true enough. However, making death threats on the air by anyone goes well beyond the rights of free speech. The right, itself, carries a lot of responsibility. Considering that the people in question threaten without thought of the consequences, then they abrogate any responsibility. THus, since they don't want to be responsible, then they need to be taken off the air and shown (harshly if need be) the error of their ways. I know this sounds harsh, but unless these guys get a real education in responsibility, they will continue until someone actually gets hurt. 

Now, the above may sound like speculation, but a good friend of mine was shot to death while trying to politely get another radio operator to reconsider his on the air statements. That particular radio operator (on the 11 meter band) was tried and convicted of first degree murder and spent some 15 years in prison. Last I heard of him, he had left phoenix after his release, tried the same thing in another state and promptly got himself killed. So, yes, I have a very tim view of those who harass or threaten others, especially over such a public medium as Amateur Radio.

Eric
n7zzt

On Jun 3, 2014, at 2:28 PM, Ron Miller wrote:

> 70 centimeter operations have been restricted around PavePaws radar (hope I g=
> ot that right, I don't have any info in front of me, am mobile right now) 70=
> centimeter operations can interfe with the air track radar systems.
> 
> Regarding the comment about making threatening comments on the air a terrois=
> t act is a Very Bad idea. There are already laws on the books which can be u=
> sed to prosecute a person for asult.
> 
> Terrorism should be dealt with very harshly, up to and including the death p=
> enalty, but our freedom of speech should not be threatened by applying "terr=
> orist" paint with a broad brush, much less with a brom.
> 
> 73
> 
> Ron Miller
> N6MSA
> 
> 
>> On Jun 3, 2014, at 1:39 PM, John Miller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> =20
>> I believe the military handles their own frequencies for the most part but=
> I=20
>> could be wrong.
>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>> From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
>> =20
>> =20
>>> Besides, I doubt that the FCC is much interested in what hams do as long=20=
> 
>>> as
>>> it doesn't affect commercial or military frequencies.  The focus is more=20=
> 
>>> on
>>> politics and economics, not on good radio practice.
>>> =20
>>> Steve
>>> =20
>>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>>> From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 07:37
>>> Subject: Re: FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
>>> =20
>>> =20
>>>> They don't go after those groups and the 3.910 group around regions 1 an=
> d
>>>> 2
>>>> and probably 3 because they know those people are going to keep it up no=
> 
>>>> matter how many letters and fines they get and the FCC doesn't have the
>>>> resources to take the next step. The FCC doesn't want to waste all that
>>>> money though why our government is nothing but a waste of money, but the=
> y
>>>> don't want to spend the money to take these people to court because they=
> 
>>>> won't pay the fines and what not, only for these people to cry that it
>>>> wasn't them and no one can prove one way or another and they'll keep=20
>>>> doing
>>>> the same thing weather licensed or not. They'd rather go after the ones
>>>> that
>>>> are fairly new to their attention where they might have some impact=20
>>>> rather
>>>> than the habitual people who take the warning letters and notices and
>>>> frame
>>>> them, hang them all around their shacks  then brag about them on the air=
> 
>>>> and
>>>> post pictures online and what not. It's not worth bothering with them,
>>>> they
>>>> don't have the resources to go after them. Plain and simple, I'm sorry t=
> o
>>>> say it but that's what the problem is. If you mess up a couple times or
>>>> push
>>>> your limits, a letter might scare you straight or a fine once, you keep
>>>> doing it and become a regular, they're not going to bother anymore.
>>>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>>>> From: "Robert Ringwald" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:07 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
>>>> =20
>>>> =20
>>>>> Kind of a waste of FCC time going after these guys for not identifying =3D=
> 
>>>>> when out here on the West Coast we have much worse stuff going on, on =3D=
> 
>>>>> 3840, 75 meters. The worse jamming, swearing, foul language, threats, =3D=
> 
>>>>> much worse than the CB band. And these guys appear to be adults.
>>>>> =20
>>>>> It is so embarrassing. What if someone is tuning around the ham bands =3D=
> 
>>>>> thinking about getting a ham license? Or if some child is listening in.=
> =20
>>>>> =3D
>>>>> 99.99% of the hams are law abiding. But the .001 percent of bad guys =3D=
> 
>>>>> really give our hobby a bad name.=3D20
>>>>> =20
>>>>> -Bob Ringwald K6YBV
>>>>> =20
>>>>> =20
>>>>> From: Ron Canazzi=3D20
>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 9:25 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
>>>>> =20
>>>>> Hi Group,
>>>>> =20
>>>>> Read this article.  It is interesting.
>>>>> =20
>>>>> http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-releases-warning-notices-to-several-radio-=
> am=3D
>>>>> ateurs
>>>>> =20
>>>>> =20
>>>>> --=3D20
>>>>> =20
>>>>> Signature:
>>>>> They ask me if I'm Happy, I say "yes."
>>>>> They ask me "How happy are you?"
>>>>> I say: "I'm as happy as a stowaway chimpanzee on a banana boat!"
>>>> =20