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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ARRL renewal..........ineffectual?  (Read 29434 times)
KD7KCP
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« on: April 23, 2014, 05:19:36 PM »

ARRL renewal,
I believe I’ve been an arrl member for over a decade. I look forward to QST magazine every month. One of my favorite parts of your web site is the old magazine archive I just love looking at all that stuff.
I have read arrl material that says when it comes to informing the FCC about malicious operators, the FCC is to be contacted through the arrl. I have dutifully done so. I was informed that the reality is this; the arrl is ineffectual in putting a stop to this problem. It was also pointed out that the the fcc is derelict in its duties. Talk about pointing to the obvious. Any one that monitors just some of the bands will see the obvious, communications, sometimes lifesaving radio communications are completely rendered useless by malicious operators constantly and get this for years! Boys the proof is in the pudding. Over a year ago I asked the arrl to do something about this problem, both the malicious and the derelict. And what have I gotten. The obvious, malicious operators continue to operate with impunity mostly the same ones for years. Oh I read somewhere that the arrr wants to help the fcc look better when it makes a tinny once a quarter bust. You know promoting perceived performance.  Just take a look at this last qst it trumpets a pathetic effort by the fcc as if it were some great accomplishment.  An exception is a weak argument and is one the arrl puts forth.  The arrl is all hat and no cattle and the fcc is derelict in it duties. This combination has produced a gigantic fecal matter sandwich that all civil fcc licensed operators have to take a bite out of.
Thanks arrl way to go! 
I’m having problems trying to rectify the oblivious with paying for a renewal.
73s
KD7KCP current arrl member.   

     

Logged
KS2G
Member

Posts: 731




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2014, 05:54:14 PM »

I have read arrl material that says when it comes to informing the FCC about malicious operators, the FCC is to be contacted through the arrl. 

Can you cite the specific source for this?

To the best of my knowledge, there's nothing to prevent individuals from lodging complaints with the FCC directly.

With regard to the rest of your rant:

ARRL Calls for Timely, Visible FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement (posted 4/1/14)
http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-calls-for-timely-visible-fcc-amateur-radio-enforcement

The League has no enforcement powers.
Those reside with the FCC.

If you're unhappy with the performance of the FCC --or any other federal agency-- the places to send your tirade are the offices of your Congressman and U.S. Senators.

Better yet, contact them to urge them to support the ARRL's comments on GN Docket 14-25.



Logged
KG6AF
Member

Posts: 473




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2014, 06:07:27 PM »

With regard to the rest of your rant:

ARRL Calls for Timely, Visible FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement (posted 4/1/14)
http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-calls-for-timely-visible-fcc-amateur-radio-enforcement

Yes!  Every radio amateur concerned about enforcement should read the comments the ARRL filed with the FCC:

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521096114

I have had my differences with the ARRL from time to time, but I can't see how anyone can blame them for the FCC's lack of enforcement.  The comments they've filed are by themselves worth the price of next year's dues.
Logged
KD7KCP
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2014, 06:44:04 PM »

Wow I feel so much better now that the arrl sent a letter to bearcats. Like that’s going to make a difference.
An important part of that letter is about increasing the visibility of the very rare enforcement event.
Take that with the fact that there are many well-known “jammers” that operate with impunity and have for several years.  All I have seen for over a decade is no enforcement. Not some enforcement that just wasn’t reported but no enforcement at all period.
The only exception to this is when the arrl gives us a small story about a bust. But the bust never involves the notorious jammers. It’s usually some fool that messes with a bureaucratic entity like law enforcement.
Also it was in some arrl information about how to deal with this problem. The idea that I go through them and not go directly to the fcc. The arrl in there information indicated that the fcc liked it that way.
I got that from the arrl. I did not make that up.
Logged
KG6AF
Member

Posts: 473




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2014, 07:08:48 PM »

Wow I feel so much better now that the arrl sent a letter to bearcats. Like that’s going to make a difference.

In your opinion, what should the ARRL do?

Quote
Also it was in some arrl information about how to deal with this problem. The idea that I go through them and not go directly to the fcc. The arrl in there information indicated that the fcc liked it that way.  I got that from the arrl. I did not make that up.

Can you post a copy of, or a link to, what the ARRL said?
Logged
AF5CC
Member

Posts: 214




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2014, 07:20:46 PM »

Any one that monitors just some of the bands will see the obvious, communications, sometimes lifesaving radio communications are completely rendered useless by malicious operators constantly and get this for years!

