Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why do CB'ers hate ham operators so much?  (Read 17830 times)
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #45 on: September 04, 2009, 09:43:16 AM »

RE PTZ...

re "You can't change the world."

One person cannot change the entire world, perhaps....

BUT you can get a little "Satisfaction" sometimes. Wink
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3875




Ignore
« Reply #46 on: September 04, 2009, 10:37:25 AM »

WA4PTZ writes: "There are
bad apples in every barrel, even in Amateur Radio."

That's true. But some barrels have fewer bad apples than others.

WA4PTZ: "Why? We will never know, but often it has to do with envy or low self-esteem."

Depends on the situation. In any event, it is often possible to reduce the bad-apple-percentage by doing certain things, and to increase it by doing other things.

I prefer actions that reduce the bad-apple percentage.

WA4PTZ: "I personally wouldn't get my
panties in a wad over it. You can't change the world."

Actually, people change the world every day. A little here and a little there.

One of the things that has kept Amateur Radio alive and thriving for almost 100 years is the fact that there were and are hams who DID get their panties in a wad, and did things that made a difference.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #47 on: September 04, 2009, 11:22:24 AM »

Re PTZ...

re ...

"One of the things that has kept Amateur Radio alive and thriving for almost 100 years is the fact that there were and are hams who DID get their panties in a wad, and did things that made a difference."


Could you briefly site some examples ?
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3875




Ignore
« Reply #48 on: September 04, 2009, 12:21:15 PM »

Let's see...

There were the early hams (pre-WW1) such as Maxim, Tuska, Stewart, and others who went to Congress on their on dime and stood up for the experimenter/amateur at a time when the Navy and commercial interests wanted to control all of radio.

There were those who formed the ARRL back then, and then revived it after WW1 to get hams back on the air.

There were those who went to the international radio conventions in the 1920s to secure the existence of amateur radio in a world where many governments didn't want private citizens to have radio at all. Maxim, Mrs. Maxim, Warner and others went, supported by many hams back home.

When the "1929" regulations were announced, there were those who not only pushed amateurs to comply, but developed the means and showed how to do it. Folks like Grammer, Hull, Lamb, and more.

When WW2 shut down amateur radio a second time in 25 years, there were hams who went to war and used their skills and knowledge for victory.

Then there are all the hams who pushed for SSB when the bands got crowded. Hams who did public-service communications, hams who did pioneering things like satellites, EME, meteor scatter, etc. Hams who fought TVI and the high cost of equipment. Hams who formed the backbone of WERS, MARS, RACES and other organizations. And much more.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
NR5P
Member

Posts: 131




Ignore
« Reply #49 on: September 05, 2009, 01:06:17 PM »

I have never seen a problem with "cbers" disliking ham operators.  All the cbers I've talked to either didn't know what ham radio was or did know and wanted to find out more.  Ofcourse some people talk on c.b. like truckdrivers who are not necessarily radio enthusiasts.  Some people in every part of society are bad seeds and say things they shouldn't on the radio.  

Unfortunately I see the opposite, I see more hams hating people that talk on c.b.  Not all c.b.ers are bad.  For a lot of hams it is a stepping stone.  I think it is very childish either way we are all radio enthusiasts!  People argue about this like a bunch of 10 year olds would argue about who is it in a tag game.  It's just another rf band, a band that you don't need to be licensed for
Logged
KD5FKF
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: September 05, 2009, 06:53:29 PM »

Ed Zachary!

Been a CBer and am a ham.  Good and bad in both.  Get used to it!  No whiners!!!
Logged
KD5FKF
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #51 on: September 05, 2009, 07:02:07 PM »

Also would like to know why the gubmint decided it owns the airways and makes all the rules instead of the private sector.  But I suppose this has been an ongoing argument since time began . . .
Logged
N3OX
Member

Posts: 8854


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #52 on: September 05, 2009, 07:11:47 PM »

"Also would like to know why the gubmint decided it owns the airways and makes all the rules instead of the private sector"

Are you serious?

If the government hadn't taken control of the airwaves, you'd be paying a subscription to RCA to use any radio frequencies ;-)

Ham radio wouldn't exist without government intervention.  Neither would CB.  Broadcast was chaos prior to government intervention.

Without government intervention, if cell phones had even been developed, Verizon Wireless could go ahead and jam Sprint to put them out of business...

Radio ABSOLUTELY requires a (hopefully relatively impartial) third party to make the basic rules.  Of course, lobbying is strong.

But the basic issue is that the private sector proved very quickly in the early days of radio that they could not appropriately manage the airwaves themselves in a responsible manner... which, of course, is the case, because managing the airwaves in a responsible manner and making a profit off of the use of the airwaves are completely mutually incompatible.

73
Dan
Logged

73,
Dan
http://www.n3ox.net

Monkey/silicon cyborg, beeping at rocks since 1995.
KD5FKF
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #53 on: September 05, 2009, 07:27:48 PM »

Of course, I'm serious.  You do bring up some valid points but I've rarely seen the government control a portion of the private sector without complicating things.  I suppose you've noticed the loss of frequency over the years.  Not a lot, but nonetheless a loss.  They are moving into more and more of the private sector and I'm one of those who believe the smaller the gov. the better.  Outside of the defense of our country . . . oh, never mind.
Logged
N3OX
Member

Posts: 8854


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #54 on: September 05, 2009, 08:24:54 PM »

"Outside of the defense of our country . . . "

Don't forget roads.  I usually find that the "extremely small government" folks and I can usually agree on roads.

In my opinion, a certain amount of government intervention makes for a freer market.  What I suspect would have happened without the establishment of radio law in this country is that the loudest broadcaster would broadcasted loudest on every frequency until they drove all the competition out of business... and then they would have done whatever they wanted with all that spectrum space.

Monopolies make maximum profit and easily stamp out new competition.  That's why we need some sort of third party beholden to the people to keep monopolies in check.  

Do I think our government does the absolute best possible job allocating the airwaves of any way that could be?  No, I don't think that.  There's a lot of corruption and profit-seeking within our government agencies.  

But do I think they must necessarily do a *better job overall*, in terms of increasing the amount of innovation and consumer choice in wireless services, than would Time Warner, or Comcast, or Verizon once they took over entirely?

Hell yes.

Telecommunications companies make *absolute maximum profit* when they have zero competition because people need telecommunications even if they don't have a choice in who they get it from.  That makes it a virtual certainty that the end result of unregulated telecommunications will be a monopoly, who will then charge as much for access to those telecommunications as the public would bear without outright revolt.  That is not a free market.  That's a non-market wringing money from people and businesses who can't live without an essential service.  

We've been over that time and time again in this country and it's why we have government telecommunications regulations.  You can't trust companies to play fair and offer competitive access to telecommunications, because they have to work a lot less hard and they will make a LOT more money if they are the only pipe available...

73
Dan
Logged

73,
Dan
http://www.n3ox.net

Monkey/silicon cyborg, beeping at rocks since 1995.
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3875




Ignore
« Reply #55 on: September 05, 2009, 08:49:31 PM »

KD5FKF: "Of course, I'm serious."

How would "the private sector" control the radio spectrum better than the FCC does?

KD5FKF: "You do bring up some valid points but I've rarely seen the government control a portion of the private sector without complicating things."

Yet without adequate regulation, the private sector has made some really awful messes. The history of radio before FCC is a prime example.

KD5FKF: "I suppose you've noticed the loss of frequency over the years. Not a lot, but nonetheless a loss."

You mean the ham bands? What have we lost?

I've been a ham 42 years, and back when I started we had no 30, 17 or 12 meter band, no access to 902 MHz, and 160 was full of LORAN noises and power/access limitations. The frequencies we've lost in the recent past were all lost for the same reason: we hams didn't use them enough!

If the private sector had its way, amateur radio would have never existed past about 1912.

KD5FKF: "They are moving into more and more of the private sector and I'm one of those who believe the smaller the gov. the better."

Everybody believes that - until their particular part of the govt. is eliminated.

Would you eliminate Medicare and have everyone over the age of 65 or so buy their own health insurance?

Would you privatize the highways? air traffic control? NASA? National and state parks and wilderness areas?

How about education? Maybe we should simply close all the public schools, state universities, community colleges and the like, and just let the parents pay for education out of their own pockets.



73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3875




Ignore
« Reply #56 on: September 06, 2009, 05:51:50 AM »

N3OX:

Dan, you make a very strong case! I'll add a few points.

I'd say the market needs *some* government regulation, more than intervention. Sensible regulation makes the market more free and avoids uncontrolled monopolies.

For example, it's government regulation that insures the correctness of scales, meters and pumps in the marketplace. Imagine a world where you had to trust the gas stations, grocery stores, etc. to sell you a pound or a gallon!

And in some cases monopolies can be a good thing - if they are properly regulated! Imagine multiple competing electric companies, water companies, etc., in the same area. There'd be wires and pipes all over the place, and higher costs because of lower customer density.

Properly done, government regulation can also spur innovation. If new technology that needs RF spectrum had to buy it from the big boys, it would never see the light of day if the big boys didn't like it.

Your example of roads is a good one. If roads were only built by the private sector, much of the country wouldn;t have any because the initial ROI would be too low. The same is true for utilities, schools, and many other improvements.

Of course government sometimes makes mistakes. CB on 27 MHz was a whopper! But so does the private sector; ask anyone who bought a new technology only to see it go bust in a few years.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
KD5FKF
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #57 on: September 06, 2009, 08:37:20 AM »

I stand corrected about the loss of bands.  But my point is the gov't assuming control over things that, in my OPINION, they have no authority to do so.  Although the private sector isn't perfect, it usually works itself out because the consumer is the ultimate voice of authority.  If it doesn't work, the consumer will go elsewhere.  If the gov't takes control of something they aren't accountable to anyone.  I know, they are suppose to answer to "We the people" but in reality . . . "it ain't gonna happen."
You see the gov't now taking over the auto industry, going after the best health care system in the world, setting its sights on the broadcast media and many other areas and you wonder where will it stop?  Some of the areas you mention are valid but gov't hasn't done a very good job with any of them.  Roads?  Who do you think builds the roads?  Private contractors build them under gov't regulations.  Medicare?  Private hospitals and doctors under gov't regs.  Education?  Have you checked out what our children are being taught in public schools?  Some of 'em can't even read their diplomas.  But they can put a condom on a banana.  They know everything about Marilyn Manson but can't tell you anything about George Washington or Thomas Jefferson.  They read "Heather has two mommies" but have never heard of the constitution.
In most every area where the private sector performs, they do it better and at less cost.
Oh, well.  My apologies for starting a much too political thread on a good website for a bunch of great hams.  I'm going back to my antenna question . . .
Logged
KI4SDY
Member

Posts: 1452




Ignore
« Reply #58 on: September 06, 2009, 10:40:49 AM »

Why can't we just love one another, in a spiritual sort of way? These two radio services can compliment each other, if you have operators with open minds who's goals are enjoyment of the radio hobby and public service.

Keep in mind that their are more CB radios is use than any other type of two way radio (not counting cell phones) and that the trucking community is constantly "patrolling" or nation's highways with this equipment. A very valuable resource in traffic accidents, emergencies and disasters. If you have 10 meters in your vehicle all you need is a switch box and a inexpensive CB radio to expand your mobile radio horizons or vice versa. Further, if you monitor the CB bands, it will let you know when their are "band openings" on 10 meters and the other HF bands.

I have not experienced a CBer hating ham radio operators. Usually they aspire to ham radio and that is where we currently draw the most new hams from. There are hams that constantly bad mouth CBers, but if that target was removed they would be bad mouthing someone else. I guess they need to take a good long look in the mirror, if they can stand it.
Logged
K2NRC
Member

Posts: 19




Ignore
« Reply #59 on: September 06, 2009, 10:52:37 AM »

'Why do CB'ers hate ham operators so much?'-

why does anybody care?  why do hams hate cbers?-again, why does anybody care?  why would anybody watch the video?  i don't care.  i do find a gentleman who calls himself 40mobile & posts on youtube cb stuff from certain 'famous' cbers 'amusing' and in some cases interesting.  some just make noise, others speak about the equipment they are using.  some i think would make FINE hams, some probably already are, many have a hard time speaking english and probably aren't smart enough to memorize the test so.....why don't YOU help out/elmer those cbers who wish to get into something else, OR yourself purchase a cb radio & try to make things better THERE.  i have a cb alongside my 706 in my truck.  sometimes i find i need to shut them BOTH off & turn on the stereo.  there is knob labeled 'OFF' on ALL of them.  i ignore who i need to ignore & don't worry much about who hates who.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!