I never liked anything about the Strawman Redemption. So the distinction I was making between transciever and transmission utility is superfluous now - to me.
Nobody was ever able to convince anybody that there was any law behind any of that. I kept hearing a lot of hopeful rumors but when I was able to find people actually witnessing it in the courtroom, it failed.
As an old shortwave radio buff, I'd like to suggest that this is another case of people confusing the words "transceiver" and "transmitter."
Let's say that David and I are ham radio buffs, and want to "chew the rag" about redeeming lawful money (to pick an arbitrary topic). If he and I have transceivers, I can transmit a radio signal to him and he can receive it; and then he can reply, using that same piece of equipment, by transmitting a signal which I can receive with my original piece of equipment. However, if all that he and I have are transmitters, neither of us can send a signal which the other can hear without also having separate receivers.That's why ham operators almost always have transceivers.
One reason why I was a shortwave buff and never a ham radio operator is that my shortwave radio got ham bands; and unless you are a hardcore radio geek some of the most boring conversations you will ever hear will come from ragchewing ham operators.
Last edited by bobbinville; 06-04-13 at 07:41 PM. Reason: grammar
what do you mean by witnessing it in the courtroom? you set up a treasury account and send all bills into them and they discharge the debt.Originally Posted by David Merrill
do you mean for fines?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote