Of all the images I have seen of the attempted coup, I have only seen baofeng radios. These are very cheap ($20'ish) radios that work very poorly (they splatter all over the bands) even when equipped with decent antennas. They barely work when equipped with the stock rubber-duck antennas.
It's easy to be a snob about the type of radios that they are using, but that's not even the point.
These people are idiots. Bringing their cellphones, recording video of themselves committing felonies and then posting them online. There is already plenty of rules regarding what can/can not be said using amateur radios. There is however no requirement to provide identification before you purchase an amateur radio.
Anybody can buy them, and it's based on the honour system to use them according to the law. It's already against the law to use them in a manner that is against the law.
Id' like to see this used as a punitive measure against everybody who was using them during the coup. Maximum FCC fine for all of them.
I don't know why people complain about Baofengs so much. I have a bunch of baofengs that I bought to pass out as emergency radios at burning man. They have saved at least one person's life, because it meant we were able to call the emergency services when somebody had a heart attack and collapsed. I'm sure that guy is glad that that crappy $20 radio was there and a ham operator had configured it for the 911 service it was used for.
That alone cemented baofengs into my "good to have" category for life. They're cheap, and that's why I have been able to use them in the places I have.
People mostly complain about Baofengs because they leak a bunch of RF interference everywhere. Not obvious to the Baofeng user, but obvious to radio operators on other frequencies.
I think 'these people are idiots' is an easy thing to think but almost always the wrong thing. Few people are idiots. Most people are just as smart as you are.
More likely, these people fundamentally aren't looking at the situation like you are. Probably, they don't care what you, or the police, or the FBI, or anyone else, think about what they're doing and don't care how they're being tracked.
They don't feel the need to hide.
It's comforting to think 'nah they must be idiots' for not hiding... but maybe more concerning to realise they could be right about not needing to hide.
These people don't believe in objective reality (Biden won the election and there was no meaningful voter or election fraud) and I'm having trouble thinking of a definition of "idiot" where something like that doesn't qualify.
Exactly; a good portion of them probably really believe that somehow #45 could order, and authorize, the things that happened. The rest were probably just looking for a strong opportunity to go full anarchy and guns equal power moment.
It makes me uneasy to see how much commentary on recent events seems to focus on insulting these people instead of hearing how society has failed them and why they're upset even if we tend to disagree with their suggested fixes. I think their presence in DC and that "colorful" person they elected are all symptoms of this behavior.
> focus on insulting these people instead of hearing how society has failed them
Look, I'm just a guy, with no fancy credentials or research to back this up, but the more I read, the more I try to understand this crowd, the more I talk with other people about this crowd, the more I believe these people are making choices. That is to say, there are plenty of educated and monied people running amok here. To believe that this is a crowd of impoverished, under/un-employed people with limited economic means that society has failed is in fact allowing them to behave recklessly and grow their audience. Nope. A lot of these folks know what they are doing or are allowing themselves to give in to their worst selves. That's not being failed, that's making choices.
While your ingroup is unique individuals with good and bad traits, your outgroup is an undifferentiated "them" that is selfish, untrustworthy, stupid, the reason for all these problems we're having, and we really may have to do something about them one of these days!
So far I assume (not in order): A) the "American dream" and doing better economically than your parents ain't all it used to be, B) non-hispanic whites are loosing their majority status, C) mass media and the internet are more disrupting than the printing press was, D) greed, corruption, and other political inefficiencies, and E) the scale and pace of change are unprecedented.
Everyone agrees that lots of stuff is broke. Politicians don't seem to be helping. We (the people) don't agree on next steps. Some want to turn back the clock. Others want to try something new. Too many want to impose their view on others who disagree.
I assume we'll figure it out eventually. Some cultures/societies will have it easier than others.
>insulting these people instead of hearing how society has failed them
It's always "the left" that has to compromise and do the hard work of understanding and placating "the right". The right wing is immune to consequences and allergic to self-reflection. I'll stop calling them idiots when they grow up, actually take responsibility like adults do, and act accordingly.
No amount of "economic anxiety" justifies an explicitly undemocratic coup attempt where people were running around looking to scalp democratically elected leaders.
There are real ills in society, but - ignoring that republican voters are significantly uninformed about things like the party's support for healthcare, e.g. Efforts to scrap Obamacare largely hurt poor Trump voters - that doesn't excuse them from the fact that they've swallowed the Trump Koolaid and taken part in a coup.
And besides, if you want to talk about society failing them - were there any black people in the Capitol?
It's always a Baofeng because they're the cheapest radio that looks the part; it's just a cosplay element - along with the plate-carrier with the MOLLE and the camouflage pants.
> These people are idiots. Bringing their cellphones, recording video of themselves committing felonies and then posting them online.
I don't think it's as simple as "these people were idiots because they recorded themselves committing a crime", to paraphrase this line of thinking. I'm pretty sure these people convinced themselves, and each other, that they were breaking the law to save the country. They thought they were recording a revolution in which they would be the new heroes.
I think it does have a simple explanation, just different from yours. I think that they assumed they wouldn't be punished, because they never have been. Cops don't shoot white protestors.
I don't think so. They were at the Capitol for a few hours. They committed some vandalism and brawled with the Capitol police. Maybe the guy with the zip ties thought he was there for revolution, but most seemed to be taking advantage of an opportunity to run in and see or loot the Capitol.
I think many felt they had nothing to hide. Many are in camera calling it a revolution. Many aren't hiding theur faces, giving their names in interviews.
A person in one of the videos taking photos of random documents says "Ted Cruz would want us to do this".
The warning is probably directed more at politicians or civilians making complaints than the lawbreakers. It gives the agency something to point to when they get inquiries or complaints.
There's lots of issues regarding burden of proof. I doubt the FCC has enough evidence to identify these people, much less enough to arrest or convict them.
If you can get a baofeng to last out of the box longer than a week, and manage to DX a handheld or a repeater further than a parking space away, you should at least win a QRP award and a discount on your technicians test before you get sent to the klink.
Strong disagree, and wish this sort of gatekeeping wasn't present. Go get one of these things. They're $20, and ham radio is a fun and useful hobby.
I have many baofeng radios which have been in many forms of being thrown into boxes, backpacks, filled with dust, rained on, abused by drunks, dropped, etc. and they ALL are still working fine, albeit some with dest behind the LCD cover.
I've had a UV-5R for four years. Receives fine. The handful of times I've used it to transmit on a local net nobody mentioned vomiting in disgust at its poor transmission characteristics. The original battery even still holds a charge, which I really didn't expect, since it's probably spent 3.9 years sitting on the charger being kept at the float voltage.
Your post reeks of elitism, which is very common in the radio community. Saying baofeng radios “barely work” when you use them with the antennas they come with is a blatant lie.
I’m sorry that there’s some sort of “eternal September” in the radio community because of baofeng users, but lying won’t bring back the days when only people who could afford very expensive equipment could enjoy radios.
>Saying baofeng radios “barely work” when you use them with the antennas they come with is a blatant lie.
Not a lie. Personal observation.
When I first got the radio I tested it at our groups ham shack. I was 150' away from our repeater (open field, no obstructions) and could not get the repeater to acknowledge my signal. I could hear everybody fine, but could not TX.
One of my buddies handed me a spare antenna, and presto I was able to use the repeater. I was also able to hear repeaters that were 20+km away that I couldn't tune-in on the rubber duck.
Transmit and receive improved with a different antenna.
I thought I had a bad radio, bad transmit button, or bad microphone before I swapped out antennas.
My statement is 100% accurate based on my observations. Grumbles from the other members in my group agreed with the sentiment. They ship with bad antennas.
The reason there's no requirement to identify yourself is that this stuff isn't hard to make and the FCC already employs professionals for tracking (this is a common sport) and arresting people who abuse the radios.
> The Bureau has become aware of discussions on social media platforms suggesting that certain radio services regulated by the Commission may be an alternative to social media platforms for groups to communicate and coordinate future activities.
“Stop discussing plans for a revolution on amateur radio bands like if we aren’t listening to them, we are, stop believing everything they say on Facebook. I mean, we do encourage civil discussions, but if you’re going to collude on terrorism over the radio we will hold you responsible for that”
Presumably they would have a 2nd amendment suit if they were censored for the content of their speech by the agency that runs the amateur radio system, right?
I'm sure I'll get a lot of hate for this, but honestly FCC regulation of ham radio is at best antiquated cold war bullshit (ie, crypto bans) and at worst gatekeeping for a bunch of old men who can dox themselves in order to get exclusive access to some bands.
Every single person here uses high powered encrypted communication without a license, it's a cell phone.
My experience in the amateur radio community is that hate is exceedingly rare, although disagreement is common.
> Every single person here uses high powered encrypted communication without a license, it's a cell phone.
So let's have a discussion: do we really want these kickass bands to become another cell phone band? I think it's useful to have a part of the spectrum on which deafening corporate rent-seeking cannot hide.
I work full-time on cryptology, so I'm no stranger to the benefits of developing network protocols with cryptographic primitives in mind.
However, the radio spectrum is a great place to let many flowers bloom, and the amatuer bands appear to be experiencing a lovely, overdue bloom right now.
I bought an Icom-7100 last year, and the rapid growth of linux support for hacking on low-signal modes is wonderful to see, and I think it's happening because this band is the way that it is.
> FCC regulation of ham radio is at best antiquated cold war bullshit
Listen: I'm all for completely abolishing the FCC. However, I also recognize that the amateur radio licensing program plays a very important role in society: it allows us to stand and be counted in favor of tinkering and experimentation in the mainstream of some of the best bands on the spectrum. It prevents the government and its cronies from claiming that these bands are fallow and better utilized as even more centralized, profiteering, plastic bullshit.
I don't disagree with your thinking, I just ask that we apply different thinking to different parts of the spectrum so that we can have a more robust and diverse experimental reckoning of the airwaves with which we're blessed.
Use it or lose it in my opinion. The bands are underutilized and the barrier of entry, regardless of what most people think, is too high. Joe Shmoe should be able to watch an hour long video and then get a call sign the same day after passing an exam. Why a tech needs to understand antenna theory, space transmissions, and ionosphere reflection is beyond me. Cool, sure. Essential, c’mon.
> Every single person here uses high powered encrypted communication without a license, it's a cell phone.
Your cell service provider holds the license.
Ham radio exam is not hard, and does not require special training, just some basic knowledge of how radios work and what the regulations are. I don't see what the issue is.
Not only that, but every exam question comes from a published pool of questions [0]. If you can memorize the answers to those questions, then you don’t need to learn anything about how radio works at all.
You're missing the point. I would only bother to take the exam if I could use my radio for encrypted packet radio. I'd love to set up a long range meshnet, but it's only useful if it's encrypted.
There's a lot of fundamental infrastructure decentralization that can happen once some of the HAM frequencies allow encrypted use.
Hypothetically, if I were to develop some DSSS technique that operates below the noise floor and utilizes a strong AES2 cipher, who the hell cares how I use it?
Speculation: we're just about to see a bunch of secondary offense charges come down for the Capitol riots, or at the very least forfeiture of the equipment.
There is reason to worry when the tools of defiance or rebellion are taken away. Rebellion is bad, but maitaining some remote possibility is good.
This case isn't really so bad because there's no prior restraint, no tools being taken away, or new tools for the government.
There is still concern that charges could be heaped on someone to the point they feel the need to plea bargain for something that is either a very minor offense or protected speech.
> Rebellion is bad, but maitaining some remote possibility is good.
There is that little affair from 1765 to 1783 that gets generally good press, though. "Context is for kings" is tinged with irony on that one.
> This case isn't really so bad because there's no prior restraint, no tools being taken away, or new tools for the government.
Jokes aside, any sentence which contains "no tools being taken away" around messages such as this one are is assuming too much about the future - it is entirely within the power of both executive (FCC) and legislative (Congress) to curtail the use of specific tools, including radios. It shows that someone in the agency has thought that this particular case warrants making a public statement, which is an escalation.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I think you've got that backwards: freedom of speech is a right, that a government ought to recognize. "Protected speech" makes it sound like the only speech we're allowed is what is specifically allocated to us.
“Freedom of speech”, much like “freedom of religion”, is an empty statement. — no man wants true freedom in either, so one is only free so long as it not thread over the bounds of the law, and it can thus be surmised as “One has the right to commit legal actions.”.
It's entirely different from such matters as “right to a criminal defence attorney when charged with a crime”, which many do feel should be absolute, and that all other laws must bend and give way to accommodate it.
One already has the freedom to do whatever one wish, so long as it not thread over the bounds of the law.
There were times when being in an intimate relationship with someone of the same gender was a crime, and a lot of sex work is still criminalized, so I'm actually quite bothered by (particularly) the prohibition against using encryption. Obviously I have no sympathy for white nationalists, but "crimes" in general tends to cover both things that are bad and things that aren't.
Concealing the meaning of transmissions is contrary to the purposes of the amateur radio service. There are perfectly serviceable radio bands, modes, and services for those wanting to transmit encoded messages, just like there are for those wanting to broadcast, transmit music, engage in commerce, etc.
I think it's a bit like felony murder. Nobody wants you committing felonies, but, if you do commit a felony, you're incentivized to avoid causing potentially deadly situations. (setting aside the actual efficacy of such incentives, that's just how the law currently is)
To put it another way, you probably won't be charged just for selling drugs over a radio frequency. You'll be charged for the regular crime of selling drugs and an additional charge of using radio to commit that crime.
“messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning.”
The language is troubling, but the laws on the books in US are already ridiculously broad and overbearing. Usually, the question is more along the lines of what stick you want to use. Just in case you never had a chance, "Three felonies a day" gives will give you an idea where US is now.
It’s a condition of licensed transmission on amateur radio frequencies that the operators are identifiable (give their official call sign as often as is practical) and that what is said is plainly understandable to anyone listening.
You can’t do ‘anonymous code talk’ even if you do happen to have a licence. You can’t broadcast music, or do one-to-many messages except to setup one-to-one conversations (ie CQ or during club “nets”) - it’s not free, in fact it’s quite regulated.
The meaning is clear in context. Anything you transmit should be done so with the intent that anyone could receive and easily decode it to understand its meaning. That's fundamental to the purpose of the amateur service. And it's the tradeoff that hams make for having broad swaths of spectrum and liberal freedom to experiment. Plenty of other bands & services exist if one needs privacy.
The amateur bands are not for general use. They're allocated specifically for skill-building and emergency services, and are regulated accordingly. It's no different than how AM/FM bands are licensed and regulated. You can't just get on the air without a license and say whatever.
> The Bureau has become aware of discussions on social media platforms suggesting that certain radio services regulated by the Commission may be an alternative to social media platforms [...] Amateur and Personal Radio Services, however, may not be used to commit or facilitate crimes.
The sequitur between "social media platforms" and "commit or facilitate crimes" is quite interesting.
In the part you omitted, they recognize legal speech as the other use.
> The Bureau recognizes that these services can be used for a wide range of permitted purposes, including speech that is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
They didn't jump straight to illegal speech as it sounds like you're inferring. They mentioned legal speech first.
A lot of that is probably to reach areas the cartels need to operate that don't have other reliable communication, or have little enough that it would be easily surveiled. Not sure if it applies to urban criminal activity, which is what the ARRL is worried about.
I remember coming across a job ad for a radio engineer position with the cartel. Can't remember what site it was on but they did offer some pretty good pay, housing and discount programs.
> Encrypted radios. Any radio store will sell those, IDK why the rioters skimped on that.
Key distribution.
Encrypted radios are useless if no one knows what key to use, and equally useless if everyone knows what key to use. Sharing encryption keys with people you've never met on an open forum is equivalent to giving everyone the keys, just like sharing encryption keys with random people you've never met at public riot is equally equivalent to giving everyone the keys. One of those people you share with will be on the other side, at which point it's game over for your encryption. That said, given the brain trust that invaded the capitol building, I guess you're right, it is surprising they didn't have that added layer of security theater in the form of useless encryption everyone in DC could have been listening to.
Readit News
Of all the images I have seen of the attempted coup, I have only seen baofeng radios. These are very cheap ($20'ish) radios that work very poorly (they splatter all over the bands) even when equipped with decent antennas. They barely work when equipped with the stock rubber-duck antennas.
It's easy to be a snob about the type of radios that they are using, but that's not even the point.
These people are idiots. Bringing their cellphones, recording video of themselves committing felonies and then posting them online. There is already plenty of rules regarding what can/can not be said using amateur radios. There is however no requirement to provide identification before you purchase an amateur radio.
Anybody can buy them, and it's based on the honour system to use them according to the law. It's already against the law to use them in a manner that is against the law.
Id' like to see this used as a punitive measure against everybody who was using them during the coup. Maximum FCC fine for all of them.
That alone cemented baofengs into my "good to have" category for life. They're cheap, and that's why I have been able to use them in the places I have.
You can call 911 on a radio frequency in the US?
I think 'these people are idiots' is an easy thing to think but almost always the wrong thing. Few people are idiots. Most people are just as smart as you are.
More likely, these people fundamentally aren't looking at the situation like you are. Probably, they don't care what you, or the police, or the FBI, or anyone else, think about what they're doing and don't care how they're being tracked.
They don't feel the need to hide.
It's comforting to think 'nah they must be idiots' for not hiding... but maybe more concerning to realise they could be right about not needing to hide.
Writing them all off as idiots is dangerous
For this to be true, you would have to be below average. That's just half of everyone.
> Most people are just as smart as you are.
Well which is it?
These people don't believe in objective reality (Biden won the election and there was no meaningful voter or election fraud) and I'm having trouble thinking of a definition of "idiot" where something like that doesn't qualify.
That's a pretty bold assertion on a site filled with engineers.
Exactly; a good portion of them probably really believe that somehow #45 could order, and authorize, the things that happened. The rest were probably just looking for a strong opportunity to go full anarchy and guns equal power moment.
It makes me uneasy to see how much commentary on recent events seems to focus on insulting these people instead of hearing how society has failed them and why they're upset even if we tend to disagree with their suggested fixes. I think their presence in DC and that "colorful" person they elected are all symptoms of this behavior.
Look, I'm just a guy, with no fancy credentials or research to back this up, but the more I read, the more I try to understand this crowd, the more I talk with other people about this crowd, the more I believe these people are making choices. That is to say, there are plenty of educated and monied people running amok here. To believe that this is a crowd of impoverished, under/un-employed people with limited economic means that society has failed is in fact allowing them to behave recklessly and grow their audience. Nope. A lot of these folks know what they are doing or are allowing themselves to give in to their worst selves. That's not being failed, that's making choices.
While your ingroup is unique individuals with good and bad traits, your outgroup is an undifferentiated "them" that is selfish, untrustworthy, stupid, the reason for all these problems we're having, and we really may have to do something about them one of these days!
So far I assume (not in order): A) the "American dream" and doing better economically than your parents ain't all it used to be, B) non-hispanic whites are loosing their majority status, C) mass media and the internet are more disrupting than the printing press was, D) greed, corruption, and other political inefficiencies, and E) the scale and pace of change are unprecedented.
Everyone agrees that lots of stuff is broke. Politicians don't seem to be helping. We (the people) don't agree on next steps. Some want to turn back the clock. Others want to try something new. Too many want to impose their view on others who disagree.
I assume we'll figure it out eventually. Some cultures/societies will have it easier than others.
It's always "the left" that has to compromise and do the hard work of understanding and placating "the right". The right wing is immune to consequences and allergic to self-reflection. I'll stop calling them idiots when they grow up, actually take responsibility like adults do, and act accordingly.
There are real ills in society, but - ignoring that republican voters are significantly uninformed about things like the party's support for healthcare, e.g. Efforts to scrap Obamacare largely hurt poor Trump voters - that doesn't excuse them from the fact that they've swallowed the Trump Koolaid and taken part in a coup.
And besides, if you want to talk about society failing them - were there any black people in the Capitol?
I don't think it's as simple as "these people were idiots because they recorded themselves committing a crime", to paraphrase this line of thinking. I'm pretty sure these people convinced themselves, and each other, that they were breaking the law to save the country. They thought they were recording a revolution in which they would be the new heroes.
> Due to overwhelming demand, we are not able to process any additional orders at this time
https://baofengtech.com/
A person in one of the videos taking photos of random documents says "Ted Cruz would want us to do this".
I think they expected to have no consequences...
https://radiofreeq.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/militia-radio-fr...
Why the warning from the FCC, who knows. I was always told ignorance of the law is no excuse.
It must be cheaper to issue a warning rather than expend resources to prosecute the people involved.
If you can get a baofeng to last out of the box longer than a week, and manage to DX a handheld or a repeater further than a parking space away, you should at least win a QRP award and a discount on your technicians test before you get sent to the klink.
I have many baofeng radios which have been in many forms of being thrown into boxes, backpacks, filled with dust, rained on, abused by drunks, dropped, etc. and they ALL are still working fine, albeit some with dest behind the LCD cover.
Quick: let’s implement ID for everything, because that clearly stops criminals.
Well said.
I’m sorry that there’s some sort of “eternal September” in the radio community because of baofeng users, but lying won’t bring back the days when only people who could afford very expensive equipment could enjoy radios.
Not a lie. Personal observation. When I first got the radio I tested it at our groups ham shack. I was 150' away from our repeater (open field, no obstructions) and could not get the repeater to acknowledge my signal. I could hear everybody fine, but could not TX. One of my buddies handed me a spare antenna, and presto I was able to use the repeater. I was also able to hear repeaters that were 20+km away that I couldn't tune-in on the rubber duck. Transmit and receive improved with a different antenna. I thought I had a bad radio, bad transmit button, or bad microphone before I swapped out antennas.
My statement is 100% accurate based on my observations. Grumbles from the other members in my group agreed with the sentiment. They ship with bad antennas.
Dead Comment
“Stop discussing plans for a revolution on amateur radio bands like if we aren’t listening to them, we are, stop believing everything they say on Facebook. I mean, we do encourage civil discussions, but if you’re going to collude on terrorism over the radio we will hold you responsible for that”
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Every single person here uses high powered encrypted communication without a license, it's a cell phone.
My experience in the amateur radio community is that hate is exceedingly rare, although disagreement is common.
> Every single person here uses high powered encrypted communication without a license, it's a cell phone.
So let's have a discussion: do we really want these kickass bands to become another cell phone band? I think it's useful to have a part of the spectrum on which deafening corporate rent-seeking cannot hide.
I work full-time on cryptology, so I'm no stranger to the benefits of developing network protocols with cryptographic primitives in mind.
However, the radio spectrum is a great place to let many flowers bloom, and the amatuer bands appear to be experiencing a lovely, overdue bloom right now.
I bought an Icom-7100 last year, and the rapid growth of linux support for hacking on low-signal modes is wonderful to see, and I think it's happening because this band is the way that it is.
> FCC regulation of ham radio is at best antiquated cold war bullshit
Listen: I'm all for completely abolishing the FCC. However, I also recognize that the amateur radio licensing program plays a very important role in society: it allows us to stand and be counted in favor of tinkering and experimentation in the mainstream of some of the best bands on the spectrum. It prevents the government and its cronies from claiming that these bands are fallow and better utilized as even more centralized, profiteering, plastic bullshit.
I don't disagree with your thinking, I just ask that we apply different thinking to different parts of the spectrum so that we can have a more robust and diverse experimental reckoning of the airwaves with which we're blessed.
Your cell service provider holds the license.
Ham radio exam is not hard, and does not require special training, just some basic knowledge of how radios work and what the regulations are. I don't see what the issue is.
Not only that, but every exam question comes from a published pool of questions [0]. If you can memorize the answers to those questions, then you don’t need to learn anything about how radio works at all.
[0] http://www.arrl.org/question-pools
There's a lot of fundamental infrastructure decentralization that can happen once some of the HAM frequencies allow encrypted use.
1: For stupid legacy reasons, I can't use crypto
2: In order to get and hold a license, I have to provide my full name and address, which is then PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
If your signal is strong enough to interfere with common uses of the band, well, then that's why people care.
I wonder if the executive order signed the other day might be relevant to this (preventative in its effect rather than complementary)? https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...
This case isn't really so bad because there's no prior restraint, no tools being taken away, or new tools for the government.
There is still concern that charges could be heaped on someone to the point they feel the need to plea bargain for something that is either a very minor offense or protected speech.
There is that little affair from 1765 to 1783 that gets generally good press, though. "Context is for kings" is tinged with irony on that one.
> This case isn't really so bad because there's no prior restraint, no tools being taken away, or new tools for the government.
Jokes aside, any sentence which contains "no tools being taken away" around messages such as this one are is assuming too much about the future - it is entirely within the power of both executive (FCC) and legislative (Congress) to curtail the use of specific tools, including radios. It shows that someone in the agency has thought that this particular case warrants making a public statement, which is an escalation.
Not always. Not saying it is here, but I think it depends on the context. Arab Spring, for instance.
1776?
“Freedom of speech”, much like “freedom of religion”, is an empty statement. — no man wants true freedom in either, so one is only free so long as it not thread over the bounds of the law, and it can thus be surmised as “One has the right to commit legal actions.”.
It's entirely different from such matters as “right to a criminal defence attorney when charged with a crime”, which many do feel should be absolute, and that all other laws must bend and give way to accommodate it.
One already has the freedom to do whatever one wish, so long as it not thread over the bounds of the law.
To put it another way, you probably won't be charged just for selling drugs over a radio frequency. You'll be charged for the regular crime of selling drugs and an additional charge of using radio to commit that crime.
Deleted Comment
The language is troubling, but the laws on the books in US are already ridiculously broad and overbearing. Usually, the question is more along the lines of what stick you want to use. Just in case you never had a chance, "Three felonies a day" gives will give you an idea where US is now.
You can’t do ‘anonymous code talk’ even if you do happen to have a licence. You can’t broadcast music, or do one-to-many messages except to setup one-to-one conversations (ie CQ or during club “nets”) - it’s not free, in fact it’s quite regulated.
When you reach six, USA will qualify as a dystopian wonderland: https://aliceinwonderland.fandom.com/wiki/Six_Impossible_Thi...
The sequitur between "social media platforms" and "commit or facilitate crimes" is quite interesting.
> The Bureau recognizes that these services can be used for a wide range of permitted purposes, including speech that is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
They didn't jump straight to illegal speech as it sounds like you're inferring. They mentioned legal speech first.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21109605
A lot of that is probably to reach areas the cartels need to operate that don't have other reliable communication, or have little enough that it would be easily surveiled. Not sure if it applies to urban criminal activity, which is what the ARRL is worried about.
Key distribution.
Encrypted radios are useless if no one knows what key to use, and equally useless if everyone knows what key to use. Sharing encryption keys with people you've never met on an open forum is equivalent to giving everyone the keys, just like sharing encryption keys with random people you've never met at public riot is equally equivalent to giving everyone the keys. One of those people you share with will be on the other side, at which point it's game over for your encryption. That said, given the brain trust that invaded the capitol building, I guess you're right, it is surprising they didn't have that added layer of security theater in the form of useless encryption everyone in DC could have been listening to.