Re: The 14 Petitions

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "KØHB"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>"Dwight Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
>> Sure you do, Hans. Aren't you promoting an alternative licensing system
>> with stiffer tests for newcomers?
>
>Nope.  My proposal has a dramatically less strenuous set of qualifications
>for newcomers.

   "Dramatic?"  :-)

   Okay, I'm sure there is great "drama" in having to get together the
   requisite cash to go out and buy NEW equipment so as to meet
   the the NEW RF power output levels.

   Meanwhile, ol Hans can fire up his 2.5 KW rig (with higher drive
   level input) and be as safe as a bug in a rug...

>> The key word is authorized, not expected, required, obligated, compelled,
>> obliged, or whatever. A person can build radio equipment if he or she wants,
>> but there is no mandate to do so.
>
>But there IS a mandate that each licensee is directly responsible for the
>proper adjustment and operation of their equipment, including all sorts of
>QCAO-unfriendly things like signal purity, etc.  97.307(a) thru (e) come to
>mind.  Personally, I don't believe that your (misnamed) Technician
>qualification examination is adequate to ensure that you can carry out that
>mandate.

   Heaven forbid that anyone offend any "QCAO" members who hold
   title, fief, and divine rule over amateurspace.   :-)

   LHA