Attention all Ham Radio Ops

Rollbar said:

A~Men. +1

I posted this link on Reno 4x4 - http://www.reno4x4.com/forum/showth...s-NO-To-Open-Carry-or-CCW?p=621991#post621991

Click to expand...

copied from reno4x4.com posted by leifnv

Well, Field Day is not an ARES event, so that was a safe bet.

Question is, would you have the balls to OC if they was operating from REOC parking lot?

Click to expand...

I don't have access to the reno4x4 board, but you can tell him I not only had the balls to carry in the parking lot of the REOC, I also carried in the REOC during a SNARS/ARES meeting a while back and no one said a word, my wife was also carrying too!

and I also see there are some really stupid, brainwashed or uneducated people on that board concerning rights

john-in-reno said:

copied from reno4x4.com posted by leifnv



I don't have access to the reno4x4 board, but you can tell him I not only had the balls to carry in the parking lot of the REOC, I also carried in the REOC during a SNARS/ARES meeting a while back and no one said a word, my wife was also carrying too!

and I also see there are some really stupid, brainwashed or uneducated people on that board concerning rights

Click to expand...

+1

You have access-Just register

Rollbar said:

+1

You have access-Just register

Click to expand...

i already have about 30 boards i read, I don't need another loggin

john-in-reno said:

i already have about 30 boards i read, I don't need another loggin

Click to expand...

+100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 I hear ya :shocker: :banghead:

I just received the following reply:

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Imlay
To: varminter22
Cc: k1zz@arrl.org ; nn1n@arrl.org ; N1ND@arrl.org ; n3kn@arrl.org ; w6rgg@arrl.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 7:17 AM
Subject: ARRL ARES Firearms Policy

Re: Carrying of Weapons during ARES Participation

Your e-mail inquiry of June 5, 2012 to ARRL Headquarters has been referred to me. I am the General Counsel for ARRL and have served in that capacity for more than thirty years. It is my obligation, among other things, to protect ARRL and its programs from exposure to liability.

You ask whether it is true that I have advised the Wisconsin Section Manager that weapons are not permitted to be carried by ARES volunteers while participating in any ARES activity. You quote some unknown source extensively which discusses this point, and ask if all of that is true. You say that if it is true, that you will not renew your membership and that you will urge others to resign their ARRL memberships as well. While that is entirely your decision to make, I would like to explain the circumstances of this situation so that you won’t operate under any misapprehensions. I cannot speak for the truth of the article that you quote from, and I don’t know the source. The quote in that article attributed to me, however, is substantially accurate. You should appreciate certain facts:

ARRL’s Board of Directors has not at any time that I am aware of made or adopted any policy with respect to volunteers carrying firearms while involved in an ARES activity or while involved in any other ARRL-sponsored program or activity. Only ARRL’s Board of Directors is entitled to make policy for the organization. I do not have that authority whatsoever. You, as an ARRL member, participate in the policymaking process by your communications with your ARRL Division Director who will represent your interests at meetings of the Board of Directors. In your case, your Division Director is Mr. Bob Vallio, W6RGG. I urge you to contact him about this and make your feelings about the carrying of firearms and weapons during ARES deployments known.

ARRL staff and I were asked by the Wisconsin Section Manager (repeatedly) how to respond to a question that he had been asked by ARES participants in Wisconsin as to whether or not they could bring weapons with them to an ARES deployment. Stating my opinion (and absent any statement of policy from the ARRL Board of Directors to the contrary), I advised the Section Manager (and ARRL Regulatory Information Department staff) that because of the substantial risk to ARRL of exposure to liability as a matter of law that would inevitably result if ARRL were to affirmatively permit weapons to be carried by ARES volunteers during an ARES activity, and if someone were to be injured or killed by the weapon, this could not be sanctioned. I realize from your e-mail that you don’t agree that ARRL would be exposed to liability but about that we must disagree. Just because a person volunteers his or her time to ARES does not exempt that volunteer from liability, nor does it exempt ARRL, the sponsor of the ARES program, from liability for the actions of its own volunteers during the course of the activity sponsored by ARRL. I will assure you that, should an ARES volunteer carrying a weapon injure someone while involved in an ARES activity, the volunteer and ARRL would be sued and potentially exposed to very substantial liability. It is my job to make sure that such risks are not incurred by the organization and I intend to continue to do that job to the best of my ability.

There are, however, quite a few other reasons why the policy that you would like to have ARRL adopt can’t in my opinion be accommodated. First, ARES is a program that is limited to the provision of radio communications in emergencies. ARES works with served agencies such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, and Federal and local first responder agencies which themselves do not permit carrying weapons by volunteers. If ARRL was to have a policy permitting the carrying of firearms during ARES deployments, ARES could not provide services to served agencies with which we have memoranda of understanding agreeing to provide such services. It would defeat the entire purpose of the program.

There is no reason whatsoever why a person who wishes to participate in ARES activities should need to carry a weapon of any sort during an ARES activation. If a person believes that self-protection is necessary during an ARES deployment to the extent that carrying a firearm is necessary, then that person should simply not volunteer in ARES. It is not the right program for those persons. Again, the purpose of ARES is to have hams help people in emergencies and disasters with radiocommunications.

I am well-aware, as you say that there are many hams who are outdoorsmen, shooters, hunters, or lawful concealed firearms carriers. I am one of them. However, there is no connection between those activities and the need to carry weapons to an ARES deployment. There are many places where firearms can be carried by individuals, but there are many places where they cannot be carried as well. ARRL certainly has no intention of infringing anyone’s rights, but the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution does not limit a private sector entity’s entitlement to make whatever limitations it needs to make with respect to the carrying of weapons in particular circumstances in activities involving the private sector entity’s own programs. There is simply no doubt about this, so the discussion of the Second Amendment to the Constitution has no place in this discussion. ARRL members can, as far as ARRL is concerned, carry weapons as they see fit and as the law permits, except while acting as a volunteer during ARES activities or in other ARRL-sponsored activities. It is not unreasonable for volunteers to be asked to leave their weapons in their vehicles or their homes while involved in ARES. They have the option to choose not to participate in ARES if they don’t feel comfortable without carrying a weapon to the event.

I would urge you, if you remain dissatisfied with the advice that I furnished to an elected ARRL field organization member, or with the explanation in this e-mail, to present your concerns to your ARRL Division Director. If you resign your ARRL membership in protest of the actions of an independent contractor to ARRL such as myself, then you lose the ability to influence ARRL policy, which seems to me to be the exact opposite of the goal that you want to achieve. Unless the ARRL Board of Directors decides otherwise, there will be no change in my advice given to the ARRL staff and the elected field organization volunteers, because it is based on protecting the organization that I care very much about. I hope that you will agree that ARRL is a valuable resource that is worth protecting; I hope that this addresses your concerns, and I hope that you will remain a member of ARRL.

73, Chris W3KD
Christopher D. Imlay
Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C.
14356 Cape May Road
Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011
(301) 384-5525 telephone
(301) 384-6384 facsimile
W3KD@ARRL.ORG

Click to expand...

While he might make some good points, I still have questions/concerns.

And I MOST certainly disagree with his statement:

There is no reason whatsoever why a person who wishes to participate in ARES activities should need to carry a weapon of any sort during an ARES activation.

Click to expand...

My same reply to your post on Nevada Shooters:

I quite respect the time he took to address your letter. However:

...because of the substantial risk to ARRL of exposure to liability as a matter of law that would inevitably result if ARRL were to affirmatively permit weapons to be carried by ARES volunteers during an ARES activity, and if someone were to be injured or killed by the weapon, this could not be sanctioned.

Click to expand...

He's apparently not a very good lawyer, nor does he know the definition of "sanctioned."

There is no reason whatsoever why a person who wishes to participate in ARES activities should need to carry a weapon of any sort during an ARES activation.

Click to expand...

He also does not understand the purpose of a sidearm. We carry sidearms during those times we should not need to carry a weapon. That's what they were designed for (outside of TV). Duh! If we felt the need to carry a weapon, it sure would be a lot more powerful than a handgun!

I get his point that permitting firearms would open them to liability. That's why the correct policy is no policy at all. Don't over think it.

Stop here and go get a glass of milk.

OK, welcome back.

While they are at it, they should ban _____-. Because if they don't, I'll bring mine. And if I do, there is a real possibility that I might slap someone with it while performing my duties as an ares volunteer. Then somebody's gonna get sued.

Its like a mad lib. Fill in the blank. (Now's the time to drink the milk)

I'll get you started:
Spork
Soap-on-a-rope
Light saber
Car keys
Salt shaker
Lamb chop
Wife
Parakeet
Box of Kleenex
Flip-phone
Salmon (dead)
Salmon (live)
Earwax
And of course, my favorite. Penis.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

umbrella

I'll add two more for the list:

A sharp tongue especially when combined with a quick wit!

A 50-state approach written by an attorney who resides in Maryland.

He would have done better to pray the guns away. :banghead:

Merlin: spot on. Also, Imlay is a sharp guy on communications law. But like most attorneys, he has his specialties.

Well thats a shame. I've been inactive for years but should I take it up again, I won't be joining such an unamerican organisation. If I had to get involved in anything it would be militia groups. Far more effective