NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just sitting here thinking to myself, why do we have the FCC, well at least for TV? In most, if not all, parts of America, people have to pay for their Cable/sattellite subscription, right? So why then would we need the gov't to tell us what we can and can't watch if we are spending $30+/month on something? I know people usee the excuse of children and yadda yadda. Well if you don't want kids watching it, then lock it. If you don't want to watch smut, then seek out a more wholesome cable company that will put on edited programs, but Christ, I am getting tired of the gov't interfering with me and my desire to see prime time breasts and hearing swear words.

We don't.

However, I predict someone making the inane 'regulate the airwaves' argument in...

three...

two...

We don't.

However, I predict someone making the inane 'regulate the airwaves' argument in...

three...

two...

They regulate the airwaves to keep trash off the air. There is so much trash on the air right now I'm sick of it. :p

They regulate the airwaves to keep trash off the air. There is so much trash on the air right now I'm sick of it. :p

Trash such as plot lines, but hell, no nudity allowed on any of the major chanels, even though we have to PAY to get them. Shouldn't we decide whats on, not the feds?

Trash such as plot lines, but hell, no nudity allowed on any of the major chanels, even though we have to PAY to get them. Shouldn't we decide whats on, not the feds?

I was joking. The FCC is full of idiots who now only listen to Christian parents saying I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT!.

If they don't want to see something on TV then they should change the fucking channel.

I was just sitting here thinking to myself, why do we have the FCC, well at least for TV? In most, if not all, parts of America, people have to pay for their Cable/sattellite subscription, right? So why then would we need the gov't to tell us what we can and can't watch if we are spending $30+/month on something? I know people usee the excuse of children and yadda yadda. Well if you don't want kids watching it, then lock it. If you don't want to watch smut, then seek out a more wholesome cable company that will put on edited programs, but Christ, I am getting tired of the gov't interfering with me and my desire to see prime time breasts and hearing swear words.
You just used the lord's name in vain!:eek:
Those things are indecent, and no one is meant to like them.
The Govt is htere to protect you from yourself.

The FCC does make sure that no one person can hack or bump into the airways or channel of another person.

I was joking. The FCC is full of idiots who now only listen to Christian parents saying I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT!.

If they don't want to see something on TV then they should change the fucking channel.

or just dont have a dam TV at home

You just used the lord's name in vain!:eek:
Those things are indecent, and no one is meant to like them.
The Govt is htere to protect you from yourself.


I really hope you are joking...

We don't.

However, I predict someone making the inane 'regulate the airwaves' argument in...

three...

two...*Does so* :>

The FCC does make sure that no one person can hack or bump into the airways or channel of another person.

The cable companies should regulate that. I'm sure they could. No need for the gov't to interfere.

The cable companies should regulate that. I'm sure they could. No need for the gov't to interfere.

and the radio waves, which include ATC, Ham radio, Walkie Talkies etc.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2006/06/29/fcc-fading-into-irrelevancy/

In the meanwhile...

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2006/06/29/fcc-fading-into-irrelevancy/

In the meanwhile...
This means one thing: THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO REGULATE THE 'NET!!!!

(SCNR, Al knows how it is meant)

I think Angela Merkel will now sue you for copyright infringement, Rejis.

Schäuble, not Merkel! but then, the truth can not be said often enough :-P

The FCC does make sure that no one person can hack or bump into the airways or channel of another person.
Which, of course, could be done without the FCC.

Which, of course, could be done without the FCC.

Aye. You do know of course that the FCC post-dates the proliferation of private radio transmitters, yes?

Which, of course, could be done without the FCC.

Not really. FCC has enforcement powers. If your a cable company and someone is jacking your signal, your only remedy would be costly and lengthy lawsuits etc. It could take years to settle and the damage could be done by then. The FCC has the power to more efficiently do this. However they need to take a 10 year coffee break on content regulations and enforcement.

Not really. FCC has enforcement powers. If your a cable company and someone is jacking your signal, your only remedy would be costly and lengthy lawsuits etc. It could take years to settle and the damage could be done by then.

Clearly the RIAA lawsuits take YEARS to settle agaisnt hackers. Wait... not.

People need to be able to OWN bandwidth like they own land, like they in fact did in the pre-FCC era. Then call the local city cops, same as if someone tresspasses on your land.

I was just sitting here thinking to myself, why do we have the FCC, well at least for TV? In most, if not all, parts of America, people have to pay for their Cable/sattellite subscription, right? So why then would we need the gov't to tell us what we can and can't watch if we are spending $30+/month on something? I know people usee the excuse of children and yadda yadda. Well if you don't want kids watching it, then lock it. If you don't want to watch smut, then seek out a more wholesome cable company that will put on edited programs, but Christ, I am getting tired of the gov't interfering with me and my desire to see prime time breasts and hearing swear words.

I think that the FCC is much needed, however, they as does most of the government needs to be Reformed. The FCC has good intentions but has a lot of work to do.

You say, if we "don't want to watch smut, then seek a more wholesome cable company". That may be easy for you but here in the Tampa Bay area, we only have one cable provider, Brighthouse Networks, they have no competition. We do have Satelite here but I feel the satelites has a lot of problems with keeping services to the subscribers due to weather.

I agree that the place for "prime time breasts and hearing swear words" has no place in basic or extended basic cable. That's why we have HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, etc... If you want to see and hear that stuff those would be the more appropriate channels. Also, there's the Playboy channel, too.

I realize you don't want to hear about the "children and yadda, yadda". The truth of the matter is that people are busy. How do you expect the parents to monitor basic cable channels while their kids watch? Most parents are at work when the kids come home and the list goes on and on.

I realize that you disagree with the government's interference when it comes to your basic cable paid subscription but that's exactly what you are paying for "basic cable".

I recently just upgraded my extended basic to digital cable with a DVR. Awesome promotion Brighthouse Networks offered it at after taxes for about $10 less than I was paying for extended basic so I also added with the upgrade to get HBO and Cinemax. Now I'm paying like only $1 more after all the taxes and whatnot's added up. Total bill: $56 and change. Having the Digital Cable box makes it much easier to control what channels you allow in your household vs the basic cable that comes thru the TV and no box needed.

I'm single, though, but I do have a roommate who has a 3 year old kid but the kid isn't old enough to work the tv yet. I got it hooked up through surround sound and whatnot. I did block all of the Pay-per-view channels and Pay channels themselves, man are their a lot of them. You're able to order right thru the remote control. Bad Idea if you have roommates. So I have those channels "blocked" and passcode protected plus I called Brighthouse and had them knock that $125 credit to order down to $0 that way if I ever want to order any Pay channels, which I highly doubt, I have to call in to Brighthouse.

Control is definately needed for the basic and extended basic channels. To much filth comes through as is, could you imagine by taking the threat of accountability and high fines away what would inevitabley happen with our TVs?

I realize you don't want to hear about the "children and yadda, yadda". The truth of the matter is that people are busy. How do you expect the parents to monitor basic cable channels while their kids watch? Most parents are at work when the kids come home and the list goes on and on.

I see. So since parents cant be bothered or its to "inconvienent" its MUCH better to abrogate the rights of 80% of the viewing public that actually ARNT children and DONT need to be spoonfed by the FCC.

I realize that you disagree with the government's interference when it comes to your basic cable paid subscription but that's exactly what you are paying for "basic cable".

So since im paying for "basic cable" with the same green money that parents with children do, why does the word basic somehow mean that government interference with content is somehow then justified?


I'm single, though, but I do have a roommate who has a 3 year old kid but the kid isn't old enough to work the tv yet. I got it hooked up through surround sound and whatnot. I did block all of the Pay-per-view channels and Pay channels themselves, man are their a lot of them. You're able to order right thru the remote control. Bad Idea if you have roommates. So I have those channels "blocked" and passcode protected plus I called Brighthouse and had them knock that $125 credit to order down to $0 that way if I ever want to order any Pay channels, which I highly doubt, I have to call in to Brighthouse.

So you concede that blocking channels is effective. So why abbrogate the rest of the countries right to view what they wish when they wish?

Control is definately needed for the basic and extended basic channels. To much filth comes through as is, could you imagine by taking the threat of accountability and high fines away what would inevitabley happen with our TVs?

Yea we might get more compelling programming like the Sopranos and actually have something interesting and non-vanilla to watch for once. Censorship is the death of creativity.

You have the FCC to protect the sensibilities of silver-haired grannies what haven't drawn breath since the end of the Eisenhower administration.

I see. So since parents cant be bothered or its to "inconvienent" its MUCH better to abrogate the rights of 80% of the viewing public that actually ARNT children and DONT need to be spoonfed by the FCC.

Did you not hear that parents must go to work. It isn't like it used to be many years ago where one part of the parents were able to bring home a descent pay to live on but now is required to both in the most part. A vast majority pays for the basic cable due to it's costing in most case is cheapest. You get what you pay for. If you want the nudity and obsessive vulgarity you ought to pay for it. I am standing my ground when comes to my opinion on this matter. Basic cable is just that "Basic".

So since im paying for "basic cable" with the same green money that parents with children do, why does the word basic somehow mean that government interference with content is somehow then justified?

As I said, you get what you pay for. Basic is just that, basic.

So you concede that blocking channels is effective. So why abbrogate the rest of the countries right to view what they wish when they wish?

No, I don't concede that blocking channels is effective. A lot of kids are smarter than their parents when comes to electronics (computers, tv, video games, etc...) In fact, when I had spoken to my Brighthouse Networks represtative, she had told me of a case their currently encountering, about this lady who blocked the pay per view and other Pay channels and also took away her credit to prevent ordering the channels and her grandson (not sure how old he is) is still accessing the channels ending the result in the grandmother having a much higher bill. Both Brighthouse and the grandmother are mindboggled about what seems to keep occurring. Kids seem to be geniuses when it comes to electronic equipment. Some of the best hackers in the world are minors. So, definately, no on effective channel blocking. Also, note that each channel on basic cable has a wide range of programs.

Yea we might get more compelling programming like the Sopranos and actually have something interesting and non-vanilla to watch for once. Censorship is the death of creativity.

Figures you'd turn this into a race issue.....:rolleyes:

Not really. FCC has enforcement powers. If your a cable company and someone is jacking your signal, your only remedy would be costly and lengthy lawsuits etc. It could take years to settle and the damage could be done by then. The FCC has the power to more efficiently do this. However they need to take a 10 year coffee break on content regulations and enforcement.

The FCC has no power at all, the federal government backs them up when they feel like fucking people over.

If you want the nudity and obsessive vulgarity you ought to pay for it. I am standing my ground when comes to my opinion on this matter. Basic cable is just that "Basic".
I already pay for it, but I don't get it.

Both Brighthouse and the grandmother are mindboggled about what seems to keep occurring. Kids seem to be geniuses when it comes to electronic equipment.
I would bet it is because they are both fucking idiots.

Figures you'd turn this into a race issue.....:rolleyes:

Excuse me, but how is this:


Yea we might get more compelling programming like the Sopranos and actually have something interesting and non-vanilla to watch for once. Censorship is the death of creativity.

turning the debate into a "race issue?"

Did you not hear that parents must go to work. It isn't like it used to be many years ago where one part of the parents were able to bring home a descent pay to live on but now is required to both in the most part. A vast majority pays for the basic cable due to it's costing in most case is cheapest.

I see. So since some people cant afford or are simply unwilling to properly supervise thier children like they are supposed to i have to pay? Because both parents have to work does that mean i have to drive thier kids to the doctors office too? If you cant afford to properly supervise and care for your children then perhaps you should have reconsidered having them in the first place. Stop making thier care my problem and my burden.



No, I don't concede that blocking channels is effective. A lot of kids are smarter than their parents when comes to electronics (computers, tv, video games, etc...) In fact, when I had spoken to my Brighthouse Networks represtative, she had told me of a case their currently encountering, about this lady who blocked the pay per view and other Pay channels and also took away her credit to prevent ordering the channels and her grandson (not sure how old he is) is still accessing the channels ending the result in the grandmother having a much higher bill. Both Brighthouse and the grandmother are mindboggled about what seems to keep occurring. Kids seem to be geniuses when it comes to electronic equipment. Some of the best hackers in the world are minors. So, definately, no on effective channel blocking. Also, note that each channel on basic cable has a wide range of programs.

So let me get this straight. Our blocking system, that you yourself use with seemingly no problems, is being overrun and outsmarted by an army of minor mutant secret ninja baby brainiacs that have outsmarted the punny foolish adults and now own majority shares in Time Warner?



Figures you'd turn this into a race issue.....:rolleyes:

I would appreciate if you could cite where i did this in any way. I humbly await your apology when you fail to do so.


P.S. Oh and btw if you are THAT hard up for money, then id suggest you sell the TV and take your kid to the park.

I see. So since some people cant afford or are simply unwilling to properly supervise thier children like they are supposed to i have to pay? Because both parents have to work does that mean i have to drive thier kids to the doctors office too? If you cant afford to properly supervise and care for your children then perhaps you should have reconsidered having them in the first place. Stop making thier care my problem and my burden.
I agree.

Honestly, is it really that hard to supervise the little blighter? Or for that matter to change the channel?

Not really. FCC has enforcement powers.
And this couldn't be handled via the homesteading principle?


If your a cable company and someone is jacking your signal, your only remedy would be costly and lengthy lawsuits etc.
It doesn't have to be either costly or lengthy.

I'm just curious:

Can someone tell me about the first occurance of a child becoming unbalanced, twisted, and unstable after seeing boobies or hearing swear words on TV?

Thanks in advance.

Aye. You do know of course that the FCC post-dates the proliferation of private radio transmitters, yes?
I've heard of that. And that the FCC had something to do with preventing FM radio from getting off the ground for a while.

I'm just curious:

Can someone tell me about the first occurance of a child becoming unbalanced, twisted, and unstable after seeing boobies or hearing swear words on TV?

Thanks in advance.
I heard plenty of swearing from my parents as a child, and saw boobies plenty. I'm perfectly normal... well... at least sane... err...

Then again, I didn't watch a lot of TV so...

Figures you'd turn this into a race issue.....:rolleyes:

Ha. Any mention of anything colored makes it a race issue. You are funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U058nz0Jepg
This is playing in my head right now. :D

Clearly the RIAA lawsuits take YEARS to settle agaisnt hackers. Wait... not.

You just answered your own question. The RIAA lawsuits against hackers did take years and in fact continue on appeals to this date, and will for years to come. But imagine if you tuned into NBC and instead of watching Heros some nightmare ghost of the Numa Numa guy started appearing in the background. Whats NBC going to do..sue and maybe get an injunction in a few weeks or months when it gets to the courts docket? The federal government can shut it down the next morning and arrest those responsible and subject them to possible imprisionment.

People need to be able to OWN bandwidth like they own land, like they in fact did in the pre-FCC era. Then call the local city cops, same as if someone tresspasses on your land.

Your confusing terms here. The FCC doesnt equal the function of policemen and policemen can not substitute for them. Policemen enforce the laws only. The question in your scenario is what set of rules are your local cops following? Whos deciding them? The FCC MAKES AND enforces the laws. A very important distinction. Bandwidth is a public utility. Privatesation of a public utility is a graduate degree level semester of classes in its complexity. In a nutshell its had mixed but mostly bad results.

The FCC represents so many of the things I loathe, Keynesian Regulation and Christian Ueber-morality playing a role in the government.

Bandwidth is a public utility.
Prove it.


Privatesation of a public utility is a graduate degree level semester of classes in its complexity. In a nutshell its had mixed but mostly bad results.
No, it nearly always has good results (better service/response, lower costs).

I see. So since some people cant afford or are simply unwilling to properly supervise thier children like they are supposed to i have to pay? Because both parents have to work does that mean i have to drive thier kids to the doctors office too? If you cant afford to properly supervise and care for your children then perhaps you should have reconsidered having them in the first place. Stop making thier care my problem and my burden.

I suppose, kind of anyways, meaning, pay a little bit more for the benefits of full nudity, and major swear words. Fact is, is I think the FCC is pretty lenient and it does allow certain swear words and certain bare body parts through the cracks. No, you don't need to drive anybody's kids to the doctor office, you're being silly now. :p I really don't consider haveing "Clean TV" as a problem. To be honest, they're some things that slip through. A lot on TV can be considered offensive by many yet they still show it, anyways. I've personally heard. "Fuck" on the USA and other basic cable channels before, not often but I have. Then, they also say, what some would consider as "minor" swear words quite frequently and when they do have the more harsher words in the programs, you get the beep, which anybody with a half a brain should be able to pick up on including the kids.

So let me get this straight. Our blocking system, that you yourself use with seemingly no problems, is being overrun and outsmarted by an army of minor mutant secret ninja baby brainiacs that have outsmarted the punny foolish adults and now own majority shares in Time Warner?

Now, this is a good way to debate. :rolleyes:

I would appreciate if you could cite where i did this in any way. I humbly await your apology when you fail to do so.

I took the "non-vanilla" remark as in non-white, to be racially motivated. No apologies.

P.S. Oh and btw if you are THAT hard up for money, then id suggest you sell the TV and take your kid to the park.

I never said I was "THAT hard up for money" I am single and I don't need to worry about the 3 year old that my roommate has, either. His wife is going through the US Army basic training and he doesn't work so is perfectly able to supervise his child aroung the clock. I blocked my channels for the simple fact that I do have 2 different roommates and it isn't that I don't trust them, I'm simply leaning on the side of caution. As for the cable, I currently and recently(as in within the last 2 weeks) have, Thanks to a Promotion by Brighthouse Networks I'm practically paying the same as I was for Extended Basic. I now have Digital Cable with a DVR plus HBO and Cinemax (both of those premium channels comes with like 15 channels each).

I took the "non-vanilla" remark as in non-white, to be racially motivated. No apologies.

You're kidding right?

You're kidding right?

You have to ask? :p

I took the "non-vanilla" remark as in non-white, to be racially motivated. No apologies.


In the English language, universally accepted informal synonym of vanilla is plain. Look it up. Please cite in a dictionary where the word white is even referred to. Im still waiting for that apology.

OHOH!! I also mentioned Sopranos. Could you please tell me what i was saying about Italians as well? Im dying to know. thanks!

The FCC only covers what is on free broadcast. Most cable and satellite stations self-regulate.

But....if there's no FCC then who will people complain too when they're too appalled by what they see on TV to change the channel?

Trash such as plot lines, but hell, no nudity allowed on any of the major chanels, even though we have to PAY to get them. Shouldn't we decide whats on, not the feds?

Well, there's plenty of nudity on HBO, but anyway, what gets me is I saw a chick sawn in half with a chainsaw at 9pm on FX one night, and yet that's LESS disturbing than breasts? You know, those things that babies suckle and EVERY WOMAN HAS?!

God I hate this country.

Well, there's plenty of nudity on HBO, but anyway, what gets me is I saw a chick sawn in half with a chainsaw at 9pm on FX one night, and yet that's LESS disturbing than breasts? You know, those things that babies suckle and EVERY WOMAN HAS?!

God I hate this country.

For some reason violence is just more acceptable here. Now Germany on the other hand, sex is perfectly acceptable while violence is not. Why I don't know. I guess the government thinks if the populace is exposed to too much blood and guts the people will want to invade Poland again. ;)

we have an FCC because the Govt likes power and the people at the head of the FCC aren't about to let the department be axed. the FCC is not actually under Govt control so they can make what ever laws they want. Welcome to the Start of the Police State :(

Welcome to the Start of the Police State :(

What do you mean start? We're living in it right now baby. (and have been for about the past 100 years)

What do you mean start? We're living in it right now baby. (and have been for about the past 100 years)

it has been around for the past 100 years but its not truly a police state because 99% of Americans don't know it exists, if fact they are the reason that it exists. props to you if you know its here. :(

The FCC also regulates interference of wireless devices so that we don't have static on all our cell phones and radios, and planes flying into each other because someone's I-Pod interfered with the avionics.

The FCC also regulates interference of wireless devices so that we don't have static on all our cell phones and radios, and planes flying into each other because someone's I-Pod interfered with the avionics.

thats bs and you know it

TO: Intestinal fluids

I now stand corrected in your use of "Vanilla" and I do apologize to you for the misinterpretation. However, I have heard racial comments coming from blacks using the term "Vanilla" in a racial use against whites. Please except my apologies.

thats bs and you know it

Yeah I do, but someone has to play devil's advocate.

Another reason for my misinterpretation of your intent (This is Not another excuse for I don't feel that their is any acceptable excuse for my ignorant misinterpretation) is because to many times have I heard today's television is "White TV" and how television isn't equal or fair to the Blacks, etc...

As this is NO excuse, just a reason that obviously influences my irrational thinking. Again, I do apologize.

The cable companies should regulate that. I'm sure they could. No need for the gov't to interfere.

The FCC does a lot more than just regulate programming that is NOT on cable or satellite. Cable and satellite companys can put any programing they want on their services. Cable companies have absolutely nothing to do with free radio and television broadcasting so they couldn't regulate it.

To learn more about the FCC and what it does, go here http://www.fcc.gov/aboutus.html

Which, of course, could be done without the FCC.

Ok, how would that be done? Who would do it?

I was just sitting here thinking to myself, why do we have the FCC, well at least for TV? In most, if not all, parts of America, people have to pay for their Cable/sattellite subscription, right? So why then would we need the gov't to tell us what we can and can't watch if we are spending $30+/month on something? I know people usee the excuse of children and yadda yadda. Well if you don't want kids watching it, then lock it. If you don't want to watch smut, then seek out a more wholesome cable company that will put on edited programs, but Christ, I am getting tired of the gov't interfering with me and my desire to see prime time breasts and hearing swear words.

As long as airwave broadcast rights are marketable, then we need the FCC. Not that we need them to get involved with half of what they do, but ideally anyone should be allowed to broadcast whatever they want on the airwaves. Problem is, if we all do that, then it's all going to be static. So we need the government to sort it all out. And they do a shitty job because people have gotten used to the idea that TV companies are something for big powerful people, not Joe Everyman, and don't hold the FCC to account.

But they have no right to get involved in Cable and internet communications.

Ok, how would that be done? Who would do it?

well there are privet companies that could do it.
besides who says it needs to be done?

thats bs and you know it

Umm...no, it isn't BS. A portion of the aircraft Instrument Landing System (ILS) is very close to the FM Broadcast band. Without ILS, aircraft cannot land in reduced visibility weather conditions. If the FCC were not around to regulate the frequencies and set transmission standards to reduce interference, there could be some very serious consequences for aircraft.

Also, Personal Electronic Devices (PED) such as computers, IPOD, etc. that people carry on and use on aircraft can interfere with the aircraft navigation systems. FCC makes rules to restrict emissions from these devices so the interference with avionics is minimized. Without restrictions like these, you would not be able to use any PED during any phase of you flight. As it is now, you are usually restricted from using them only during the take off and landing phases of flight.

Umm...no, it isn't BS. A portion of the aircraft Instrument Landing System (ILS) is very close to the FM Broadcast band. Without ILS, aircraft cannot land in reduced visibility weather conditions. If the FCC were not around to regulate the frequencies and set transmission standards to reduce interference, there could be some very serious consequences for aircraft.

Also, Personal Electronic Devices (PED) such as computers, IPOD, etc. that people carry on and use on aircraft can interfere with the aircraft navigation systems. FCC makes rules to restrict emissions from these devices so the interference with avionics is minimized. Without restrictions like these, you would not be able to use any PED during any phase of you flight. As it is now, you are usually restricted from using them only during the take off and landing phases of flight.

Same goes for the Marine Industries. The airwaves must be regulated to prevent all sorts of chaos and interferences. Example is the FCC has it where the boaters are only allowed to have 25 watts of power while a land station, such as I work for, must be licensed and can only have an output power of 50 watts and they also assign you certain frequencies for your communications in MHz

Umm...no, it isn't BS. A portion of the aircraft Instrument Landing System (ILS) is very close to the FM Broadcast band. Without ILS, aircraft cannot land in reduced visibility weather conditions. If the FCC were not around to regulate the frequencies and set transmission standards to reduce interference, there could be some very serious consequences for aircraft.

Also, Personal Electronic Devices (PED) such as computers, IPOD, etc. that people carry on and use on aircraft can interfere with the aircraft navigation systems. FCC makes rules to restrict emissions from these devices so the interference with avionics is minimized. Without restrictions like these, you would not be able to use any PED during any phase of you flight. As it is now, you are usually restricted from using them only during the take off and landing phases of flight.

the point is that the Govt does not have to be the one in charge of that. And it all of the interference stuff is true then why are they manufacturing planes that allow for people to use there cell phones and have internet capability's?

the point is that the Govt does not have to be the one in charge of that. And it all of the interference stuff is true then why are they manufacturing planes that allow for people to use there cell phones and have internet capability's?

Actually, I would disagree considering it is involves the government's interest. The government uses the airwaves for special transmissions within our Air Force, Coast Guard, Army, and so on. Also, different bodies of our Government uses certain aspects of our airwaves so I definately disagree that they don't have to be in charge of it. It greatly concerns their interests and can also be deemed to affect our National interests. There is so much that the average Joe doesn't either know or understand when it's about the airwaves.

No, it nearly always has good results (better service/response, lower costs).

One word. Enron.

Actually, I would disagree considering it is involves the government's interest. The government uses the airwaves for special transmissions within our Air Force, Coast Guard, Army, and so on. Also, different bodies of our Government uses certain aspects of our airwaves so I definately disagree that they don't have to be in charge of it. It greatly concerns their interests and can also be deemed to affect our National interests. There is so much that the average Joe doesn't either know or understand when it's about the airwaves.

the airwaves operate at different frequencies, yes it is true that the Govt does have a large interest regarding th airwaves, but that does not mean that they need to be controlling the civilians side of the air. I think that the Govt does have a right to protect its interests regarding the military and inter body/branch communications. but i see no reason for them to control what is placed on public air

One word. Enron.

thats what happens when you put a Govt in control of things it has no business in

Ok, how would that be done? Who would do it?
First-comer/homesteading principle, resolved in arbitration.

One word. Enron.
Enron utilized the exact same accounting methods as the US Federal Government.

And I have two words for you: Cabrini Green.

Umm...no, it isn't BS. A portion of the aircraft Instrument Landing System (ILS) is very close to the FM Broadcast band. Without ILS, aircraft cannot land in reduced visibility weather conditions. If the FCC were not around to regulate the frequencies and set transmission standards to reduce interference, there could be some very serious consequences for aircraft.

Also, Personal Electronic Devices (PED) such as computers, IPOD, etc. that people carry on and use on aircraft can interfere with the aircraft navigation systems. FCC makes rules to restrict emissions from these devices so the interference with avionics is minimized. Without restrictions like these, you would not be able to use any PED during any phase of you flight. As it is now, you are usually restricted from using them only during the take off and landing phases of flight.

I'm pretty sure the FAA regulates what happens on an aircraft not the FCC.


A lot of parents don't care what their kids watch. I don't think cleaner TV is needed since there really is no evidence that it effects kids in any way.

I'm pretty sure the FAA regulates what happens on an aircraft not the FCC.


A lot of parents don't care what their kids watch. I don't think cleaner TV is needed since there really is no evidence that it effects kids in any way.

I don't think h/she were referring to the happenings on an aircraft. The FAA is supposed to know the routes and track the planes and protect the no-fly zones and so forth.

The FCC are the ones to enforce and regulate the airwaves, communications, and whatnot.

why do we have the FCC, well at least for TV? In most, if not all, parts of America, people have to pay for their Cable/sattellite subscription, right? So why then would we need the gov't to tell us what we can and can't watch if we are spending $30+/month on something? Well if you don't want kids watching it, then lock it. If you don't want to watch smut, then seek out a more wholesome cable company that will put on edited programs, but Christ, I am getting tired of the gov't interfering with me and my desire to see prime time breasts and hearing swear words.

Cable tv packages include the networks, ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX etc. The FCC concerns itself with those, it doesn't cover basic cable stations such as ESPN/Sci-Fi/Spike etc, but basic cable tends to have the same standards and practices as the networks when it comes to language/nudity etc.

As for your bleating about "if you don't want your kids to watch it, then lock it, that's simple stupid. It doesn't work, if for no other reason then most parents are too lazy to figure out how to work the lockbox on their tv's and the system makes some of the most arbitrarily stupid decisions imaginable as to what and what not to lock out.

And if you are so hellbent to see prime time breasts and hear swear words, go to the fucking vid store.

Also, Personal Electronic Devices (PED) such as computers, IPOD, etc. that people carry on and use on aircraft can interfere with the aircraft navigation systems.

Wrong. All modern aircraft are shielded against such interference. And only a very certain frequency range can actually interfere on some old, unshielded aircraft. (This is why every should be forced to watch Mythbusters.)

Cable tv packages include the networks, ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX etc. The FCC concerns itself with those, it doesn't cover basic cable stations such as ESPN/Sci-Fi/Spike etc, but basic cable tends to have the same standards and practices as the networks when it comes to language/nudity etc.

As for your bleating about "if you don't want your kids to watch it, then lock it, that's simple stupid. It doesn't work, if for no other reason then most parents are too lazy to figure out how to work the lockbox on their tv's and the system makes some of the most arbitrarily stupid decisions imaginable as to what and what not to lock out.

And if you are so hellbent to see prime time breasts and hear swear words, go to the fucking vid store.

The parents could always just change the channel or not even have a TV in the first place if they don't want to see "filth" on TV.

Boys understand mighty penises.

Boys understand mighty penises.

Yes. But the FCC wouldn't allow that!

Because if we don't, the adds for cialis will have pictures.

So what would happen if the FCC didn't exist?