Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site drusd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!drutx!drusd!lrd
From: lrd@drusd.UUCP (DuBroffLR)
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Radar Jammers BEWARE
Message-ID: <1065@drusd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Jun-84 15:34:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: drusd.1065
Posted: Wed Jun 27 15:34:12 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Jun-84 06:03:22 EDT
References: <2281@ihuxf.UUCP>
Lines: 30

[Just in case...]

       "Is this 'radical chic', or just poor judgement?
       Congratulations,	you have just used the net to advocate
       the breaking of federal and international regulations:

	Bob Parnass,  AT&T Bell Laboratories
	- ihnp4!ihuxf!parnass - (312)979-5414 
	(FCC Radiotelephone Operator's License
	P2-18-37775/Radar Endorsement)"

From the quoted exerpts, it SEEMS as if Mr. Parnass and I have read the
same article, but our reactions are totally different.

I did not see any details that would enable anyone to build a RADAR
jammer if the builder did not already have the knowledge to do so;
all I saw was a general description of the principles involved.

Further, I don't agree that the original poster has "just used the net
to advocate the breaking of federal and international regulations."
I saw neither advocacy nor encouragement; indeed, I saw cautions and
warnings of the penalties for using a jammer.

Maybe we weren't reading the same article.

		L. R. DuBroff	...[ihnp4!]drusd!lrd

		FCC Ratio Telephone Operator License
		(First Class) #P1-18-52382
		Ship Radar Endorsement