Wilco! You're response has so much class and rationale.
----Original Message Follows---- From: "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Gray Areas of Ham Radio Regulations and Rules Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:23:32 -0000 Generally speaking, gray areas are widely accepted in democratic societies and have a clear connection to the notion of tolerance, whereas in societies of totalitarianism, grey areas are typically not accepted on any level. The notion is, that there may be a gray area in a rule or regulation, as an area where no clear rule or precedent exists, or where the rule has not been applied in a long time... thus making it unclear if it is applicable at all. Many people accept gray areas of life as a natural part of the human experience, whereas others may react with suspicion and a feeling of defectness or uncompleteness of any thought-system (or paradigm) accepting gray areas. It is not surprising that strong polarizing opinions exist regarding this subject or how it is applied to ham radio digital communications. Bonnie KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Like laws, ham radio regulatory rules are not black and white. > They are subject to interpretation, tradition, politics, and > convincing arguments. > > A gray area is the area of rules where an unclear or unsharp dividing > line may apply to a specific instance, a trend, a group, or in this > case... a communication signal. > > Often, a new convincing argument may move a previously gray area > situation into a more clear definition. > > In USA's ham radio rules, there are many gray areas. > > Gray areas always are present in ham regulations and rules because: > > 1. Technology always moves faster than regulatory process. > 2. Some rules are inherently self-contradictory. > 3. Regulation rarely anticipates all things possible. > 4. New inventions happen. > 5. Users deploy technology that has not been previously in wide use. > 6. "Spirit of the law" may tend to obscure or modify a rule. > 7. New valid arguments may modify the way rules are interpreted. > 8. Enforcement may be different than actual commonly accepted meaning. > 9. Valid loopholes may be found or become boldly evident. > 10. Technology may be designed to effectively circumvent rules. > 11. Technology may have an inherent higher value under "Spirit of the > law" to preclude enforcement over a long time, thus rendering the rule > null in the practical sense. > 12. Civil disobedience or long term use of a particular gray area > method may effectively render it clearly within the rule through > non-enforcement. > 13. Pressure through widespread common use in surrounding > jurisdictions may render the rule moot, ineffective, or non-enforced. > 14. Humans wrote the rules, and humans are not infallible. > 15. The value or strength of one rule may overtake or nullify another > rule when applied to a situation. > 16. Compelling arguments for one side may win over the other side. > > There are other explanations for gray areas, and ham radio digital > communications has many examples. > > Bonnie KQ6XA >
