RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > The RadioReference Tavern > News and Events

News and Events Mother gives birth to bigfoot-like child! Africa sinks! If it happens you'll read it here

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2012, 8:33 AM
K2 K2 is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: K2
Posts: 0
Default Law of the Land clarified

The only part of Article 6 left out was the provision on Treaties. Is Title 47 a Treaty between the government and ham operators?

All statutory laws enacted by Congress and signed by the President are not the Law of the Land. By example already mentioned, The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (GFSZA) which the Supreme Court overtunred by finding it had no relation to the Commerce Clause nor was GFSZA enacted "pursuant to" any other provision of the Constitution.

If Congress wants to "regulate" where no Constitutional authority exists, the only Lawful way to accomplish such regulation is to first ammend the Constitution with new authority to act.

Could it be that the only difference between CFSZA and Title 47 today is the lack of a proper challendge?

Further study for those so inclined from American Jurisprudence:
Unconstitutional Official Acts
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2012, 2:21 PM
kb2vxa's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Posts: 6,127
Default

Since when has Congress been lawful? Even Mark Twain called them the largest group of organized criminals in the country.
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2012, 3:02 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 4,567
Default

In the 78 years since the Communications Act of 1934, passed by Congress, that authorized the creation of the FCC, it's amazing that the army of lawyers practicing communications law haven't caught the constitutional violation that the FCC's existence is. That goes double for 78 years of Supreme Court activities. You'd think someone would have caught it, in all that time.

I'm sure glad we have the constitutional experts here in RadioReference to set the government straight.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2012, 5:04 PM
K2 K2 is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: K2
Posts: 0
Default Unconstitutional Law

An attorney with enough honor to step up and expose unconstitutional law and cost his profession millions in the process is a rare bird indeed, so rare in fact that it isn't surprising at all to see fewer than one in 78 years.

Supreme Court benches like all others are filled with attorneys so don’t expect any such moves from them either, even if where legal. It is illegal for a judge to practice law from the bench. When the Supreme Court overturned The Gun-Free School Zones Act in United States v. Lopez in 1995, it was the first time in 60 years the high court had overturned a law under the Commerce Clause. Just in this same time period since 1995, the FCC annual budget has doubled from 210 million to over 420 million and it is relatively small compared to other agencies.

The only way such laws are ever corrected is by the dedicated actions of a damaged citizen and once such a citizen hires an attorney we are right back to where we started in paragraph one above.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2012, 8:27 PM
kb2vxa's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Posts: 6,127
Default

"In the 78 years since the Communications Act of 1934, passed by Congress, that authorized the creation of the FCC..."

The Federal Radio Commission was established in 1927 which began regulation of wireless but expanded to cover other electronic means of communications so the Communications Act was drafted and the name changed. The "FCC" is older than you think.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
        
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 12:01 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 4,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K2 View Post
The only way such laws are ever corrected is by the dedicated actions of a damaged citizen and once such a citizen hires an attorney we are right back to where we started in paragraph one above.
I'm sure it never occurred to you that the laws could actually be constitutional, and your opinion is wrong. It just seems to me that if they were so blatantly wrong, someone other than an anonymous poster on a hobby oriented web site would have said something.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 12:02 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 4,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb2vxa View Post
The Federal Radio Commission was established in 1927 which began regulation of wireless but expanded to cover other electronic means of communications so the Communications Act was drafted and the name changed. The "FCC" is older than you think.
Yes, I am aware of that. In the context of a discussion of the constitutionality of the law that created the FCC, I chose to start the clock in 1934. It's not an arbitrary date.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 9:06 AM
K2 K2 is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: K2
Posts: 0
Default Constitutiional authority

Quote:
Originally Posted by zz0468 View Post
I'm sure it never occurred to you that the laws could actually be constitutional, and your opinion is wrong. It just seems to me that if they were so blatantly wrong, someone other than an anonymous poster on a hobby oriented web site would have said something.
I never said Title 47 was or was not Constitutional. I simply asked the question; where in the Constitution does the FCC derive its authority? It isn't that hard, either the FCC has Constitutional authority to exist or it doesn't. For those that believe the FCC is a Constructional Federal agency, simply post the section from The Law of the Land or one of the amendments thereto, that provides the "expressed powers" for the FCC existence. If you don't have a copy of the Constitution in your home (shame on you) you can easily find a searchable copy on line. You don't need an attorney to read for you as America is a nation of Laws not of men. I know you can all read or we would not be "communicating" and the Law of the Land is widely published and easy to read. You may start your search with say "communication" since that is the essence of what the FCC regulates.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 11:47 AM
kb2vxa's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Posts: 6,127
Default

Of course 1934 isn't an arbitrary date, it's a landmark date. Continuing in that vein, the Constitution having been drafted long before there was any sort of organized communication you will find nothing in that regard in it. A bit of common sense here please. The drafting of communications law and the formation of the FCC in its current form was an act of Congress which has power under the Constitution to enact laws. The Act is the power of law for that reason, drafted, amended, voted on and ratified like any other bill thus written into law.

"For those that believe the FCC is a Constructional Federal agency, simply post the section from The Law of the Land or one of the amendments thereto."

I believe that covers it.

Now I hope this clears up a common misunderstanding that raises its head all too often. The word unconstitutional is worn out through incessant over use and misuse to the point of ridiculousness. Another is "rights" coming from people who have no idea our ONLY rights are those in the amendments commonly known as The Bill Of Rights, everything else is a privilege, grant, license, but I digress.

I rest my case and the rest of the armchair lawyers should do the same. This arguing Constitutional Law could go on forever with nobody really knowing what they're talking about.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 1:31 PM
K2 K2 is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: K2
Posts: 0
Default Powers of Congress

Congress enacted Title 47 which formed the FCC so allow me to narrow down the Constitutional search for the “enumerated power” that makes the FCC “Lawful” or not. Found here are the enumerated powers granted to Congress under the Law of the Land:
Thirty Enumerated Powers – Tenth Amendment Center
Notice that “common sense” is not an enumerated power.

Although I have been unable to get such an admission from the FCC, given the time frame in which it was formed, most likely it was formed “pursuant” to clause 3 which is commonly referred to as the Commerce Clause, as is over 70% of Federal authority today. A study of Supreme Court case law since 1995 evidences that a Clause 3 agency claim of Lawfulness is much less likely to hold up under a proper challenge today than it has been for the past 85 years. For those choosing to learn just how much less likely, start your study here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 4:44 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Davenport,Fl.- home to me and the gators and the skeeters.
Posts: 625
Default In the 78 years or so,

why hasn't somebody, or law firm, brought about the legality of the FCC to the Supreme Court? We seem to have all these armchair law experts here, then why don't THEY challenge the FCC and be done with it? Instead of talking about it...
__________________
Freedom, a beautiful way of life. Roger
Old scanners like me:
Pro-107, Pro-44, Pro-94, Pro-2006, DX-440
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 5:28 PM
K2 K2 is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: K2
Posts: 0
Default Supreme Court rules

It doesn’t work that way. The Supreme Court has laid out 7 rules for getting cases heard on Constitutionality grounds. They are listed here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashwan...lley_Authority
(In light of this discussion, #6 may apply to licensed hams.)

Now readers may know how it can be that dozens of Federal “agencies” may by operating beyond all Constitutional “enumerated powers” and have gotten away with it for so long. If they can convince you to submit to a little “un-Lawful” benefit then you can’t win even if you complain. This national treasury draining scam may now be 10+ trillion worth a year and counting.
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 6:52 PM
elk2370bruce's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 1,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rafdav View Post
why hasn't somebody, or law firm, brought about the legality of the FCC to the Supreme Court? We seem to have all these armchair law experts here, then why don't THEY challenge the FCC and be done with it? Instead of talking about it...
Because there are much bigger issues to address. Besides, as stated, FCC Act of 1934 (as amended) does give the right to inspect any stations where violations exist. As I recall, there is even a question in the licensing pool that covers this as well as the privileges , not rights, associated with such lucensure. Besides, the Brazilian Boondoggle Boob was clearly in the wrong and got a reduced fine as a first offender. He made his decision to challenge and lost.
__________________
K C 2 P B J
Other useless license information.
List of my out-of-date radios.
Other data that nobody cares about.
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 7:12 PM
Fuzy_GSXR1000's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Belleville,New Jersey
Posts: 1,350
Default

Wow he holds or held a extra class amateur license and didn't know he was operating on a military authorized frequency? How much power does one require to talk to Brazil? Was his rig modified illegally? I have a few questions for my radio club when we resume after Christmas!!!
__________________
Michael KD2CUD
Kenwood TH-F6A
GRE PSR-800
Uniden 536HP
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2012, 7:28 PM
milf's Avatar
Careful, I CAN hear you!
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 7,856
Default

Challenging the "Constitiutional Right" of the FCC to exist, and to legally enforce the myriad laws regarding telecommunications is as pointless as also challenging the equally strange ways of the EPA, DoE, DoL, NEA, and countless other "Alphabet Soup" Federal Agencies, and para-agencies. The FCC remember not only enforces regulations regaurding comms, but also the very spectrums of the airwaves. Don't even get some of us started on the massive corruption involved with the selling of "Spectrum" blocks of frequencies. Lets just say the rabbit hole goes way way way back and so deep even God looks down and asks us humans, "Are you serious?" The bidness of dem der Feds is to appear to do no harm whilst hiding how much its about to really hurt you. Bidness has been just getting better and better over the last 20 years. Until "We the People" hold constitutionally approved "Continental Congress" and make people pay attention, changes ain't happening for the better. So lets stop argueing moot points in places that change nothing, get to our churches, town halls, markets, etc... And GET R DONE!
__________________
Admin & Mod for AR, LA, MS, and TN
Scanology, its the path to monitoring happiness!
Support your local Scanologists!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 12-18-2012, 1:20 AM
Spitfire8520's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 563
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzy_GSXR1000 View Post
How much power does one require to talk to Brazil? Was his rig modified illegally?
Only need enough power to hit the military satellite with the input frequency. Try looking up some SATCOM and MILSAT information, it's basically a repeater located in vacuum of space allowing for near global communications (and is specifically reserved for the military, the Brazilian love hijacking them though).

SATCOM - The RadioReference Wiki
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 12-18-2012, 2:54 AM
Spankymedic7's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 232
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by FFPM571 View Post
He let them in the house and gave them a tour and showed them the radio and antenna...How is that violating his rights...The guy is a moron and gets what he deserves...
Amen.
__________________
Cory-
Critical Care Paramedic
WI9EMS
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 12-18-2012, 9:47 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 8,515
Default

When I saw he was talking to Brazilians, my only question was:

Quote:
How many zeroes are in a Brazilian?
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Professional Scanner Developer
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 12-18-2012, 12:56 PM
kb2vxa's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Posts: 6,127
Default

Well Bruce, it looks like we're the only ones here who understand that when one applies for an FCC license he waives certain Constitutional rights and agrees to the provisions of the license.

"He made his decision to challenge and lost."
He lost his petition to dismiss because he didn't have the proverbial leg to stand on, his defense was utterly ridiculous. He did successfully win a reduction based on his ability to pay and the FCC took first time into consideration but ability is always primary.

"Only need enough power to hit the military satellite with the input frequency."
When I've spoken with Mir and the ISS I used only 5W FM into a ground plane with solid results. BTW I was among the very first with Mir and had the cosmonaut all to myself for the entire 10 minute pass.

"How many zeroes are in a Brazilian?"
If you're talking about pirates, every one of them is a zero. If you want to know how many zeroes in Brazil I suppose you'd have to count the antennas.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 03-17-2013, 9:05 AM
RRR RRR is offline
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kma371 View Post
its a privilege not a right to possess a license. if you don't want to be inspected don't get a license. OR better yet if you don't want to be inspected don't break the rules! pretty simple really.

A ham license, like a drivers license, is neither a right or priviledge. I am so sick of hearing folks falsely claim "driving is a privilege", etc. The opposite of "rights" are not "Privileges"

Look up the definition of "Privilege". You don't have to be a person of privileged status to be able to obtain a license, you only need to successfully complete the necessary testing to competancy and pay the subsequent fees as necessary. You have then earned and paid for the license, -that is not a "right" nor a "priviledge"


As far as "authority to inspect" that does not mean agents may forcibly enter your property against your will for that purpose. They must get a warrant signed by a judge to be able to legally do that. And remember, you must be breaking a criminal law to be arrested.

And by being granted such licenses, you do not necessaraly agree to waive your constitutional rights, as erroniously claimed above.

Of course, the guy voluntarily let them in, so it's a moot point in this case. And his cooperation was probably a factor as to why his fine was reduced somewhat.

Last edited by RRR; 03-17-2013 at 9:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions