Should The FCC Allow GMRS Repeaters To Be Linked? Or, Should Linked GMRS Repeaters Be Illegal?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- In this video I discuss with myself the legalities of linking GMRS repeaters over the internet. The recent updates and changes to the FCC rules regarding using the internet to link GMRS repeaters has caused much discussion and confusion amongst both GMRS and ham-radio operators alike. So in this video I talk about these changes to the FCC rules, how it affects linked GMRS networks, and I give you my opinion about linking GMRS repeaters together over the internet.
►Want to help support my channel? Click the JOIN button and become a member for as low as $1.99/mo (cancel any time) - Click here for more info: / @thenotarubicon
►► Or just click the $Thanks button at the bottom of the video
►►► Like my shirt? Get yours here! --- amzn.to/3vc1Whf
NOTICE - The above links (and most other links on my channel) are affiliate links - if you use one of my affiliate links to make a purchase I may receive credit/payment/money/something of value in return.
..
#gmrs
Your assessment of the shituation is spot on. There is no practical reason to link GMRS repeaters over the internet when the grindr app serves the same purpose.
pretty good for a keyboard warrior!
My area just got an excellent GMRS repeater. It's awesome. I don't need it linked to anything else. It's perfect.
I used to watch your videos not knowing what you meant by “some people” and “making contacts”. After a few months and “taking the test” myself I now understand…lmfao. I love you even more now. Such accurate statements.
Love,
A GMRS guy now also a “happy ham” guy.
@@kaynenbrown5102 I was looking at your channel, Mr. Brown, and many congrats are in order for you, Sir. Looks like 2024 has been a great year. Well done. 💪🇺🇲👍
Good video! I'm both a ham and GMRS user. I have to agree with you 110% about the linking of GMRS repeaters, and I also think there is too much repeater linking in the ham world also.
It has gotten out of hand . On 2m it is difficult to hold an a organized simplex net due to internet linked nodes .
GMRS repeaters spread the cheer,
The FCC says, "Keep it near." :(
I agree with you regarding the INTENT of GMRS radio/repeater communications. I’ve been using 2-way radios for only about two years (GMRS and Ham) but I ASSUMED there was somewhat of an “unwritten” rule that one avoids the topics of religion or politics on the air out of respect for everyone else; apparently, I was wrong.
After listening to three guys talk politics this morning over a local GMRS repeater, I’ve decided to remove that repeater from my radio - I was thoroughly disgusted. That is one less resource I have during disasters and emergencies (one of the two primary repeaters in my area). 😞
I seriously have to thank you for everything you do because you always put a smile on my face and I’ve been into radio since 70s and you have actually taught me so much you are a actual radio hero man keep up the awesome work man ❤️
Well, my comment will be boring. I agree with you.
I am somewhat isolated in my little valley and can use a repeater to reach as much as 100 miles away but if I drive over the hill, no matter what tone I use, the repeater channels become non-useable with people from NYC talking to people in Baton Rouge about nothing in particular.
I got my GMRS license because I wanted to use my raido while out and about in the desert riding around. I knew it was just for a few miles. If I wanted to talk across the city, I would have gotten a HAM. I may still get one but I just don't feel the need to for now.
I get where you're coming from about designed for short distance comms, but I confess that I found it a little exciting to talk to someone halfway across the country. Every time I have used GMRS while motoring, I have found very little in the way of traffic or weather reports when not within range of a repeater. My only real issue with the linked repeaters is that users seem to flock to those channels when they could use simplex channels without locking up the repeater while they chat about what kind of sweet roll they had with their coffee yesterday morning.
On the other hand... there seems to be something very satisfying about pissing off sad hams that think they should have some kind of special monopoly on using an appliance!
Keep up the great work, and never let "Those" people win!
Use Zello
i liked talking about picking my nose while eating a mator slamwich
Been watching this guy for a while now.......he just makes me laugh
Glad to have you clarify that Part 95 has always prohibited landline linking of GMRS repeaters. Arizona has/had a great linked system which was mostly well run and properly moderated but, as you said, there is a limited selection of GMRS repeater channels, so having multiple channels used simultaneously for one conversation is pretty selfish. I am a member of the group that runs these repeaters as well as a few ham repeater groups and spend most of my time on the ham side. Also, like you, I mainly use GMRS simplex on the lowest 7 channels for inter vehicle communications, often when there is no cell service. Perhaps, if linked repeaters are deemed necessary, GMRS channels can be expanded so there is more room available, or separate channels can be allotted only for linking purposes.
I think I had never heard about GRMS until I stumbled across your videos. I think it is a grand idea. However, as someone with no radio experience, but some education, I was confused by the subject of your channel and didn’t understand anything about it, its context, the history, etc. After learning a minimum about it necessary to make an uninformed decision I agree, in short, with the FCC. Furthermore, I think you have made an existence, at least partially, by talking about something that requires no more than 5 minutes of explanation. And since so many seem to not be able to grasp the simple significance of your words, you seem assured a long and steady, if not maddening, career. I presume you find it profitable. kudos! And thanks for the trivia.
I dont always agree with your videos but this one is spot on Ill be sharing this all opver
I don’t have a law degree, but it seems to me that this is all about purpose, GMRS,CB, FRS, MURS ham and business radios all have a different purposes. With that said, trying to combine these to fit your purpose rather than to use the correct radio service is why the FCC has to make rules (not laws) to help folks get along, because people just don’t want to listen to common sense and do what is right. I use GMRS for outdoor family activities and CB for fun with local friends that like to chat from their homes and ham because it’s an interesting hobby and I like learning about different things that I don’t turn around and shove it down other people’s throats, I learn just for me only. Right or wrong that’s just me.
I agree 100% and I'm a ham with a GMRS repeater. The only maybe exception and I say only would be 462.675. That's supposed be the Ch 19 of GMRS.
It's to talk to other motorists for conditions and help.
A coordinated link along Interstates and main hy-ways could be beneficial. Have the option for solo or linked by changing CTCSS tone
This . This is a great idea and a good reason for linked repeater.
Some people just like to complain. I love to hear your direct, accurate, hilarious, opinions on these people. No excuses, not holding back.
Mr Nota, you are the best and smartest guy in the room, you have the most genuine way to communicate with us your awesomeness ( a real Texas word)
Love the shirts, and the back drop TV screens. You are very entertaining, keep up the great show. See you on X.
I spit out my M&M’s when you suggested Ham 🤣🤣🤣
I got gmrs in order to keep coms open even in the middle of BFE, so I agree totally with your video. However I will miss our local gmrs Nets I have in my state.
There should be repeater linkages for any kind of communications
I live in a fairly large metro area. The two main repeaters here, on 462.600 and 462.650, basically hog those two channels outright. They're fairly high up and high powered. This effectively leaves only the other channels available for use even with a 10 watt smaller repeater. In a city with millions of people, depending on where you're at, it can get crowded pretty fast.
Overall, I agree with you that if someone wants nationwide comms on a radio, they should go to HAM. Almost everyone I know that uses GMRS here in Dallas does so to talk to people here. In Dallas.
I always, and will always be on the side of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. More laws is not the answer. More laws only make us turn on each other.
Don't know what you heard or who you heard it from but there has been no new GMRS rules. Linking repeaters has always been forbidden but the language is/was confusing for normal people. The FCC used the terms 'wireline' and 'public switched network' instead of the internet.
Is the FCC afraid of spurious emissions or something? I put sausage links on my gps repeater...am I in trouble now? Wait, asking for a friend.
So, how long have you been wetting your bed?
I've watched several of your videos where you describe the use case for GMRS...a perspective with which I completely agree. The linking of GMRS repeaters is wholly inconsistent with that use case. That out of the way, I truly do NOT understand the point of linking amateur repeaters, either. If the technology I'm using to communicate involves the Internet as part of the chain, I'll just use the Internet. No need to muddy the waters with RF. I know there are a very few edge cases where you might find yourself in a spot where the only way you are able to communicate is via VHF/UHF connected to an Internet-linked repeater, but if you're in that situation, maybe consider HF instead? Or SATCOM? I know this opinion is going to rub some people the wrong way, but Internet-linked repeaters are pointless (at best) and cheating (at worst).
The big problem is that there are only 8 repeater channels on the GMRS band. Obviously linking can monopolize the limited number of channels with voice traffic from far away, and thereby crowd out local comms. So what's the fix?
Since the GMRS channels are landlocked with thousands of licensed users above and below, expanding the current channel assignment is impractical. The only option which would both preserve the local comm capabilities of GMRS and allow for long distance linking would be to authorize repeaters to use 2-slot digital modes like P25 or DMR.
This would effectively double the number of repeater channels with two conversations going on at the same time on the same RF channel (one in each time slot). One time slot could be for local comms, with the other linked to distant repeaters. Or both could be local. Either way, going to 2-slot digital voice effectively doubles the number of repeaters while taking up no additional spectrum, and allows linking to be done without interfering with local comms.
Obviously this plan would require many users to buy new digital-capable radios, but many available radios already do this.
What you're describing is already available on HAM radio. I think that I agree that GMRS should be limited to local comms, if you want to talk to people far away, get a HAM license and leave GMRS as it is.
I would like to see the FCC allow linked GMRS repeaters. I think it would add utility to the service and encourage adoption. It certainly would be a nice alternative to cell phones for people who just want to keep in touch with their family members without paying for an expensive cell phone and monthly subscription fees, who don't want to (or can't) take a test to push a button and talk, or desire a robust communication alternative during times of emergency. I think GMRS has a lot of potential for common people who do not wish to experiment with exotic modes and bands, or fidget with radio hardware and don't have an interest beyond mere communication.
The grinder app😂😂😂
I think in some locations GMRS linking makes sense, others not so much. With only 8 currently available GMRS freqs it sort of voids the purpose of GMRS to tie them all up for an entire metropolitan area. If you want to talk to men long distance get a HAM. If you want to talk to your buddy in the neighborhood get a GMRS.
I'm not debating FCC rules here, just the current use, legal or not, I'm not debating that. There are 15 GMRS channels and 7 FRS channels. Only 8 of the 15 GMRS channels are allowed to be used with repeaters. That leaves 15 channels wide open for local/simplex use. I have a radio set on scan almost all the time (rescue workers never rest), and rarely hear more than one of those 15 frequencies in use at any given time. Nothing is tied up. It's actually under-utilized. Even the repeater channels that have people talking always yield to 'more important' traffic. We've actually tested the difference between 0.5 watt FRS and 5 watt GMRS and on the ground, in suburban area, there is almost no difference, so both channel sets are equally usable for local use. I'm involved in both HAM and GMRS emergency radio nets, and there is a world of difference in the types of users. They both are priceless, but very different. The GMRS groups are far more "boots on the ground", where the HAM groups are generally more stationary stations. Both network connected HAM and GMRS groups are an extremely valuable public service. I have witnessed it myself.
Be careful what you wish for. The FCCs will require a complicated exam for a GMRS license.
Randy You should know that during Covid I was an online expert. Now I’m a GMRS expert thanks to you. I’m hopeful that I can convince you to come over to my side and join me. As I write ✍️ this I’m sitting here in my mom’s basement eating a Pop Tart thinking about changing my underwear 🩲 tomorrow. Thank you for all you do even if it’s all wrong misinformation you’re spreading.
Let us now when DoorDash shows up with those Cheetos(tm).
Disinformation. Not misinformation. You don't have to like the information but it's still facts.
@@kevinroberts781 you must be the smartest guy in the outhouse
I do miss the linked repeaters. We had a network activity a couple of times a week. It was fun to talk to people several adjoining states. And all the activity was local most of the time.
@@michaelpthompsonI agree, which is why I’m just got my Ham license. Many from my GMRS group as well. In the end we really aren’t loosing much.
Your opinion is 100% correct. Avoids overcrowding on a radio service not meant to operate that way. If I'm making an important call to my local off road party, I don't need some clown 700 miles away to answer me.
So don’t use a linked repeater. Duh
Right?
Can always mute them out several different ways...
After attending a Ham meeting where I as a GMRS used to be welcomed, this time I was chastised about this ruling by the Fricking Communist Communication ruling. A few of the hams had gotten their GMRS license apparently in an effort to shut down the competition that they perceived from GMRS popularity. How dare we talk beyond our rubber duck antenna limitations. There are 208DSC and 52 CTCSS tones to pick from on the 7 "repeater channels"
Right now I wouldn't get a HAM license if it was free with no test. And given the chance would shut them down for hogging all the computer bandwidth and slowing my internet speeds. Put them back on antenna only
Got my "My other ride is your mom " tshirt. Love it ..
Thanks!
Yet some amateur radio users are allowed to link their repeaters. "Some People" will tell you "too bad" become a HAM.
Because it says they can do it in the rules. Ham radio is experimental
Ham Radio is allowed to link Repeaters.
Linking gmrs repeaters across the inter-webs just seems like VoIP with a lot of extra dorky steps.
Yes. Exactly.
While I have very little experience with repeater linking systems, I can see the advantages of having such an 'animal' in certain situations. Perhaps one per market area or region?
I guess I already knew about the blocking of any connection to PSTN, but most folks carry a cellphone, so that seems like a non-issue these days.
If I had to guess, this issue will evolve & change in time, like anything else.
I can say a net work based in Arizona was reaching parts of Wyoming. on the occasion their call in would transmit on 16,18,20 including repeater channels. Some of them would get a "wet diaper" over using the channels, as if it was their airwaves or for emergency use. I would use it anyways, "its not channel 9(CB)" if used one of the channels to long, a Karren would say you needed to change the channel it was Hogging their repeater.
Should people get their General and set up an NVIS antenna for regional comms? Or get a Technician and talk to people everywhere using Echolink. I'm in San Francisco and used Echolink to talk to my stepson in Guatemala City using a repeater down there.
I am licensed Ham, GMRS, and also use CB. All of these have their place. I am glad the overlords took the action they did, it was needed.
Why so sad, Tom?
@@Ccerastes WAAAH You are a SAD GMRS !!
Grinder App or HAM 🤣😂🤣 good stuff
From the viewpoint of my esteemed cereal box law degree, I am in favor of linking BOTH GMRS and HAM repeaters to each other and also to the POTS service of the FCC and cross linking that to the NASA radio telescopes for INTERGALACTIC chatter noise. Constitutional Amendment to follow when Mom says I can go outside.
Tech license for ham is so easy to get even the "some people" who put the fries in the bag upside down can pass the test!! GMRS is great and has its purpose for local coms , ham tickets open up the world . Thanks for the smiles Randy!
You said it correctly now and past videos. GMRS is for people who are in a group outing like off roading or camping. The internet on our phones lets us link ourselves to apps for constant contact. GMRS is right where it should be. There is always ham radio to learn if someone wants to link things. Me, I just do not want to own any of that stuff when all I need is to stay in touch when no cell service to people I know and enjoy spending time with.
As my dad used to say, "That's the way the field is striped.", or, in other words, thems the rules. If you don't like them, I guess the answer is to start a movement to petition the FCCs to change them. Or, as Randolfo says, if you want to make contacts with random men on the other side of the continent, then just get your HAM license. It's really not rocket surgery. Just a little studying and done!
Nah. The nets will continue. If only to make you a sadder HAM.
Your dad raised a little bitch for a son.
The only linked by internet I would want to use, would be for 1 to 1 contact. I think that would be fun talking across country from coat to coast.
Cell phones do those 1 to 1 contacts very nicely.
As a happy ham I'm happy to say I've never ground, nor pound any man
G.M.R.S = Gay Men Really Soon.
@@yinglyca1- Love it!
I thought it was the Gay Men's Radio Service
They should add at least 4 to 6 more repeater channels on GMRS. I'm not into linking. I also believe if you want to talk all over the world, get your HAM ticket.
I suspected you might be in the flat plane mindset - respect meter pegged!! Also, I agree with your point of view on gmrs use - pretty much all the content you post (most of which make me smile or even laugh). 👍
First, let's not confuse FCC Rules with Laws.
But Hams can keep their repeater linking hellscape in their own frequencies, and leave GMRS the hell alone so we can actually use it for what it's for.
When did the ham radio community bother with your GMRS? Amateur radio operators don’t give a rats ass about your radio service. The only time they care about ANY radio service is when it causes interference to theirs.
If you’re concerned about the FCC cracking down on your service then take it up with them. Stop blaming the ham radio community for something they’re not involved in nor give two shits about.
As long as my GMRS works from rig-to-rig, and my hammy-talkie works on the repeater all is cool. Other than this, all I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine.
True fact: The thumbnail photo is a NARC self portrait before he got started with Jenny Craig and turned his life around. Well done, my friend.
Ive been a gmrs user for like 20 years and always thought it was illegal, personally i think it’s annoying to the little repeater owners , one group always tries to monopolize a frequency or a channel however you want to look at it
I have always viewed linked repeaters as a crutch. It takes a useful device and ties it up with extra traffic while some people are talking in a town 100 miles away. GRMS has no reason to be linked as it deviates from the intended purpose.
I for one use linked repeaters for storm chasing and while traveling through my state. And I have no reason to get my ham radio license for such minimal radio use when gmrs is way easier to use and set up. Plus where I live, off roading I get signal to the repeaters and not with cellphones, so in a emergency I can jump on and get help. So I only need 3 frequencies not 500 for ham and I don't have to take a test and all of that crap that goes with it. I love your vids keep em coming.
I think the government should be minimized in its size and get the hell out of all of our business.
Well, there is a limit. I think GMRS users who set up the linking service didn't think the FCC would go after them.
Damn fucking right
About time.😊
Yes they should allow the link GMRS it really expands our knowledge and information. Since ham has dropped in popularity the GMRS community will be under attack by the Xenu overlords bord fccs employees. It is what it is sadly things in the country are not turning for the better for the people.
As many have said I rather enjoyed being able to speak to family and friends up and down my state. Being able to contact home from work etc using an alternative method.
My experience with the repeaters were the same "some people's" that complain about clogging up the repeaters and cheap Chinese radios are the same ones that are clogging up the gmrs repeaters. They will literally have conversations about how they're using ham and gmrs simultaneously (as much as one could do that)
At least they haven't come after CB as hard although in the last year even in Michigan it's full of nothing but Spanish 🙄
MySpace Tom seems pretty mum on the topic. He is my oldest and dearest friend on social media, and I greatly value his opinion.
I wonder if it was those “people” who have Ham Radio licence had the idea of linking GMRS repeaters together because of those “People” who are hams do strafe the FCC rules on their perspective on what it mean
We the People need to remind the FCC of the recent ruling from SCOTUS eliminating Chevron Deference
"We" The People need to understand that the SCOTUS ruling eliminating Chevron Deference has nothing to do with the FCC due to how it was formed and how its rules/regulations are authorized.. But yeah, other than that you are correct!
I entered the world of GMRS a few months ago precisely because of the availability of the local linked repeaters. I was not interested in contacting anonymous HAM men but was impressed by the range capability of the GMRS repeaters which allowed me to communicate from my hunting camp to home over 60 miles away using an HT without having to study radio theory, antenna construction and take a test. Our repeater group consisted of like minded individuals who enjoyed chatting and disparaging the current administration and its enablers. After purchasing several hundred dollars in GMRS radios and equipment the subsequent closing of our repeaters by the FCC has been rather distressing.
I, too, was a member of a linked repeater system. I considered it an alternate way to communicate with family members across our state. It didn't cause any interference with other GMRS channels. I felt it was an asset for those of us who feel being prepared for a State wide emergency was a good thing. We've had snow storms that have crippled cities in our state where the phone lines had failed and the cellular network was overwhelmed. We didn't want to talk with people in other countries, just our small network of family and friends.
Change the law and let us all be a little more prepared.
You're living my life friend
@@tomwilliams8675same thing here
Don't personally care if they're linked or not, but I do understand the argument against it due to the limited number of channels. If they were RF linked, it would be another story and probably not a violation. That being said, what I really take issue with is the fact that they made a rule change without any sort of congressional action which violates the recent overturning of Chevron Deference by the Supreme Court as well as the Administrative Procedures Act.
Hey y’all! Write your Representatives and Senators. If enough people complain they will start to ask questions of the FCC. If politicians start to ask questions then the committees that fund the FCC will start to ask questions. Any FCC rule can be changed. Our linked system in Houston which was shut off was very awesome especially during weather events.
It’s not at all complicated… the rules are just as clear today as they were 5 years ago. Just because “some people” don’t agree with the rules does mean they are no longer valid.. I support the FCC .. However, personally I would love to see a designated linked “emergency call” channel opened up for GMRS, simular to that of Marine VHF (16).
Ok, this is where so many people get it wrong. The FCC had previously “ruled” linking was permitted. There are copies of this written interpretation online. So
This is why people aren’t “in trouble.”
So, it’s not just because people don’t like the rules, it’s because they changed with a new interpretation.
Finally! Someone has the courage to say it out loud. The real crisis in America is french fries upside down, 2:51
Honestly linked GMRS repeater’s are something that should be more common near me. It would be nice to have a big network to connect with others for it’s intended purpose
I see the fact that “ham” like activities are happening on GMRS as a sign that there is a need for either a new more accessible class of ham license or that that the tests need to go away entirely. “Some people” don’t like that idea, but will also complain about the lack of anonymous men to chat with.
I believe there should be just one test; one and done. The test should focus on safety and regulations, and that it.
Im thinking of building a repeater at my place and have no interest in linking it to the rest of the world. I DO however plan to leave it open-access and hope it helps other local GMRS folks reach further. In a "grid-down" situation... those linked repeaters are worthless.
That's the spirit !! Don't let the B@STARDS keep you down, Onward.
This is my legal assessment comment and my comment.
I'm in favor of the no linking. There are many radio "services". Each for a different uses. Use the most appropriate service for the need. Don't try to turn a corvette into a pickup, or gmrs into ham, or business, or aviation or public service. Has nothing to do with elitism.
Serious Comment: I have both a GMRS and Ham License, I understood the rule even before the wording clarification, However in my opinion, I didn't really see any harm in allowing GMRS repeaters to be linked (If they were permitted) In my view, YES GMRS intent is to provide local communications over a shorter range.
However in certain situations with mountainous terrain areas where coverage is a challenge or an area that doesn't offer dependable coverage by other means of communication, I think linking would be a valuable asset to GMRS users. So I'm not really opposed to linking (if it were ever allowable in the future) But I also think applying some guidelines to appropriate usage of when and why you link a GMRS repeater would need to be added to the FCC language. Possibly apply for a separate license that would be required for a linked system above and beyond the standard GMRS user license.
Personally, I've never used grms repeaters before so this topic has very little bearing on me. However from my point of view yes I do think they should allow repeaters to be connected to other repeaters and through the internet. It creates an emergency communication Network that can be used in an emergency and it's more accessible to the common person. But the FCC is going to do what the FCC wants.
We could do both. 1) not have linking repeaters and 2) talk to family more than 25 miles away. Allow family members (as defined by the FCC) to communicate with a modified HotSpot (NOT a repeater that I call a ColdSpot). The RF footprint at each end will be tiny due to a power limit of 0.4 watts or less. The ColdSpot would tear down links after 4 minutes of inactivity. And, we can support family communications over the entire country without causing RF interference. Discussion in group "GMRS Next Generation".
I’m happy about the crackdown and enforcement. No more Channel Hogs tying up multiple repeaters with useless noise hole chatter
In my stoopid people’s opinion, why not allow them? I understand highly congested areas having to share the air, so that doesn’t exactly work. But where I’m at in the country, I’m 60 miles from the only gmrs repeater within 100 miles. This feels like the local band authorities should make this decision, not some dbag fcc agent behind a desk making blanket decisions for every shituation. Godspeed, and enjoy the trail!
Why the f*** would you want to use a radio to talk on the internet
GMRS does not support enough channels to lock up the band with
linksd systems long delays from across the USA.
The FCC makes these rules .
To think that family is only to communicate with only one another is to be done on simplex
channels & of PL tones but cannot exclude a station breaking in to chat.
Repeaters (GMRS) were meant to extend range and help multi users to talk within there area repeaters are not meant to hog with personal family comunicades one thinks is private .
So everyone must share and function on a Repeater system.
There is no FCC regulations that says you can not use a Repeater ch for a Net on your local repeater with owners consent in a populated area or dead repeater area moved to 1 simplex to promote use of communicatiins .
So enjoy your GMRS radio at 30-40 miles or less on a GMRS repeater As the FCC says .
I don't really care, but the debate is fascinating.
Napoleon Dynamite in the background.
Isn't that Tyler swift?
I see no problem with GMRS repeater linking if it is allowed only on one or perhaps two of the repeater channels and time limited (not 24/7) with a minimum unlinked period between linked sessions.
In these Canadian airwaves even stand alone GMRS repeaters are not allowed. We’re doing fine.
FCC should leave it alone…
Whenever the government gets involved, no good can come from it…..
The advantage to not linking them over the internet ensures reliability if the internet goes down
correction.
When the internet goes down.
Trust me, Doug's 1000 dollar repeater setup on top of the hill is not gonna survive Armageddon, my guy. You'll be fine.
When the literal shit hits the fan, there won’t be any Internet. So get used to it prepare yourself.
Gentle Man's is the correct word for people who want linked repeaters
My only thought is that there is nothing in the US constitution that explicitly grants the federal government the power to regulate the airwaves. Therefore the FCC is an illegal agency engaged in illegal activities, and should be abolished on principle, and the power to regulate the airwaves reserved to the states and the people respectively. I know that's not practical and won't happen, but that is what I believe is right and correct in principle.
Some are refusing to stop waiting for enforcement action so they can sue. Once they get the fcc in court they will claim the new chevron ruling that the fcc has no law giving them the right to ban linking. Have you read the law. Not the rules. The law congress passed.
Yes. I have read the law and the rules (and the Chevron decision) and it doesn't look like much is going to change at the FCC.
Randy, does this class make us a fishel GMRS legil schoolars? "Some people" want to know.
Maybe FCC should add some linked repeater channels to GMRS.
If you need to talk across the country then use your cell phone. GMRS serves a need for local communications, there are limited channels and to have them tied up so people can talk coast to coast defeats the purpose of GMRS.
“More Exotic anonymous men”😂😂😂
What??? You seek local more accessible men in your area?
GMRS, to my understanding, is intended for personal communications. Therefore , it shouldn't be linked.
I see the point, but the link of GRMS repeaters had actually drawn a lot of people into the hobby recently. I had several friends interested in getting there GMRS license because of the linking of a few repeaters here, but with this new "unconfuckulation" of the code and repeater linking now "Bad Mojo", they have decided to not even get their licenses. I refuse to get into the HAM radio, as I don't feel that spending shitloads of money on radio equipment that costs more than my monthly rent is worth it. I might as well just talk to people over Zello on my cellular device from now on.
It irritates me that the FCC modified the rules without going through a public comment period like most federal agencies are required to do. No feedback from you, pleeb! I know "some people" have characterized the change as a "clarification" of an existing rule, but when they change or reinterpret the wording, that's rule making and the public should get a chance to comment, not just be dictated to by the overlords who want the service to stay the way they originally envisioned it rather than be responsive to how people actually want to use it and who are willing to invest time and money into setting up the equipment to use it the way they want to use it. And lest we not forget, Randy had a Zello connection to his repeater at one time, so he apparently thought there was some value in doing it. I didn't ever talk on his channel because I had nothing relevant to say to the group (novel concept) but I enjoyed listening to his friends in southern California.
I dunno, it has never been explicitly allowed to the best of my knowledge. We don't even have anything like GMRS here in Europe, PMR is the closest equivalent. I'd be a happy man if i had an option like GMRS, both the higher power output and the repeaters themselves sound awesome. This whole ordeal sounds like some greedy people came upon a loophole in the wording of that GMRS standard description thingy, and abused it until the FCC took notice, and they are butthurt now that the rule has been updated.