• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Unlocking Cell Phones Now Illegal In The US

Henrin said:
They protesting contractual law finding itself into criminal law. They understand the reason this occurred is because of political favors being done for the corporate world and like anyone against corporatism should do they're protesting such actions.
Click to expand...

Yes, by supporting breaking the law. Look, there are people that don't agree Pot should be illegal, however if they possess it or smoke it they are still breaking the law.

You can try to justify it all you want, it's still breaking the law.
 
TheNextEra said:
Yes, by supporting breaking the law. Look, there are people that don't agree Pot should be illegal, however if they possess it or smoke it they are still breaking the law.

You can try to justify it all you want, it's still breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Yes, unjust laws get ignored and I don't care about it. Tell someone that cares.
 
Henrin said:
Yes, unjust laws get ignored and I don't care about it. Tell someone that cares.
Click to expand...

Obviously you care or you wouldn't have replied. It's still breaking the laws so I guess it's ok for anyone to break a law as long as they feel it's "unjust" right?

No skin off my back, if you break the law and get caught, have fun with the fine or jail.
 
TheNextEra said:
Obviously you care or you wouldn't have replied. It's still breaking the laws so I guess it's ok for anyone to break a law as long as they feel it's "unjust" right?
Click to expand...

Moving contractual into the realm of criminal law is unjust.
 
Henrin said:
Moving contractual into the realm of criminal law is unjust.
Click to expand...

According to YOU. Anyways, if you feel the risk is justified, so be it. Just don't go whining and complaining when you are caught.
 
TheNextEra said:
According to YOU. Anyways, if you feel the risk is justified, so be it. Just don't go whining and complaining when you are caught.
Click to expand...

According to the definitions and purposes of the individual branches of the law.
 
Henrin said:
According to the definitions and purposes of the individual branches of the law.
Click to expand...

Sure thing, sure thing. You go fight the good fight now.
 
TheNextEra said:
Yes, by supporting breaking the law. Look, there are people that don't agree Pot should be illegal, however if they possess it or smoke it they are still breaking the law.

You can try to justify it all you want, it's still breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Breaking a contract between a consumer and supplier has historically never been in criminal law. How about instead of saying that it's all the same, you give actual reasons as to why it should be a 5 year prison sentence and a $500k fine. It's the exact reason we said it was, because lobbyists wanted it that way.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I want you to name one civilian contract violation penalty that carries the punishment of 5 years in prison and a $500k fine. The puppetmasters are pulling at the strings of our politicians. No other consumer / provider agreement in the US has anything even remotely similar in punishment, and from what I understand almost none of them are handled by criminal law.
Click to expand...

I've already stated, twice, that it's a contract issue and that this law is not needed.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Breaking a contract between a consumer and supplier has historically never been in criminal law. How about instead of saying that it's all the same, you give actual reasons as to why it should be a 5 year prison sentence and a $500k fine. It's the exact reason we said it was, because lobbyists wanted it that way.
Click to expand...

Breaking a contract sure has been criminal. Try breaking your att&t contract and then don't pay the bill. It goes to collections and then legal.

As for why I think it should be a 5 year prison sentence or $500k fine, the answer is.......I don't. I don't think there should be penalties for many things that are like pot smoking, speeding, etc. However, they are there nonetheless.

I simply find it amusing that righties like to get on their soapbox and complain about Potsmokers breaking the law and right here are righties that support breaking the law when THEY feel it is ok. Amusing is all to me.
 
TheNextEra said:
It's funny watching all the righties supporting breaking the law. :lamo
Click to expand...

I'm not supporting anything at this point, but the Left is always up in arms over Corporate America screwing the little guy............except now.
 
TheNextEra said:
Breaking a contract sure has been criminal. Try breaking your att&t contract and then don't pay the bill. It goes to collections and then legal.

As for why I think it should be a 5 year prison sentence or $500k fine, the answer is.......I don't. I don't think there should be penalties for many things that are like pot smoking, speeding, etc. However, they are there nonetheless.

I simply find it amusing that righties like to get on their soapbox and complain about Potsmokers breaking the law and right here are righties that support breaking the law when THEY feel it is ok. Amusing is all to me.
Click to expand...

You're confusing tort and criminal law. Contract violations are torts - civil wrongs - and they fall under a completely different set of laws than criminal law, i.e. felonies and misdemeanors. They are heard in completely different courts that operate under completely different rules. That's not to say that you can't go to jail for tort violations. There was such a thing a debtor's prisons at one time afterall.
 
TheNextEra said:
Breaking a contract sure has been criminal. Try breaking your att&t contract and then don't pay the bill. It goes to collections and then legal.

As for why I think it should be a 5 year prison sentence or $500k fine, the answer is.......I don't. I don't think there should be penalties for many things that are like pot smoking, speeding, etc. However, they are there nonetheless.

