W6WBJ Apparent Liability in the amount of $25,000

The problem is, what, exactly, is "obscene language"?

Without a clear legal definition, such a rule becomes unenforceable.

-----

I also wonder about this:

When someone starts going off the deep end - jamming, cussing, not ID'ing, etc. - what is it that makes them go bad?

I mean, do these folks start out behaving this way? Or do they get there gradually, over time?

And - have locals ever confronted the bad apple? Say, taken him/her aside at a hamfest and said "Look, friend, you've been acting like a real @$$hole on the air. We've heard it and we know it's you. What's the problem? Why are you doing what you're doing?"

Just wondering.

 

Pat... Did you really have to post the link?

When you do that, or when people highlight bad behavior on the air, in some perverse way, it only adds fuel to the fire.

These miscreants thrive on attention, and when we get on a website and pontificate about bad behavior on this frequency or that one it just feeds the flames and the jerks really like that.

Ham radio has always had this kind of stuff going on. Read QST for example, especially the early years, and you will find "letters to the editor" even back in the 1920's lamenting the bad antics of some fellow hams. There is not too much difference today, except that the miscreants get better publicity now.

Here on QRZ, I think that we get at least one of these type threads started almost every month... or at least it seems that way. Some righteous indignant ham, usually a newbie, will come here full of anger against "bad behavior" and demand that someone one better do something! Then, the crowd begins to chime in with their own angry story and before you know it, we have page after page of knee-jerk reactionaries giving the assembled crowd their own pet solution to the "problem".

Folks, if it was that easy to solve, it would have happened years ago, and airing our laundry in public... Is that really a good idea?

I am not saying we should ignore it, but if we did, I would suggest that the problem itself might be easier to solve.

FCC? We know how effective they are, and it's not their fault, really! Their organization is now ran by a bunch of lawyers who know nothing about the various services that they are supposed to be regulating. All these lawyers know is that the big money talks, and the rest of us are insignificant.

Past history bears this out. We have constantly lost spectrum to commercial interests. Any one here remember the 220 MHz and UPS fiasco?

There are many reason why we still have ready access to HF. Mostly because HF is a world wide shared allocation, not just something one country or another can readily appropriate for their own use. But VHF/ UHF is a good target. Does anyone here remember when a South American country decided to allocate the 440-450 MHz band to their local PD services? They did not know or care that the frequencies they were on just happened to be on Amateur radio satellite uplink frequencies.

Quite honestly, if they had picked frequencies just a bit off from the satellite band no one would have ever noticed... As it was, there was enough of a stink generated in the world to convince them to cease and desist, or at least pick different frequencies. Again, this was something noticed on a world-wide basis, not just locally.

OH, well... Many more instances abound where hams just can't seem to behave. Expecting a government agency to help is just a waste of time. If the government really got involved they would probably regulate us out of existence!

After all, a bureaucrat's best response to anything requiring work is a resounding no! Especially if saying yes might get him/her/ it in trouble!

 

THis has gone on for some time : http://www.eham.net/articles/18682

 

What about the ARRL also listing the Lids, those who are consistent violators according to the Official Observers? This would help legitimize the ARRL and the OOs in everyone's minds, in fact.

 

Let's cut to the chase...

Are you condoning the jamming of a net and the harassment of members of that net, including the transmission of music and of indecent language for the purpose of said harassment?

And/or

Are you saying that the FCC should not enforce the rules? That they have to build so air-tight a case that it takes years if not decades to gather what evidence you deem acceptable?

Or is Mr. DeBakey simply not free at the moment, and if so, did you try Mr. Barnard in Room 1A, just along the corridor?

 

Case Law means that a judge ruled and it set a precedence. Period. But, the law is still on the books. Therefore, regardless of "case law," if someone is charged with violating the law, it still has to go to the courts for a determination. IF the person has the Time and Money to fight the FCC in court, he may still get away with it but it will cost him.

Until the Law is changed, until those words are taken out, then it's still The Law. If someone has deep pockets and can fight the government's legal team, then maybe, just maybe he can still come out clean. Regardless, now everyone knows who and where he is and this is nice to know.

Foul, indecent, vulgar, sgummy and profane language is what it is. Any good dictionary defines it. If it offends anyone, then it should be undesirable language. Also, it adds nothing to the conversation/communication except to reveal the miserable soul of the person who resorts to using it.

Maybe the ARRL can issue a new certificate to them: The Indecent and Foul Language award.

There's still nothing wrong with a signal report and a few friendly words before signing off. This can be done without resorting to Basic Training vocabulary.

 

I tuned into this after seeing this link. This is absurd.

 

Apparently Crowell still is in the same hole and still digging. Read his comments on that page and you can see he thinks he's bigger than the FCC. And the FCC's complaints with him go back to the year 2000... 15+ years. Maybe putting a notation on his gravestone is their goal.

 

Where is this fcc site with the comments that you were mentioning?
Can you send or post a link to it. Chances are it his Jammers cohorts, the stranglings that support him.

Thanks, Tim/kk7ho

 

That is exactly right!

 

Great news! Now its time to eliminate the drunkard that shows up on 3.846 in the middle of the night. we all hope this one is next on their list. They (FCC) might be late but at least something is happening. WOW!

 

IMHO the FCC is after the big MONEY and Amateur Radio falls to the bottom of their list, very unfortunate for us hams who want to keep our hobby as professional as possible. As I watched what happened during the 1960s with Citizens Band, the FCC was known as a Paper Tiger ... More Growl than Bite and the commission had bona fide Field Engineers at that time not a bunch Liars / Lawyers running the show. We lost a very good guy when Riley Hollingsworth Retired and with the recent downsizing of the FCC Engineers and offices, this is another nail in the Enforcement Coffin. It seems to be if the Amateur Radio Operators do all of these things in the ham bands, it's okay by the FCC but if these individuals migrate into the Public Safety Bands or Commercial Satellite Uplink Bands, you'll see the FCC swing into action with the power of the U.S. Court System backing up every move they make, tracking down, confiscating equipment, arrest, jail time and some stiff fines. So I'm not holding my breathe whether this Advanced Class ham will ever have his license Revoked or Pay his Fine.

Dan
WA9WVX

 

The idea of merely "spinning the dial" is not Ham Radio. If this becomes the vogue, then the idea of ham radio being "self-policing" needs to be stricken from the concept.

The idea of being self-policing was brought into the art originally, I believe, to help make sure we did not have some outside entity come into the hobby and give us a set of rules/regulations/guidelines. It was then an internal concept designed to keep our problems inside the art. In overview, however, what ails us may be corrected by suggestion and a goal system of being the professional actors we all should want to be but where this fails, where it is yet a big problem, then our recourse is to report it to the FCC, assuming the FCC is not aware of it, and allowing that path to take effect.

Merely saying "spin the dial" is ignoring the problem. Ignoring it only encourages it to grow and become more widespread, as we have seen. But like with children, unless you mark a limit or, in this case, place a line in the ether, it will continue to grow and have supporters of foul and indecent language. Saying it has always been this way is like saying that drivers have always been driving drunk so we just need to take another road and not try to get the drunks off the road.

I suspect that the ones who vehemently preach that everyone just "spin the dial" may have well done their share of interfering and making catcalls in the past and they, too, hope and expect to get away with it. They are the ones who seem to want most to support jammers. We the People of Ham Radio can do better.

 

The only problem is that there are others intentionally causing interference on the OMISS.net frequencies of 7.185, 14.290 and 3.830!
They show up at Net Time, and you can count of them being there at what ever frequencis we use! Will be glad when the FCC nail them!