Can you cite any specific examples when lifesaving communications were prevented by malicious operators?  I have never read about any cases like this.

John AF5CC
Logged
KD7KCP
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: April 23, 2014, 09:35:11 PM »


In your opinion, what should the ARRL do?

What I expect is the ARRL to hold the FCCs feet to the fire. It is reasonable to expect the arrl to figure it out, it’s not like they aren’t flush with smart guys. Part of their renewal pitch is that there are effective avocets for its members. On this problem I see lip service from them, not anything effective.  Look at their  “comments of the arrl”  project (letter) they summited to the fcc. In this letter they call for a more effective way of having a flattering story for the fcc, upon the rare enforcement action. This is one of the main points of this litter. The arrl is advocating a better perception rather than actual performance.   That will not solve the problem.   I am not going to call out the people or their position at the arrl. Everyone I talked to at the arrl up and down the line was already aware of this problem and all its specifics long before I talked to them.  They indicated (all of them) that they were working with the fcc. Now I talked to the arrl (who for a long time have been aware and working with the fcc) over a year ago and not one thing has happened. How long ago did the arrl start working with the fcc on this problem? Years before I bore my treasures of enlightenment upon them obviously.
So what do I expect the arrl to do?
After years upon years of working with fcc on this problem. I expect them to produce reasonable results.
 
Logged
KD7KCP
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: April 23, 2014, 09:48:05 PM »

Any one that monitors just some of the bands will see the obvious, communications, sometimes lifesaving radio communications are completely rendered useless by malicious operators constantly and get this for years!

Can you cite any specific examples when lifesaving communications were prevented by malicious operators?  I have never read about any cases like this.

John AF5CC
You can’t be serious my man. Here on planet earth the ham community promotes the fact, yes I said fact, that armature radio operators do save lives.
Can you cite any specific examples when lifesaving communications were never prevented by malicious operators?  I have you read about any cases like this?     
Logged
KI6LZ
Member

Posts: 739




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2014, 10:08:58 PM »

? Prove that it didn't happen?  Fuzzy logic here we go.
Logged
KS2G
Member

Posts: 731




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2014, 04:52:02 AM »

What I expect is the ARRL to hold the FCCs feet to the fire.... I expect them to produce reasonable results.

Easy to say, but exactly HOW should/can the ARRL "hold the FCC's feet to the fire"?

Just WHAT are you expecting the ARRL to do?

If you were the ARRL, what would YOU do that they're not doing?

And what's your definition of "reasonable results"?
Logged
N8YX
Member

Posts: 966




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2014, 06:11:06 AM »

To the OP:

As was asked on the other site on which you posted this missive, please provide us (the users) with a few details regarding the violations which you feel aren't being aren't being addressed.

Dates. Frequencies. Callsigns of those involved, if known. Nature and duration of the violation. Existence of corroborating evidence (recordings, etc.).
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 14328




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2014, 06:17:14 AM »

It sounds like y'all don't know that the ARRL is in charge of the FCC. Anything that the FCC does or does not do is a direct result of the ARRL.  Grin
Logged

Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA
W1JKA
Member

Posts: 2086




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2014, 07:36:19 AM »

Re: KD7KCP

Why all the ruckus between the ARRL and the FCC? Just give the Frequency Cops more power, there's no shortage of them and they are always available. Renew your ARRL membership, their glossy high end Ham radio gear catalogue called QST is worth the subscription cost alone.
Logged
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 6306




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2014, 08:38:13 AM »

KCP:  You've been a member for about 10 years?  I've been a member for over 45 years.

Quote
One of my favorite parts of your web site is the old magazine archive I just love looking at all that stuff.

These old archives you love looking at...... I read.  May I make a suggestion.  Start looking at the parts of  the old QSTs that shows what the League has done down through the years.

I would also like to suggest you have no clue as to what an organization can and cannot do.  As for the FCC..... as with any government entity, they pretty much do what they want.  All the ARRL can do is ask, suggest and petition.  That's it! 

Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 14328




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2014, 09:04:15 AM »

I expect that the FCC's budget for amateur radio enforcement is pretty small. The amount of money needed to track these guys down and do a proper investigation to gather evidence that will hold up in court is not small. The result is that amateur radio enforcement gets a pretty low priority.

Now if you could get Congress to authorize a fee of say $10 to $20 per year for each amateur license AND require the FCC to use that money for amateur radio enforcement you might see some progress. Better yet, tell the FCC that they get to keep any fines that they collect - bet that would get some enforcement action.


Logged

Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 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!