eHam

eHam Forums => Antenna Restrictions => Topic started by: WB2KSP on October 16, 2017, 04:09:28 AM



Title: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 16, 2017, 04:09:28 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: AC2RY on October 16, 2017, 06:27:35 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I wounder who will have to pay when baseball will make a ding on that car parked along the street.

But generally many HOA rules are written to replace common sense: I do not think anyone will object if there are Porsche or Corvette parked on the driveway in the neighborhood, but not so if it is a rusted clunker. Due to "political correctness" rules cannot say "do not leave your rusted piece of junk" on the street, and instead prohibit ANY car outside of garage. Many "no antenna" rules were written when you needed 10 feet dish to receive satellite TV stream.

Unfortunately due to legal system around HOA it is very hard to rewrite any once set rules, even if they do not make sense anymore. But this is all other topic.



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 16, 2017, 07:13:49 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I wounder who will have to pay when baseball will make a ding on that car parked along the street.

But generally many HOA rules are written to replace common sense: I do not think anyone will object if there are Porsche or Corvette parked on the driveway in the neighborhood, but not so if it is a rusted clunker. Due to "political correctness" rules cannot say "do not leave your rusted piece of junk" on the street, and instead prohibit ANY car outside of garage. Many "no antenna" rules were written when you needed 10 feet dish to receive satellite TV stream.

Unfortunately due to legal system around HOA it is very hard to rewrite any once set rules, even if they do not make sense anymore. But this is all other topic.



So I wonder what would happen if the FCC overruled a CC&R's ability to disallow ham radio antennas. Would the HOA's then be able to allow a neighborhood homeowner to erect an outside antenna? If that is the case perhaps the answer would be to have the federal government overrule CC&R's and leave the rest to the individual.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KG4RUL on October 16, 2017, 09:14:43 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I wounder who will have to pay when baseball will make a ding on that car parked along the street.

But generally many HOA rules are written to replace common sense: I do not think anyone will object if there are Porsche or Corvette parked on the driveway in the neighborhood, but not so if it is a rusted clunker. Due to "political correctness" rules cannot say "do not leave your rusted piece of junk" on the street, and instead prohibit ANY car outside of garage. Many "no antenna" rules were written when you needed 10 feet dish to receive satellite TV stream.

Unfortunately due to legal system around HOA it is very hard to rewrite any once set rules, even if they do not make sense anymore. But this is all other topic.



So I wonder what would happen if the FCC overruled a CC&R's ability to disallow ham radio antennas. Would the HOA's then be able to allow a neighborhood homeowner to erect an outside antenna? If that is the case perhaps the answer would be to have the federal government overrule CC&R's and leave the rest to the individual.


   
S. 1534 Amateur Radio Parity Act


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 16, 2017, 09:38:31 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I wounder who will have to pay when baseball will make a ding on that car parked along the street.

But generally many HOA rules are written to replace common sense: I do not think anyone will object if there are Porsche or Corvette parked on the driveway in the neighborhood, but not so if it is a rusted clunker. Due to "political correctness" rules cannot say "do not leave your rusted piece of junk" on the street, and instead prohibit ANY car outside of garage. Many "no antenna" rules were written when you needed 10 feet dish to receive satellite TV stream.

Unfortunately due to legal system around HOA it is very hard to rewrite any once set rules, even if they do not make sense anymore. But this is all other topic.



So I wonder what would happen if the FCC overruled a CC&R's ability to disallow ham radio antennas. Would the HOA's then be able to allow a neighborhood homeowner to erect an outside antenna? If that is the case perhaps the answer would be to have the federal government overrule CC&R's and leave the rest to the individual.


   
S. 1534 Amateur Radio Parity Act


I agree but the parity act goes further in that it instructs HOA's on antenna issues. If the HOA didn't have a covenant to follow (and covenants are public not private laws) then negotiations could take place. As of today because of the CC&R's negotiations are not allowed so that means the ARRL should go after the covenants first which would give these HOA's and their potential purchasers room to negotiate. Hope I'm explaining myself clearly. Theoretically what this would mean is that the CAI would not be involved with negotiations on this law. The revision would just make it illegal to disallow amateur radio by any group because the operation of Amateur radio is under the jurisdiction of the FCC not private home associations. If after the law is changed and all HOA's still mantaned the anti antenna rule that could be considered be a form of collusion.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KC4ZGP on October 16, 2017, 12:43:55 PM
The HOA is proof the socialist, communist, Marxist, liberal, Leninist and 'they' have crept into every facet of our lives.

