Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!olivea!mintaka!yale!bunker!wtm
From: wtm@bunker.UUCP (Bill McGarry)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: code waivers
Message-ID: <17091@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jan 91 21:39:49 GMT
Reply-To: decvax!vm1.nodak.edu!34AEJ7D%CMUVM.BITNET
Distribution: misc
Lines: 9
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Fidonet: Blink Talk Conference

Index Number: 13102

Well, if we were discussing something like a Marine Radiotelegraph License,
then your arguements might have some value in that a lack of CW (code)
competency on the part of an operator could result in a loss of life
and property. In the case of hams, there is seldom, probably never,
a life-or-death situation when the use of CW is mandatory. In light of
that, the code test smacks of artificial barriers and the FCC was justified
in sweeping it aside.