Alfred Zoer wrote: >Dutch authorities have been discussing the actions against the Dutch pirates in the >government
>Our thoughts is they own the right to be there as they have been there so long. Just one observation: Alfred wrote several convincing arguments in favour of allowing some form of unlicensed broadcasting in The Netherlands, but IMHO spoiled it by including the sentence above. I do not believe that repeatedly doing something in the knowledge that it's illegal eventually gives you the *right* to do it. According to that line of argument, a petty criminal has the *right* to break into peoples' homes and steal because he has repeatedly done it in the past. I know that isn't what Alfred means, and I'm not for a moment suggesting that he or any other pirate radio operators have ever engaged in any form of illegal activity other than harmless broadcasting. But I just think that, if making a case to the authorities, it would be better not to include this line of reasoning, as it might in fact work to your *disadvantage* by appearing to suggest that persistent violation of the law is in itself sufficient justification for changing the law. As a Dutch resident and taxpayer (as, indeed, are all the radio pirates) I think this could set a precedent we might live to regret. Andy Sennitt (speaking only for myself, not Radio Netherlands). ---[Start Commercial]--------------------- World Radio TV Handbook 2003 is out! Order it now! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0823059677/hardcoredxcom ---[End Commercial]----------------------- ________________________________________ Hard-Core-DX mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www2.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/hard-core-dx http://www.hard-core-dx.com/ _______________________________________________ THE INFORMATION IN THIS ARTICLE IS FREE. It may be copied, distributed and/or modified under the conditions set down in the Design Science License published by Michael Stutz at http://dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt
