Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 166

Thread: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    How is that my problem? I don't care what you let your kids watch or how ****ty a parent you are so that you can't control what they watch. You want to use lousy parenting as excuse to infringe on the rights of the individual? That's ****ed up.
    I knew this was coming; so tell me Ikari, how many children do you have and have raised?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    How hard is it for you to comprehend that it is not public? Do you pay to use a frequency? Can you broadcast? No? Didn't think so, because the use of that frequency and power is not yours. That belongs to a company which bought the rights to it. You can merely purchase a device which can pick up and interpret the radiation and display a signal. Tax payer money doesn't support FOX or ABC to broadcast over the air. The companies bought that ability, it's theirs. Case closed.
    As much as you want to rant about what is NOT public, the fact that the Government has ownership of the rights to broadcast and licenses the airwaves you transmit on does indeed make them public.

    Once more in your highly emotional anarchical state, you didn't answer my question; if the frequencies of airwaves were left unregulated, you would have nothing but a mass of confused transmissions and anarchy.

    Avoiding reality is hardly a good debate tactic don't you think?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I can...it's called unplug the TV. Only let it operate when you are around. Be a damned responsible parent instead of trying to social engineer things so you don't have to watch over your kids. "Oh please...won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN"! What piss poor appeal to emotion. It's the oldest false argument on the books. You can't just see the E&M radiation which composes TV and radio signals. You need a device to receive them. Control that device. Jesus Christ, is that too much? You kids can't watch TV if there is no TV.
    So how many children did you say you had and have raised?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I don't know. How difficult is the concept of responsibility to you? Why do you have to have the government solve your problem for you? Baffles me.
    Who is arguing that the Government should solve my problems for me? Must you always conjur up pretend arguments when you rant on such a raw emotional level?

    I know you think the world should revolve around you and your naive myopic perceptions of reality, raising children whom you obviously haven't done and what constitutes the public airwaves, but the REAL world simply doesn't care that you THINK it should revolve around you and your narcissistic views.

    In the REAL world, PUBLIC airwaves is one thing and should be regulated, and PRIVATE airwaves can contain whatever content it desires; Cable and Satellite.

    It is not that hard for you to comprehend is it?

    You donít like it; we get it. But this is not about YOU; it is about ALL of us and the fact that if broadcast transmissions through the airwaves are not controlled, you would have nothing but garbled nonsense. Someone has to do it dude.

    Now take a breath or some meds.

  2. #32
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Carry on Ikari, I know, you are the center of the universe and all that is revolves around you.

    By the way, just for my edification, how old are you? I am willing to bet barely 25 if that.
    I'm a 31 year old scientist (physicist to be precise). I don't believe that the world revolves around me. I merely believe heavily in property rights and the liberty of the individual. Maybe the frustrating thing about me to the waffling type is that all my arguments are rooted in the same philosophy and extremely self-consistent. Where as the wafflers have to tailor each of their arguments to specific cases because they change the base they argue from.

    BTW, I know you couldn't actually counter any of my arguments, that's why you made this deflect post with unsubstantiated claims instead of addressing the issues I brought up. Carry on.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I'm a 31 year old scientist (physicist to be precise). I don't believe that the world revolves around me. I merely believe heavily in property rights and the liberty of the individual. Maybe the frustrating thing about me to the waffling type is that all my arguments are rooted in the same philosophy and extremely self-consistent. Where as the wafflers have to tailor each of their arguments to specific cases because they change the base they argue from.

    BTW, I know you couldn't actually counter any of my arguments, that's why you made this deflect post with unsubstantiated claims instead of addressing the issues I brought up. Carry on.
    Well Mr. 31 year old physicist, how can one counter your arguments when it is so apparent that you lack comprehension of the points they make?

    What do you think the airwaves would be like if the FCC did not regulate and specify who can use those wave lengths. Being a physicist, I would imagine you are very aware of how sounds are transmitted and their frequency responses.

    Do you believe than an UNREGULATED broadcast of transmissions over the air would not result in anarchy and nothing more than garbled interference?

    If so, I would question your self proclaimed status as a physicist.

    By the way, we do believe in a lot of the same things, my version is less naive and more based in REALITY. I rarely susbtitute reality for idealism; I have grown out of that stage.

  4. #34
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Well Mr. 31 year old physicist, how can one counter your arguments when it is so apparent that you lack comprehension of the points they make?

    What do you think the airwaves would be like if the FCC did not regulate and specify who can use those wave lengths. Being a physicist, I would imagine you are very aware of how sounds are transmitted and their frequency responses.

    Do you believe than an UNREGULATED broadcast of transmissions over the air would not result in anarchy and nothing more than garbled interference?
    Two completely different issues. The FCC is perfectly capable of regulating who can broadcast on which frequency, without also regulating F-bombs and wardrobe malfunctions.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Two completely different issues. The FCC is perfectly capable of regulating who can broadcast on which frequency, without also regulating F-bombs and wardrobe malfunctions.
    The majority of the public, myself included do not agree with you Kandahar; remember, the world doesn't revolve around you and Ikari's particular version of mores and feelings on the topic.

  6. #36
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    I knew this was coming; so tell me Ikari, how many children do you have and have raised?
    None, it's irrelevant. My argument is based on property, not the number of children raised. Your children are not my concern. This is deflect and nothing more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    As much as you want to rant about what is NOT public, the fact that the Government has ownership of the rights to broadcast and licenses the airwaves you transmit on does indeed make them public.
    Yes yes, and a private bar is public because we call it that. Follow the money, who pays is who owns. You call it "public", but only to substantiate your point. The government "owns" it, and sells the rights to use it to companies. It merely begs the question as to how the government initially came into possession of a piece of the electromagnetic spectrum. It's like if they outlawed the transmission of red.

    Simplest way to put it is who pays is the owner.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Once more in your highly emotional anarchical state, you didn't answer my question; if the frequencies of airwaves were left unregulated, you would have nothing but a mass of confused transmissions and anarchy.
    This is unsubstantiated claim, hyperbole, and intellectually dishonest argument. At no point do I push for anarchy. In fact, I said that I believe the FCC's sole responsibility should be the protection of property rights. Pirating the airwaves would still be considered an offense because someone else purchased the rights to use that frequency and power and you have no right to infringe upon their property. It's not anarchy. You are only using that deflect because you can't address the actual issue of property rights. That's your inability to properly form an argument and articulate it, not mine. I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from such obvious intellectually dishonest claims in the future when you are unable to properly argue against the base argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Avoiding reality is hardly a good debate tactic don't you think?
    I do think so. But you're oh so good at it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    So how many children did you say you had and have raised?
    Irrelevant, the argument isn't based on how many kids one has raised, it's based in property rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Who is arguing that the Government should solve my problems for me? Must you always conjur up pretend arguments when you rant on such a raw emotional level?
    It's not emotional argument. You in fact are arguing the government should solve your problems for you. You raised children...it's ever so difficult to always police what they want. Therefore, you want the government to come in and police what is on the airwaves so that in case you are unable to properly supervise your children, they can't be exposed to content you do not like. That is the base of what you claim through the use of the FCC to uphold "decency". It is you trying to get the government to solve your problem for you. You big government statists are all the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    I know you think the world should revolve around you and your naive myopic perceptions of reality, raising children whom you obviously haven't done and what constitutes the public airwaves, but the REAL world simply doesn't care that you THINK it should revolve around you and your narcissistic views.
    Ad-hoc. And outright lie. My arguments don't even suggest that I think the world should revolve around me. This is further deflect, insult, and intellectual dishonesty on your part to avoid the base argument. My argument in fact is that it's up to the property owners, not me, to choose what they broadcast on their frequency. You claiming that I think the world revolves around me is nothing short of lie and hyperbole used to deflect from the real issues. Your arguments fall flat and you're oft left with nothing but personal insult, hyperbole, lie, and intellectually dishonest argument. That is measured fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    In the REAL world, PUBLIC airwaves is one thing and should be regulated, and PRIVATE airwaves can contain whatever content it desires; Cable and Satellite.
    In the real world, someone paid to use that piece of the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus they are private, you can not use them; I can not use them. It is the owner's ability to use and broadcast on

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    It is not that hard for you to comprehend is it?
    Tell me? Is property that hard for you to comprehend?

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    You donít like it; we get it. But this is not about YOU; it is about ALL of us and the fact that if broadcast transmissions through the airwaves are not controlled, you would have nothing but garbled nonsense. Someone has to do it dude.
    It's not about me. It's about the free practice of the rights and liberties of the individual. I'm not arguing for my sake. If anything, it makes my job harder as I would have to work harder to servo what I watched and what was allowed to be on TV in my house. It's the antithesis of a personal argument. Someone has to do it? No, that's not true. No one has to do it. Consumer pressure can regulate what is shown, the government need not trample personal property rights to do so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Now take a breath or some meds.
    Yay for more personal insult by the TD.
    Last edited by Ikari; 04-29-09 at 06:59 PM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #37
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    The majority of the public,
    Do you have any recent polling data on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector
    myself included do not agree with you Kandahar;
    Then surely you should be able to refute the arguments I made, instead of ignoring them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector
    remember, the world doesn't revolve around you and Ikari's particular version of mores and feelings on the topic.
    Actually it does. YOU are the one who wants to restrict freedom of speech; the burden of proof is on YOU to explain why it's necessary.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 04-29-09 at 06:57 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #38
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Do you believe than an UNREGULATED broadcast of transmissions over the air would not result in anarchy and nothing more than garbled interference?
    No, anarchy would not result. As I have stated several times now, the FCC's sole responsibility would be property protection. Piracy would still be bad. Proper consumer pressure can take care of the rest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    If so, I would question your self proclaimed status as a physicist.
    You'd better voice your concerns to the scientific journals I am published in. They may wish to know this information about me that you have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    By the way, we do believe in a lot of the same things, my version is less naive and more based in REALITY. I rarely susbtitute reality for idealism; I have grown out of that stage.
    I don't wish to use the government for things we can do ourselves. That's it. Some people wish to enact government to take care of things for them, I don't believe that proper use of government especially when that takes the form of infringing upon the rights of the individual. I believe it so much, that I don't even ask you to stop with your personal insults to me.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    None, it's irrelevant. My argument is based on property, not the number of children raised. Your children are not my concern. This is deflect and nothing more.
    It is absolutely relevant when you make uninformed comments about how one should raise and be responsible for their children when you are clearly incapable of understanding how absurd such assertions are.

    The concept of always knowing where your children are and controlling what they do and watch at all hours of the day can only come from those who have no concept of what they are talking about because they have little or no experience in dealing with the young.

    It is hard to take your arguments serious when they are made in such a vacuum of reality and factual experience.

    I have a personal experience to share with you; I was at a Target store with my formerly very young sons and wife; they were acting up and throwing balls all over the store and I had asked numerous times to stop with no uncertainty what would happen if they didn't.

    The goofing off continued until I grabbed one of them and smacked them pretty hard; which ended the goofing off and putting the balls back in the rack whence they came.

    On the way to the car while carrying my youngest across my shoulder like a sack of potatoes, someone like you stopped me to lecture me on how wrong it was for me to have smacked my child; so I asked him how many children he had. His answer was that he didn't have any children and wasn't even married. I told him he should mind his own f***ing business and come back and see me when he had kids of his own and could speak from authority on the subject. My kids once in the car even asked why that person was being so nosey; even a child can comprehend when someone is beyond their capacity to comprehend them.

    The notion that Kids can be reasoned with or somehow controlled 24-7 can only come from a naive point of view and from the ignorance of never having raised kids or dealing with them on a daily basis.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Do you have any recent polling data on this?

    Then surely you should be able to refute the arguments I made, instead of ignoring them.

    Actually it does. YOU are the one who wants to restrict freedom of speech; the burden of proof is on YOU to explain why it's necessary.
    Do you think it is okay to yell "FIRE" in a crowded auditorium?

Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •