this.
  10. K0UO

    K0UO Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    If you're going to call a net, or do non-routine activities on a privately-owned repeater or even when it's owned by Club it needs to be cleared by the control operator.

    I have kicked people off of my repeater for using cross band radios, which lockd up system and attempting to call nets that were not authorized, and in the old days using the phone patch for business or calling people on the Auto patch with non appropriate conversations.

    If the repeater has been coordinated by a frequency coordination Council for that area, then they basically do own the frequency. It's the owners obligation to make sure it's run correctly per the FCC.
    That's also why you can't be running Simplex and jamming a repeater, that has been properly coordinated, the FCC will side with the coordinated repeater. And this has occurred numerous times over the last 40 years.

    The owner maintains and pays for the repeater which can be quite expensive now days.
    KX4O, N0TZU, KA0HCP and 1 other person like this.

Share This Page