Regulate cradle to grave. The masses are easiest to control when we're voiceless, classless, thoughtless, mindless
and Godless.

Your children are damned.

Kraus


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KN6SD on October 16, 2017, 04:16:38 PM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

What country is this???

 :D


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N9AOP on October 17, 2017, 11:27:29 AM
Oh yes, I remember the mid 50's.  Almost every home was getting some kind of tower or pole to put up that TV antenna.  And as long as the car ran, you could park a beater or a caddy out front.
Art


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N3QE on October 17, 2017, 07:20:27 PM
(http://irarc.ham-radio-op.net/SchlitzHam.jpg)


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: ND6M on October 18, 2017, 07:03:02 AM
... the parity act goes further in that it instructs HOA's on antenna issues. If the HOA didn't have a covenant to follow (and covenants are public not private laws) then...

That's quite frankly, just plain legal gobbledygook.

By LEGAL definition "private" law can not apply to HOA's. ;)





Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 18, 2017, 07:41:24 AM
... the parity act goes further in that it instructs HOA's on antenna issues. If the HOA didn't have a covenant to follow (and covenants are public not private laws) then...

That's quite frankly, just plain legal gobbledygook.

By LEGAL definition "private" law can not apply to HOA's. ;)





Maybe I'm not understanding your response, so please forgive me. I am very much a pro parity supporter. I think the inability to erect a outdoor antenna on ones own property is a major overstep of our individual liberty to participate in a legal hobby. The point of my comment was to overturn CC&R as they pertain to ham radio. That would allow HOA',s which are covered by these rules and which they must enforce, to consider the use of an outdoor antenna by a prospective purchaser. As of today, I don't believe HOA's can even consider the erection of an external antenna due to their obligation to uphold the CC&R's. If there are four HOA's in a town and only one allows a homeowner to put up a ham antenna I doubt anyone would complain. The problem today is that there are nearly no new homes/communities being built which allow ham antennas to be constructed on an individuals property.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KN6SD on October 18, 2017, 11:16:01 AM
You guys might find this interesting http://www.tcpalm.com/story/opinion/readers/2017/09/30/amateur-radio-vital-during-disasters-and-deserves-sen-nelsons-support/711423001/

It looks like some people in Florida get it.......

And of course there was a comment made by a CAI shill, that said, "You bought it, you eat it".......


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N3JJB on October 18, 2017, 11:35:09 AM


"I wounder who will have to pay when baseball will make a ding on that car parked along the street."





Those cars are made of steel, they won't dent, lol.

Terry


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N3HEE on October 18, 2017, 12:18:51 PM
I predict Tango Radio One Unbelievably Magnificent President (TR1UMP) will abolish all HOA's and CCR's and require a mandatory 200 foot tower with stacked yagis for all licensees !  It's going to be HUGE !!  Making ham radio great again !!


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: ONAIR on October 18, 2017, 05:39:02 PM
I predict Tango Radio One Unbelievably Magnificent President (TR1UMP) will abolish all HOA's and CCR's and require a mandatory 200 foot tower with stacked yagis for all licensees !  It's going to be HUGE !!  Making ham radio great again !!
   Are you kidding?  As a real estate developer, Trump would oppose anything that might hinder property values or home sales!!  :o


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KN6SD on October 18, 2017, 07:56:10 PM
I am not the only one that thinks HOA's have got to go http://pvtgov.org/pvtgov/downloads/hoasamerica.pdf ....

This must be Sen. Nelson's thinking, he likes private government, homeowners with rights are dangerous...

We're all just slowly boiling in the pot with the frog!!!


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WA7PRC on October 18, 2017, 10:48:27 PM
You guys might find this interesting http://www.tcpalm.com/story/opinion/readers/2017/09/30/amateur-radio-vital-during-disasters-and-deserves-sen-nelsons-support/711423001/
"For those who do not know, amateur radio operators play a vital role in disaster communications during hurricanes and other natural disasters."

I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link (http://www.arrl.org/files/file/News/Audio%20News/Audio%20News%20Extra%20Edition/WGMD%20Interview%20with%20Mike%20Ulrich%20KA5CVH.mp3)), the trend is for LESS public need.

It looks like some people in Florida get it.......
The author is a recently licensed ham, who conflates fulfillment of current/past public need with projected increased future public need (that is not substantiated).

And of course there was a comment made by a CAI shill, that said, "You bought it, you eat it".......
"Here we go again with someone who has a problem with his/her HOA contract. You voluntarily decided to live in this community knowing, or at least should have known, the restrictions. The special interests you claim Senator Nelson is bowing to are owners of their homes in these communities and the guidines that were established and agreed upon. The real special interest group in this case would be your ham radio group, whatever name they go by."
CAI shill? ::)


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KK4GGL on October 19, 2017, 05:42:53 AM
I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer)
South Texas is not the world.
 in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link (http://www.arrl.org/files/file/News/Audio%20News/Audio%20News%20Extra%20Edition/WGMD%20Interview%20with%20Mike%20Ulrich%20KA5CVH.mp3)), the trend is for LESS public need.
[/quote]
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KN6SD on October 19, 2017, 06:04:55 AM
shill


/SHil/

North American informal


noun

noun: shill; plural noun: shills



1.


an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.



•a person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest.
"a megamillionaire who makes more money as a shill for corporate products than he does for playing basketball"




verb

verb: shill; 3rd person present: shills; past tense: shilled; past participle: shilled; gerund or present participle: shilling



1.


act or work as a shill.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N2EY on October 19, 2017, 06:11:18 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 19, 2017, 07:54:42 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 



And now we've come full circle in TV reception with the OTARD ruling. The powerful satellite industry lobbied (and paid) to have the FCC superceed the "no antennas" CC&R provision, allowing small satellite dishes AND outside TV antennas necessary to effectively receive TV broadcasts. If you're talking aluminum now allowed on HOA community's roofs, why not "reasonable" ham radio antennas? Sounds like discrimination to me.

Another situation on the horizon...the growing popularity of Internet streaming of TV content. People fed up with the rising prices of cable and satellite services, and having the availibility of also watching TV on portable computing devices, are now "cutting the (cable) cord", and canceling satellite service. When the satellite and cable companies eventually go out of business, will we be going back to "no antennas of any kind" in future CC&R's? Stay tuned..... ;)

73,  Bob K7JQ


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WA7PRC on October 19, 2017, 05:03:21 PM
Quote
I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link (http://www.arrl.org/files/file/News/Audio%20News/Audio%20News%20Extra%20Edition/WGMD%20Interview%20with%20Mike%20Ulrich%20KA5CVH.mp3)), the trend is for LESS public need.
South Texas is not the world.
It's not... but IMO, the Gulf Coast states are fairly representative of the greatest amount of need.

Quote
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?
STX is one of the more/most needy areas, at this time and looking forward. That means there is less need for hams using outdoor antennas at their homes. Put that together with the glowing reports of hams currently filling the need for communications, and there appears to be NO public need for any legislation.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KK4GGL on October 19, 2017, 05:14:04 PM
Quote
I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link (http://www.arrl.org/files/file/News/Audio%20News/Audio%20News%20Extra%20Edition/WGMD%20Interview%20with%20Mike%20Ulrich%20KA5CVH.mp3)), the trend is for LESS public need.
South Texas is not the world.
It's not... but IMO, the Gulf Coast states are fairly representative of the greatest amount of need.

Quote
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?
STX is one of the more/most needy areas, at this time and looking forward. That means there is less need for hams using outdoor antennas at their homes.
SO WHAT? You keep harping on this, wrongly, I might add.
Put that together with the glowing reports of hams currently filling the need for communications, and there appears to be NO public need for any legislation.

So... if a system provides a service there is no need to improve it.
You have this bug up your as ....
People provide a service... a service is being provided... so no more providers are needed.
I call BS.

 ... here we go...
You spouting your BS , me and hopefully others countering it and the thread goes down the drain.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WA7PRC on October 19, 2017, 05:37:59 PM
Quote
SO WHAT? You keep harping on this,
It's evidence and testimony provided by your side, that you misinterpret.
Quote
wrongly, I might add.
Your opinion.
Quote
So... if a system provides a service there is no need to improve it.
[uncalled-for personal insult snipped]
People provide a service... a service is being provided... so no more providers are needed.
[unnecessary vulgarity snipped].
Yes, when a service appears to be needed less and less. That's what appears to be the case, according to evidence and testimony your side has provided.
Quote
... here we go...
You spouting your ** , me and hopefully others countering it and the thread goes down the drain.
I'm not the one spouting personal attacks and vulgarities...


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KK4GGL on October 20, 2017, 04:44:22 AM
I haven't misrepresented any evidence.

That's right, my opinion. My opinion is that your opinion is wrong.

I listened to traffic being passed during Marie. Did you? Traffic was passed from residences. Homes. The same as with Irma and Matthew.  But, so what? Hams should be able to have reasonable antennas at their residences. Period.

I didn't spout any vulgarities , I typed as... If I'm going to be accused of something, I guess I might as well do.

Telling you are wrong is not a personal attack.

No more replies to you in this one. I do not want to be part of the reason for this thread being locked, or derailed, so you can have  your last anti-ham word.



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N2EY on October 20, 2017, 09:59:36 AM
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E (https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E)



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 



And now we've come full circle in TV reception with the OTARD ruling. The powerful satellite industry lobbied (and paid) to have the FCC superceed the "no antennas" CC&R provision, allowing small satellite dishes AND outside TV antennas necessary to effectively receive TV broadcasts. If you're talking aluminum now allowed on HOA community's roofs, why not "reasonable" ham radio antennas? Sounds like discrimination to me.

Me too. And note this: If the satellite dish needs to be on the front of the house, in full view from the street - the OTARD ruling covers it.

But a ham who wants to string up a simple dipole in the back yard is somehow damaging property values and causing the neighborhood to decline. Yeah, right.

Another situation on the horizon...the growing popularity of Internet streaming of TV content. People fed up with the rising prices of cable and satellite services, and having the availibility of also watching TV on portable computing devices, are now "cutting the (cable) cord", and canceling satellite service. When the satellite and cable companies eventually go out of business, will we be going back to "no antennas of any kind" in future CC&R's? Stay tuned..... ;)

30+ years ago, I predicted that the day would come when every house would have its own dedicated fiber-optic communication. The telecom companies would provide whatever services you wanted - TV, phone lines, data comms, whatever. FiOs made that prediction come true.

We're seeing more and more program content being specifically created for various services (such as Netflix), too. Meanwhile, the percentage of people actually watching "broadcast TV" keeps declining.

One wonders if there may come a day when TV stations start shutting down because they cannot break even, let alone turn a profit.

Satellite has one big advantage: It requires very little Earth-bound infrastructure. You can be in the middle of a major city, or way out in the boonies, and all you really need is power and the ability to "see" the satellite.

73 de Jim, N2EY



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WA7PRC on October 20, 2017, 03:46:57 PM
Quote
I haven't misrepresented any evidence.
YOUR opinion.

Quote
I listened to traffic being passed during Marie. Did you?
Yep. Several times, and afterward. And, during/after many other disasters over the past four decades.

Quote
Traffic was passed from residences. Homes. The same as with Irma and Matthew.  But, so what?
Yep. Hams passed LOTS of traffic. It was a success, more proof that the system works, as-is. Thanks for pointing that out.

Quote
Hams should be able to have reasonable antennas at their residences. Period.
I agree. Hams ARE doing that. Evidence/testimony YOU presented shows only that.

Quote
I didn't spout any vulgarities.
YOUR opinion. OTOH, most dictionaries define certain words you used as vulgar.

Quote
Telling you are wrong is not a personal attack.
Correct, if that's all you did. IMO, it's not.

Quote
No more replies to you in this one.
Thank you. :)


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KN6SD on October 21, 2017, 09:33:06 AM
PRC don't you have a SOCK to play with???

 :D


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K1ZJH on October 21, 2017, 01:43:54 PM
PRC don't you have a SOCK to play with???

 :D

 :) :) :) :) :) :)


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: W9FIB on October 24, 2017, 03:16:54 PM
I agree...that back and forth has become quite old and useless. Both parties seem to never convey any usable information other then they can fight like little kids. Names and call signs withheld so only the guilty will comment negatively. And if they don't, all the better for the rest of us!


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: KA9UCN on October 29, 2017, 04:32:46 PM
I am so glad that I live in a small town in Indiana, Logansport 18000. I am disabled and old so the grass gets cut 1/3 as often as the neighbors. I put up any antenna I want and although I do not have up a tower and there is a city ordinance that restricts any new towers. When I enquired about a tower they said as long as it is back so far from the street and can’t fall on the neighbors property. It would not be a problem. At this time I am into DIY projects, mostly receive or TX into a load. I only have up a discone. I just took down a 400 foot loop and yes I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!
God bless America!


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: ONAIR on October 29, 2017, 08:32:15 PM
I am so glad that I live in a small town in Indiana, Logansport 18000. I am disabled and old so the grass gets cut 1/3 as often as the neighbors. I put up any antenna I want and although I do not have up a tower and there is a city ordinance that restricts any new towers. When I enquired about a tower they said as long as it is back so far from the street and can’t fall on the neighbors property. It would not be a problem. At this time I am into DIY projects, mostly receive or TX into a load. I only have up a discone. I just took down a 400 foot loop and yes I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!
God bless America!
  Have a friend who is no longer able to cut his grass do to arthritis!  A robot lawnmower saved the day!!  :)


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 30, 2017, 06:08:38 AM
I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!

......and that is one reason why there are CC&R's and HOA's. ;)



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 30, 2017, 07:15:51 AM
I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!

......and that is one reason why there are CC&R's and HOA's. ;)



Comparing a professionally installed ham radio antenna with a rusted wreck is quite the stretch (and I think KA9UCN was being cynical). Strangely, my ham antennas have had no effect on my property's value, nor have any of my neighbors had difficulty selling their homes, as soon as they've put them up for sale. I guess the anti groups fantasy carries more weight than my reality.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 30, 2017, 08:03:57 AM
I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!

......and that is one reason why there are CC&R's and HOA's. ;)



Comparing a professionally installed ham radio antenna with a rusted wreck is quite the stretch (and I think KA9UCN was being cynical). Strangely, my ham antennas have had no effect on my property's value, nor have any of my neighbors had difficulty selling their homes, as soon as they've put them up for sale. I guess the anti groups fantasy carries more weight than my reality.

I agree, Dave. A low-profile vertical or dipole in the BACK yard of a postage-stamp sized lot is quite different. That is what an ARPA (not this one) is trying to accomplish. But I wouldn't want to be put in a position of going to my next-door neighbor and saying, "Hey, I'm putting my house up for sale. Would you mind deep-sixing that junker, fixing and closing your garage door, and mowing your lawn?". That's the job of an HOA. Curb appeal (yours and your neighbors) are a major factor in attracting potential buyers.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 30, 2017, 09:04:05 AM
I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!

......and that is one reason why there are CC&R's and HOA's. ;)





Comparing a professionally installed ham radio antenna with a rusted wreck is quite the stretch (and I think KA9UCN was being cynical). Strangely, my ham antennas have had no effect on my property's value, nor have any of my neighbors had difficulty selling their homes, as soon as they've put them up for sale. I guess the anti groups fantasy carries more weight than my reality.

I agree, Dave. A low-profile vertical or dipole in the BACK yard of a postage-stamp sized lot is quite different. That is what an ARPA (not this one) is trying to accomplish. But I wouldn't want to be put in a position of going to my next-door neighbor and saying, "Hey, I'm putting my house up for sale. Would you mind deep-sixing that junker, fixing and closing your garage door, and mowing your lawn?". That's the job of an HOA. Curb appeal (yours and your neighbors) are a major factor in attracting potential buyers.

Understood. On the other hand I've never had an issue with neighbors behaving in such a manor. Maybe it's the part of the country I live in but I've yet to see that kind of behavior from a neighbor of any of my friends who live in the suburbs of NYC. Part of the problem leading to this kind of behavior stems from people who own homes but are financially unable to maintain them and so the banks end up foreclosing on them and many times they are left to decay. Happily in my area we had relatively few foreclosures in the past 15 years or so and so there were no homes in my area which were not kept up. I don't state this to sound obnoxious or self serving. It is a mater of fact however.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 30, 2017, 11:16:40 AM
I have a old Chrysler mini van complete with rust that haply sets outside 365 days a year with the broken garage door that has been open at least 3 years. I have owned the property since 1973 and if it was entirely up to me. The grass would have never been cut!

......and that is one reason why there are CC&R's and HOA's. ;)





Comparing a professionally installed ham radio antenna with a rusted wreck is quite the stretch (and I think KA9UCN was being cynical). Strangely, my ham antennas have had no effect on my property's value, nor have any of my neighbors had difficulty selling their homes, as soon as they've put them up for sale. I guess the anti groups fantasy carries more weight than my reality.

I agree, Dave. A low-profile vertical or dipole in the BACK yard of a postage-stamp sized lot is quite different. That is what an ARPA (not this one) is trying to accomplish. But I wouldn't want to be put in a position of going to my next-door neighbor and saying, "Hey, I'm putting my house up for sale. Would you mind deep-sixing that junker, fixing and closing your garage door, and mowing your lawn?". That's the job of an HOA. Curb appeal (yours and your neighbors) are a major factor in attracting potential buyers.

Understood. On the other hand I've never had an issue with neighbors behaving in such a manor. Maybe it's the part of the country I live in but I've yet to see that kind of behavior from a neighbor of any of my friends who live in the suburbs of NYC. Part of the problem leading to this kind of behavior stems from people who own homes but are financially unable to maintain them and so the banks end up foreclosing on them and many times they are left to decay. Happily in my area we had relatively few foreclosures in the past 15 years or so and so there were no homes in my area which were not kept up. I don't state this to sound obnoxious or self serving. It is a mater of fact however.

And I've never had such issues with neighbors when I lived in non-HOA/CC&R areas back in suburban Phila. But that's just you and me. Others aren't so lucky with their neighbors. Even my tower and tri-bander was a clean installation in the back yard, while the front of my house (curb appeal) was neatly maintained...by me. I couldn't afford a landscaping service. It's called pride in the appearance of your possessions, and consideration of those around you.

I'm not passing judgment on one's financial or medical conditions. It's unfortunate if such conditions come into play, and I might understand if you live alone with no family or friends to assist you. Or even if you have no neighbors living within, say, 100+ yards of you, where the condition of your home has virtually no impact on anyone. But absent of those situations, I don't get it. I certainly don't consider myself a snob...just a practical, normal, and prideful homeowner.

Question: "IF" your neighbor living within 25 feet of your property had an old rusted junker van in the driveway, a broken, constantly open garage door for the last 3 years, and grass as high as an elephant's eye, would you be perfectly OK with it? An effective HOA wouldn't let that happen.

Again, this is just my opinion. Everyone else's is fine with me...unless you're my next-door neighbor. ;)

73,  Bob K7JQ


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: W9FIB on October 30, 2017, 02:04:03 PM
Beauty or pride is in the eye of the beholder. In my life there have been dumps that look cool and pristine landscaped properties that have looked terrible. It is simply a matter of opinion which may or may not agree with the owner.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K1ZJH on October 30, 2017, 02:30:49 PM

 
Question: "IF" your neighbor living within 25 feet of your property had an old rusted junker van in the driveway, a broken, constantly open garage door for the last 3 years, and grass as high as an elephant's eye, would you be perfectly OK with it? An effective HOA wouldn't let that happen.

Again, this is just my opinion. Everyone else's is fine with me...unless you're my next-door neighbor. ;)

73,  Bob K7JQ

Bob,  many towns have zoning regulations that address those issues. No need for a HOA to enforce laws concerning unregistered vehicles
or overrun properties.

Pete


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 30, 2017, 02:34:20 PM
Beauty or pride is in the eye of the beholder. In my life there have been dumps that look cool and pristine landscaped properties that have looked terrible. It is simply a matter of opinion which may or may not agree with the owner.

Absolutely! But I'll ask you a variation of the same question: if you were looking to buy a house, and the next-door neighbor's house (25 or less feet away) was a "general concensus opinion" dump from the curbside, would you (or the wife/significant other, if that applies) have some reservations? Maybe not...it might be one that you think is cool ;D. But that's OK with me. You're the one that has to live there. Not arguing, just my opinion. Personally, I'll take the pristine landscape over the dump ;).


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: K7JQ on October 30, 2017, 03:06:59 PM

Bob,  many towns have zoning regulations that address those issues. No need for a HOA to enforce laws concerning unregistered vehicles
or overrun properties.

Pete

No argument there, Pete. So, can we compare CC&R's to zoning regulations, and the HOA (as the enforcer) to municipal authority/police? I might be wrong, but maybe an HOA, dealing strictly to the subdivision, would remedy those eyesore violations a lot quicker than the red tape involved in dealing with municipal governments? And besides enforcing such violations, HOA's maintain the community's common areas and other recreational amenities. Municipalities won't address peeling, totally faded paint and other rundown exterior house eyesores that affect the community.

Please understand, I don't like antenna restrictions either. I support a properly worded ARPA. But the other CC&R's, when applied logically, really aren't that bad. All I'm saying is that a properly run, efficient HOA isn't the evil dark side that many believe they are.

73,  Bob K7JQ


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WB2KSP on October 30, 2017, 05:09:11 PM
In my opinion the proper way around the antenna restrictions is for the feds to issue and exclusion on any mention of ham antennas with a CC&R.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: AE5GT on November 20, 2017, 03:03:31 PM

South Texas is not the world.

Watch you language.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: AA2UK on December 03, 2017, 05:47:37 AM
I predict Tango Radio One Unbelievably Magnificent President (TR1UMP) will abolish all HOA's and CCR's and require a mandatory 200 foot tower with stacked yagis for all licensees !  It's going to be HUGE !!  Making ham radio great again !!
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-04-27/news/0704250422_1_donald-trump-american-flag-flagpole


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: WA7PRC on December 03, 2017, 06:24:44 AM
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-04-27/news/0704250422_1_donald-trump-american-flag-flagpole
Non sequitur... the link refers to flags, not antennas, and not in a HOA.  ???


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: ONAIR on December 03, 2017, 08:30:07 PM
I don't think that a real estate developer would appreciate huge ham antennas in any development where he is trying to sell homes.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: NEVBEN on December 05, 2017, 09:25:36 PM
This would seem to be part of the proliferation of socialism on the surface, but there may be a little more to it.  I truly do not understand the whole picture but let me introduce some conjecture anyway.  I am beginning to understand that one of the reasons antenna restrictions are so common in CC&R's and HOA rules is because they are required to be put there by the lenders to land developers.  So while I don't intend to defend any socialist ideal in the least bit, the proliferation of antenna restrictions may actually be a capitalist phenomenon.  I suppose that capitalists that fund land development have been insisting on boilerplate CC&R's that protect their investment.  Typically, once the developer pays off the lender, those requirements no longer stand, but the declarations remain practically irrevocable.

It's easy to villify the HOA (believe me I can't muster the least bit of endearment), but oftentimes the HOA is merely fulfilling their obligation to enforce the CC&R's.  This is one of those cases where I can't imagine why any red-blooded American wouldn't just do a half-assed job, but let's face it, the boards of HOA's tend to attract busybodies.

What I'm saying is that it's not the busybodies, the HOA's, or even the developers that are the root cause, but the capitalists funding the developers that have been insisting on antenna restrictions.  They're far from caring.  They see those stacks of boilerplate regulatory declarations as a checkbox on their list of requirements for their fiduciary responsibility.  If they neglected something they've  maintained for countless repetitions, they would have no excuse.

This is a case where individuals need protection from the capitalists.  That protection doesn't come through anything socialist, but through the rule of law, which is the proper function of the government of a republic.  The law needs to intervene and say these capitalists do not need whatever protection these declarations provided their investments unbiquitously.

If the declarations where not there to begin with, it would be very hard for the socialists to engender them.  Most HOA's need 2/3rd's or 80% vote of owners to do such a thing, and there's typically a very tiny minority of sidewalk superintendents that run those things, and the vast majority owners are absent (they just own rentals), or just hoping the HOA doesn't pay them any unwanted attention.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N2EY on December 08, 2017, 07:01:52 AM
This would seem to be part of the proliferation of socialism on the surface, but there may be a little more to it.  I truly do not understand the whole picture but let me introduce some conjecture anyway.  I am beginning to understand that one of the reasons antenna restrictions are so common in CC&R's and HOA rules is because they are required to be put there by the lenders to land developers.  So while I don't intend to defend any socialist ideal in the least bit, the proliferation of antenna restrictions may actually be a capitalist phenomenon.  I suppose that capitalists that fund land development have been insisting on boilerplate CC&R's that protect their investment.  Typically, once the developer pays off the lender, those requirements no longer stand, but the declarations remain practically irrevocable.

It's easy to villify the HOA (believe me I can't muster the least bit of endearment), but oftentimes the HOA is merely fulfilling their obligation to enforce the CC&R's.  This is one of those cases where I can't imagine why any red-blooded American wouldn't just do a half-assed job, but let's face it, the boards of HOA's tend to attract busybodies.

What I'm saying is that it's not the busybodies, the HOA's, or even the developers that are the root cause, but the capitalists funding the developers that have been insisting on antenna restrictions.  They're far from caring.  They see those stacks of boilerplate regulatory declarations as a checkbox on their list of requirements for their fiduciary responsibility.  If they neglected something they've  maintained for countless repetitions, they would have no excuse.

This is a case where individuals need protection from the capitalists.  That protection doesn't come through anything socialist, but through the rule of law, which is the proper function of the government of a republic.  The law needs to intervene and say these capitalists do not need whatever protection these declarations provided their investments unbiquitously.

If the declarations where not there to begin with, it would be very hard for the socialists to engender them.  Most HOA's need 2/3rd's or 80% vote of owners to do such a thing, and there's typically a very tiny minority of sidewalk superintendents that run those things, and the vast majority owners are absent (they just own rentals), or just hoping the HOA doesn't pay them any unwanted attention.

So....correct me if I'm wrong....what it all boils down to is that the mindset of CC&Rs, HOAs, etc., is because of CAPITALISM, not SOCIALISM.

If so....I think you're right. Here's another piece of the picture:

Where I live, things like keeping properties in decent shape are taken care of by nuisance ordinances, enforced by the local government. Which means.....taxes and a government department.

But with HOAs and CC&Rs, "smaller government" is possible, because the HOA does all that - paid for by HOA fees. And the HOA doesn't have to deal with things like simple majorities changing the rules, nor the Constitution.



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: W9FIB on December 08, 2017, 07:41:37 AM
Where I live, things like keeping properties in decent shape are taken care of by nuisance ordinances, enforced by the local government. Which means.....taxes and a government department.

But with HOAs and CC&Rs, "smaller government" is possible, because the HOA does all that - paid for by HOA fees. And the HOA doesn't have to deal with things like simple majorities changing the rules, nor the Constitution.

I agree that can be true in many cases. However when you live in a more rural area where very few, if any, HOA's are present; then local government can make their own ordinances. And they are sometimes needed.

It is also possible that local ordinances predate an HOA development in their jurisdictions and have never been changed.


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N2SR on December 08, 2017, 08:11:14 AM
Where I live, things like keeping properties in decent shape are taken care of by nuisance ordinances, enforced by the local government. Which means.....taxes and a government department.

But with HOAs and CC&Rs, "smaller government" is possible, because the HOA does all that - paid for by HOA fees. And the HOA doesn't have to deal with things like simple majorities changing the rules, nor the Constitution.

I agree that can be true in many cases. However when you live in a more rural area where very few, if any, HOA's are present; then local government can make their own ordinances. And they are sometimes needed.

It is also possible that local ordinances predate an HOA development in their jurisdictions and have never been changed.

And just as people say "if you don't like the rules in the HOA, you can petition the board to change them."   

The same can be said for local government.   



Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: N2EY on December 08, 2017, 10:16:26 AM
Where I live, things like keeping properties in decent shape are taken care of by nuisance ordinances, enforced by the local government. Which means.....taxes and a government department.

But with HOAs and CC&Rs, "smaller government" is possible, because the HOA does all that - paid for by HOA fees. And the HOA doesn't have to deal with things like simple majorities changing the rules, nor the Constitution.

I agree that can be true in many cases. However when you live in a more rural area where very few, if any, HOA's are present; then local government can make their own ordinances. And they are sometimes needed.

It is also possible that local ordinances predate an HOA development in their jurisdictions and have never been changed.

And just as people say "if you don't like the rules in the HOA, you can petition the board to change them."   

The same can be said for local government.   



However, it is usually much easier to change or get a variance for an ordinance.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: AC7CW on December 08, 2017, 01:45:30 PM
Good ol' days in good ol' rural Texas: About every third ranch had an antenna hundreds of feet tall in the middle of a pasture. I never found out if they were for Cell service or what. One guy had a beam in his front yard. I used to compliment him on his yard on the repeater when I drove by. I could have built the most grandiose antenna farm and it would have gone unnoticed pretty muchly...


Title: RE: The good ol' days
Post by: VK5EEE on December 08, 2017, 10:21:06 PM
The HOA is proof the socialist, communist, Marxist, liberal, Leninist and 'they' have crept into every facet of our lives.

So....correct me if I'm wrong....what it all boils down to is that the mindset of CC&Rs, HOAs, etc., is because of CAPITALISM, not SOCIALISM.

Indeed. The over-regulation that is experienced in the west can't be called socialism, communism, Marxism, liberalism, Leninism. It's neo-capitalist FASCISM. Perhaps more accurately: LEFT-FASCISM. I think this new word is required to accurately describe the current trends in West. After all, it is corporate entities that run the governments now in the west, i.e. fascism. But they dress it up as "health and safety" and other Orwellian slogans such as War is Peace, Ignorance is Strength, Slavery is Freedom, and the drugged masses buy right into it.

Even The Don wasn't allowed to erect a flag pole of a mere 80 feet height on his own property and had to pay $100,000 bribes to charity to have it allowed at a pitiful 70 feet. What chance do the rest of us have?

What lovely photos were posted above of the good old days. Freedom and responsibility has declined to micro-managed straight jacket existence. Those kids these days would not be allowed on the road, would have to wear luminous clothing, helmets and steel capped boots.

The moment they get off the plane to have a holiday in a free country like the Kingdom of Thailand however, the count-down begins: many of them die each year there from accidents of all kinds, since they're experiencing FREEDOM for the first time but never had any training nor experience of RESPONSIBILITY.