oh man!
where did you find that video?!
that was freaking HOOOOLARIOUS!!!
where can i see more vids like that?!
LC
where did you find that video?!
that was freaking HOOOOLARIOUS!!!
where can i see more vids like that?!
LC
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
Interesting Response to FCC
- Thread starter Sonwatcher
- Start date
Wow, I wound never threat my neighbors that way, By looking at bills picture and watching the girly man with his pepper spay, I would say they belong in a straight jacket.
He definitely has some issues ! I think if he sprayed that pepper spray in the wrong person's face like he did to that guy he wouldn't need a radio to talk DX ! LOL !
As a matter of fact SteveO was on the radio one nite and was saying things that either put him or others in danger, so the cops show up at his house and took him away.............he ended up spending 3 days in the nut house. Him and Billy both are complete nut cases.
Crowell got a Hearing notice sent to him on the 12th of Feb. In reading it I found this-
Why is the burden of proof on him ? I thought in a court of law the burden of proof was placed on the prosecuting attorney to prove guilt. " Innocent until proven guilty ". I in no way approve what he's accused of I just wonder why he is given the burden of proof.
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/AmateurActions/files/CROWE08_02_14_1174.html
Why is the burden of proof on him ? I thought in a court of law the burden of proof was placed on the prosecuting attorney to prove guilt. " Innocent until proven guilty ". I in no way approve what he's accused of I just wonder why he is given the burden of proof.
I could be wrong but the way I see it is that the FCC does not need to go to court to determine guilt.NAL stands for Notice of APPARENT Liability with the key word being APPARENT. They have plenty of evidence against him and it is up to him,having the burden of proof, to prove that he should have his ticket reissued despite all the evidence to the contrary. That is what I am thinking after being awake for over 31 hours having come home this morning after a night shift. Sometimes I don't think too good after that.:blink:
Sad thing is that Bill has basically said that he's going to appeal it endlessly, and if his license does get pulled, he's going the very next day and pass all the tests to be relicensed.
The guy's a poster child for OCD....
The guy's a poster child for OCD....
If his license gets pulled he can pass all the tests he wants and score 100% every day for the rest of his life and that does not mean he will get his license back. It's just not that simple. (Thank God).
Sorry to inform you but in an American court the prosecutor has the burden of proof, atleast when Perry Mason was hot.
The FCC should have to go to court on every case but that's why they have some funds is because dummies pay up without disputing 99% of the enforcement actions outh there.
Don't get me wrong, I think the FCC a viable entity but it should have no more power than the people it's trying to control ie due prosess of law and if that's not the case they can just make up the rules as they see fit and that's seems rather childish to me, you know like half the crybabies on the radio today.
You go to trial if you murder someone but if you run 5 watts on 11 meters you go diretly to jail without a trial.