|
|
|
|
|
|
by teeray
1108 days ago
|
|
|
> because cars are dangerous machines that can cause severe harm to someone if they are driven improperly Okay, pick another example of licensure to protect natural resources, since we probably won’t be able to get away from the “cars are dangerous” distraction. Take fishing licenses, for example. Catching undersized lobster can net someone thousands in fines and possible jail time. Is this okay? If we seize their boat and traps, is that enough to guarantee they won’t do it again and discourage copycats? > so that the general public can use spectrum it legitimately owns One of the things covered in the license material you seem to feel is unnecessary is that amateur operators are secondary users on many bands and do not have an exclusive right to use those frequencies. Both the 33cm ISM band (900 MHz) and the 13cm band (2.4 GHz) are shared with unlicensed applications in a similar way to what you describe. If you want to use VHF, grab a MURS radio. UHF? Pick up an FRS radio. While those services do not overlap with amateur frequencies, it’s the same experience. What exactly are unlicensed users missing out on? |
|
|
If an individual was to be fined excessively over a handful of lobsters, then again it's another example of overcriminalization and it's likely environmental pressure groups behind these laws, and it's completely wrong.
Yes, I agree with you about the secondary users of the ham band, though. I forgot about that one.
In fact in that post, I was actually advocating for the hobby to be phased out, and replaced with some other unlicensed system, given that so much of it's community is in support of such draconian measures and punishments for those who trivially violate the rules.
As I said, it should be consigned to the "dustbin of history" because of the draconian laws surrounding it. The laws have to be changed, or it's got to go.