PDA

View Full Version : Another reason why Congress is at a negative 19 approval rating



LegalSmash
07-31-2008, 08:46 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20080731/ap_tr_ge/travel_brief_airplanes_cell_phones

zero
07-31-2008, 09:38 PM
Why is it that congress makes the rules on how airlines run their business. I don't get it. Airlines making a rule to ban cell phones on their planes is one thing. Passing a bill is another. I guess its the American way.

PotshotPolka
07-31-2008, 09:39 PM
...And this is the government's call... how?

LegalSmash
07-31-2008, 09:46 PM
Why is it that congress makes the rules on how airlines run their business. I don't get it. Airlines making a rule to ban cell phones on their planes is one thing. Passing a bill is another. I guess its the American way.

If congress can link it to commerce, its something they have plenary power to control (absolute power). Airlines have about 0 say in anything if congress decides to exercise its authority to do something like that.

GrayFox
07-31-2008, 10:03 PM
But cellphones don't interfere with planes... they tested it on Mythbusters. This whole country is going to the shitter. People are getting offended at the stupidest things, and actually winning over whatever action they take about them. Pretty soon we'll only be able to speak in grunts because people can't take criticism or jokes.

zero
07-31-2008, 10:18 PM
This whole country is going to the shitter. People are getting offended at the stupidest things, and actually winning over whatever action they take about them. Pretty soon we'll only be able to speak in grunts because people can't take criticism or jokes.

No doubt. I just finished reading this article where license plates having the letter combination NGR have been yanked in Arkansas because they were offensive.

http://www.blackvoices.com/blogs/2008/07/28/arkansas-yanks-ngr-license-plates/

phatman76
07-31-2008, 10:18 PM
If congress can link it to commerce, its something they have plenary power to control (absolute power). Airlines have about 0 say in anything if congress decides to exercise its authority to do something like that.

yeah, that's the stuff right there. The supreme court says "interstate commerce" can mean basically anything, so the clause in the Constitution gives Congress control over the airlines, or at least the ability to regulate them. That's why the only passenger trains are owned and run by the government, thank God the USG doesn't own the airplanes...

The framers never intended for this kind of regulation, and even 100 years ago it would have seemed ridiculous, but this is what happens when you underhandedly change the interpretation of a document with court and judge jargon instead of just ammending it legally, you get tripped up later.

LegalSmash
07-31-2008, 11:06 PM
Here is my view on regulation:

Some things affect the vast majority society, such as the content of medicines, the nature and extent of medical procedures allowable, the manner in which bankruptcy is conducted, the amount of gas, weight of planes, etc. ARE things that should be regulated, to prevent massive losses of life due to incompetence that occurs when you put humans in ANY equation.

Congress has the power and the means to do this. Here is the thing however... Congress makes an AGENCY through an organic statute after deciding that something should be regulated, and then staffs the agency with complete fucktards. The Fucktards make the average person's life difficult because they know elbow nor ass of law and generally fail miserably at attempting to correctly implement it.

Airplane patron conduct SHOULD be regulated to a degree. I feel safer knowing that someone who gets into a fistfight in a plane is likely to receive a felony charge or two for endangering me and the other upteen passengers. However, legislating courtesy regarding cell use, is excessive on the basis of convenience to some child molesting member of the senate. If, for example, the cell phone is messing with something like someone's pacemaker, or a hospital machine, or hell, even the coclear implant of some deaf person who may ride in the plane with the person, it should by all means be something that can be restricted, because you (person) are stuck in that plane with X other people and your actions pose a danger to them.

Where, however, your actions pose no danger, but an annoyance, then it should be left the hell alone. I'm annoyed by morbidly obese women on airplanes and their hideous, loud lard-spawn screaming and squealing at the top of their lungs, but that doesn't meant that congress should ban tons of fun from the plane unless she poses a danger of causing a wing over.

Congress needs to get their thumbs out of their congressional pages' assholes and use them to help hold a pen to write a few good ideas for some new laws.

LegalSmash
07-31-2008, 11:09 PM
But cellphones don't interfere with planes... they tested it on Mythbusters. This whole country is going to the shitter. People are getting offended at the stupidest things, and actually winning over whatever action they take about them. Pretty soon we'll only be able to speak in grunts because people can't take criticism or jokes.

Congress does not need to base their decisions on mythbusters.

Repeat
08-01-2008, 06:07 AM
Why is it that congress makes the rules on how airlines run their business. I don't get it. Airlines making a rule to ban cell phones on their planes is one thing. Passing a bill is another. I guess its the American way.

This is the step-by-step, day-by-day, socialistic reformation that I've been preaching about. And it is happening right under our noses


What did one butt-cheek say to the other butt-cheek?


If we stick together, we can stop this shit!


People need to wake up and smell the dumbfuck-flavored-coffee and realize we need to clinch our proverbial ass cheeks together and stop this shit from happening! One by one they are taking our freedoms away...and not many people seem to notice.

Red
08-01-2008, 10:05 AM
Good to see congress tackling the important issues