"Emergency Radio" False and Fictitious Statements

Status
Not open for further replies.

alcahuete

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
2,513
Location
Antelope Acres, California
Just as an FYI, I have sent an eMail to the ARRL requesting a comment on this thread. They will probably reply to my eMail rather than posting here. I'll keep everyone advised on what they have to say. 73, Dave K4EET
Complete waste of time. They're the biggest offenders of promoting whackerism.
 

K4EET

Chaplain
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
2,215
Location
Severn, Maryland, USA
Complete waste of time. They're the biggest offenders of promoting whackerism.
Not sure why you feel that way about the ARRL. But please don’t derail this thread to a new theme discussing the ARRL. The OP is trying to determine if the FCC is looking at the many misguided claims that can lead to further enforcement actions.

The new Volunteer Monitor Program (VMP) as seen here on the ARRL website is running quite well and is structured better than the old Official Observer Program (OOP) that I was part of. Even under the OOP, we saw FCC enforcement actions as a result of our efforts. Under the VMP, as cited on the ARRL’s VMP webpage, “Under this program, the FCC gives enforcement priority to cases developed by the Volunteer Monitor program, without the delay of ARRL having to refer cases through the FCC online complaint process.” That is a giant leap forward from the old procedure. Please give the ARRL’s VMP the benefit of the doubt. Their work is summarized on the webpage that I cited. At least this information is now being fast-tracked to the FCC.

73, Dave K4EET
 

K4EET

Chaplain
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
2,215
Location
Severn, Maryland, USA
Yeah, I really, really, really hope the ARRL doesn't start participating in this page. The last thing we need….
I suspect that the ARRL already monitors the Amateur Radio forum. I also doubt if they would actually post here since, as far as I know, they have never posted on Radio Reference as an organization. Sleep well tonight my friend knowing that. 😃

73, Dave K4EET
 

alcahuete

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
2,513
Location
Antelope Acres, California
Not sure why you feel that way about the ARRL. But please don’t derail this thread to a new theme discussing the ARRL. The OP is trying to determine if the FCC is looking at the many misguided claims that can lead to further enforcement actions.
You derailed the thread talking about the ARRL, not me.

To get you back on topic, no, the FCC is absolutely not looking at the misguided claims. If it doesn't deal with selling more bandwidth to the cell phone companies, they don't care. And TBH, why would the FCC care? If I make a post here saying that you can transmit on any frequency you want using your shiny new 'feng, that's not against the law. That's called the 1st Amendment. If you use your 'feng to actually do it, then you're breaking the law. The FCC still won't care, but you're breaking the law.

So a campaign to get the FCC to curtail the 1st Amendment? No.
 

GlobalNorth

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
2,120
Location
Fort Misery
Certain scenarios effectively forbid HF/VHF/UHF use during the incident. Other scenarios will allow short term use, but as time wore on, the power demands would deplete the radios.

Lots of people believe gear will always save them, when education and or training would be be more advantageous.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
24,101
Location
I am a lineman for the county.
I've been getting a lot of Facebook ads touting "Emergency Radios" where the vendors are basically trying to tell the general public that, in an emergency, they can legally transmit on the ham bands to get assistance.

Since ARRL is being discussed,
Let us all keep in mind that the ARRL used this same approach with their idiotic "When All Else Fails" marketing push. They encouraged the idea that the fate of humanity was balanced on ham radio operators saving the day with their radios.
They helped create this monster. Seems like maybe some of those chickens have come home to roost.
 

k6cpo

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
1,300
Location
San Diego, CA
I really wish the FCC would issue a clarification of 97.403 and 97.405 so amateurs and the radio community in general had a better idea of their intentions with these two sections. Way too many people take this as permission to transmit where ever they want during an emergency, including on first responder frequencies. I don't believe this is what was intended when the rules were enacted.
 

N4DES

Retired 0598 Czar ÆS Ø
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,396
Location
South FL
I really wish the FCC would issue a clarification of 97.403 and 97.405 so amateurs and the radio community in general had a better idea of their intentions with these two sections. Way too many people take this as permission to transmit where ever they want during an emergency, including on first responder frequencies. I don't believe this is what was intended when the rules were enacted.
They do, these rule parts trump Part 97...

§ 1.902 Scope.​

In case of any conflict between the rules set forth in this subpart and the rules set forth in parts 13, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, 74, 80, 87, 90, 95, 96, 97, and 101 of title 47, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations, the rules in this part shall govern.

§ 1.903 Authorization required.​


(a) General rule. Stations in the Wireless Radio Services must be used and operated only in accordance with the rules applicable to their particular service as set forth in this title and with a valid authorization granted by the Commission under the provisions of this part, except as specified in paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) Restrictions. The holding of an authorization does not create any rights beyond the terms, conditions and period specified in the authorization. Authorizations may be granted upon proper application, provided that the Commission finds that the applicant is qualified in regard to citizenship, character, financial, technical and other criteria, and that the public interest, convenience and necessity will be served. See §§ 301, 308, and 309, 310 of this chapter.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
24,101
Location
I am a lineman for the county.
I really wish the FCC would issue a clarification of 97.403 and 97.405 so amateurs and the radio community in general had a better idea of their intentions with these two sections. Way too many people take this as permission to transmit where ever they want during an emergency, including on first responder frequencies. I don't believe this is what was intended when the rules were enacted.

#1. I don't think most hams have read the rules. They prefer to let some stranger on the internet "interpret" the rules for them.
#2. I don't think most hams would comprehend the idea that Part 97 rules ONLY apply to Part 97 frequencies.
#3. Whackerism runs rampant and unchecked. It wouldn't matter what the FCC said, there are those that would do it anyway.
-
#1456. In a true life or death situation, I'd probably use whatever I had to get help. But I'm usually/sometimes smart enough to not put myself in a situation where I'd only have a modified ham radio (or worse, a CCR) as my only means of getting help.

ARRL could really help with this. But I think some of their target audience is those with an acute case of whackeritis.

They do, these rule parts trump Part 97...

I agree. But if you cannot get hams to read Part 97, there's no way they are going to read Part 1.

Whackers gotta Whack.
 

KF5LJW

Member
Joined
May 15, 2021
Messages
33
Rules and Policies are for fools and merely suggestions for the wise. If you see a police officer shot in need of help. Do you pick up his radio and ask for help, or dance while he bleeds to death?
 

paulears

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
802
Location
Lowestoft - UK
I have picked up a police radio, dropped by an officer who drove off in a hurry. I told the control room I had it, how, and said I'd wait till somebody either picked it up or he came back. They thanked me, and it cost me 30 minutes of my time. The car arrived back, I waved at him and held up the radio. I told him I'd picked it up and let the control room know - and he said he knew a colleague had teased him about it. Still see him and he always waves! Nobody even mentioned law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top