On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:00:24 -0400, Larry wrote (with
possible editing):

L. M. Rappaport wrote in
:

No flame, Larry, but can you document that? References, please. I
always thought there were far more violations on CB, particularly
since callsigns are required and I never heard them. Of course that
is anecdotal. Those violators don't seem to be pursued by the FCC,
but that doesn't mean they aren't violating the law. Thank you.
--

Larry (W1HJF - Amateur Extra Class)


There aren't any violations on CB. FCC gave up...(c;

I don't find any "list" I can point you to, even on the FCC's website.
Let's see, Richard whatzizname and the other idiots on 14.303, FZ in Puerto
Rico's a prime example. If you go through the old ARRL mags where they post
the troublemakers and look up the calls, that would give you an indication.

Again, no flame intended, but what you're saying is purely anecdotal;
i.e., your opinion. Because the FCC is not enforcing CB violations
does not mean that they are not breaking the law. There was a period
of time when there was very little enforcement of amateur radio
regulations as well. My recollection was that amateurs were the ones
to ask for enforcement and Riley Hollingsworth (a ham himself as I
understand it, although I could well be wrong) restarted the effort
for the FCC.

I guess I just have to disagree. I still use cw occasionally, and
then like to stay in that bottom 25 khz of the band where the traffic
and qrm is light. I have no quarrel with those of you who think
that using that segment isn't worth the effort, but please don't
generalize about extra class license holders. At least don't
generalize without evidence.
--

Larry (W1HJF)
Email to rapp at lmr dot com