I simply find it amusing that righties like to get on their soapbox and complain about Potsmokers breaking the law and right here are righties that support breaking the law when THEY feel it is ok. Amusing is all to me.
Click to expand...

I'm against all laws that don't have a victim, especially drug laws. However, speeding, smoking, assault, all of those things are under criminal law. Breaking a contract is not a criminal offense. It goes to collections, where your credit will be destroyed, or they may enlist help from the government to take the money from your account. In no situation does anyone ever go to jail over a consumer - producer contract. So please, explain to me why this should be the one exception to the rule.


If I sell you a hot dog, but make you sign a hot dog contract first that says you're not allowed to put mustard on it, and you do, should the government be able to imprison you for years for violating that contract?
 
Fisher said:
My problem is that for as much as they charge you for a telephone, even if it is at "special rate", then it is your phone regardless of what their fine print says. The next time mine breaks after I am out of my contract I am switching to straight talk or one of those jobbies. I am sick of AT&T already.
Click to expand...

Prepaid is much better imo.
I've got Metro PCS, just bought a newer smart phone from their 4g line up.
The phone was $100 + I have a $50 mail in rebate.
The service for unlimited calling, text and 2.5gigs of 4g is $50.

The contract carriers can't beat that.
Was an ATT customer for years.
 
American said:
I'm not supporting anything at this point, but the Left is always up in arms over Corporate America screwing the little guy............except now.
Click to expand...

And the right is always up in arms over people breaking the law, except now.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Prepaid is much better imo.
I've got Metro PCS, just bought a newer smart phone from their 4g line up.
The phone was $100 + I have a $50 mail in rebate.
The service for unlimited calling, text and 2.5gigs of 4g is $50.

The contract carriers can't beat that.
Was an ATT customer for years.
Click to expand...

Yeah I broke my phone about a year ago and it was when I did not have time to figure it all out so I renewed my contract with ATT for 2 years to save a couple hundred bucks. Come next year, I am switching. I have no problem with their service--it is just the heavy handed way the try to force you into their contract that annoys me.
 
Fisher said:
Yeah I broke my phone about a year ago and it was when I did not have time to figure it all out so I renewed my contract with ATT for 2 years to save a couple hundred bucks. Come next year, I am switching. I have no problem with their service--it is just the heavy handed way the try to force you into their contract that annoys me.
Click to expand...

You pay more up front for the phone, but you more than make up for it, in the service costs.
Metro doesn't have as wide of coverage as ATT, but I don't care, as I rarely travel outside of their network.

ATT can suck nuts, as fair as I'm concerned, I over paid them for services for way too long.
 
It is certainly contradictory to public policy and the free right to contract when businesses can impose such predatory contracts on people. Certain pieces of technology are a necessary part of life. Cell phones are a part of that, as are cars and internet capable computers. The companies that gate access to these technologies have a completely unconscionable disparity of power in any kind of contract negotiation. It is not right nor beneficial to society that a few private interests be able to exercise so much power over the public. Predatory contracts like those employed by call carriers oughtn't to be permitted. And using criminal prosecution to protect the power of these businesses is absolutely contrary to personal liberty.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
You pay more up front for the phone, but you more than make up for it, in the service costs.
Metro doesn't have as wide of coverage as ATT, but I don't care, as I rarely travel outside of their network.

ATT can suck nuts, as fair as I'm concerned, I over paid them for services for way too long.
Click to expand...

I am actually a little lucky--ATT is cheaper for me than straight talk or other providers right now. I had a lifetime rate guarantee with another provider as long as I did not change my service package that AT&T has to honor since they bought out that company just after they gave me this great deal. I never even use anything close to my package limits.
 
Paschendale said:
It is certainly contradictory to public policy and the free right to contract when businesses can impose such predatory contracts on people. Certain pieces of technology are a necessary part of life. Cell phones are a part of that, as are cars and internet capable computers. The companies that gate access to these technologies have a completely unconscionable disparity of power in any kind of contract negotiation. It is not right nor beneficial to society that a few private interests be able to exercise so much power over the public. Predatory contracts like those employed by call carriers oughtn't to be permitted. And using criminal prosecution to protect the power of these businesses is absolutely contrary to personal liberty.
Click to expand...

I'd be willing to accept it if the opposite party, the AT&T executives and employees, could go to jail when my contract is violated as well.
 
Paschendale said:
It is certainly contradictory to public policy and the free right to contract when businesses can impose such predatory contracts on people. Certain pieces of technology are a necessary part of life. Cell phones are a part of that, as are cars and internet capable computers. The companies that gate access to these technologies have a completely unconscionable disparity of power in any kind of contract negotiation. It is not right nor beneficial to society that a few private interests be able to exercise so much power over the public. Predatory contracts like those employed by call carriers oughtn't to be permitted. And using criminal prosecution to protect the power of these businesses is absolutely contrary to personal liberty.
Click to expand...

Cars, cell phones, internet access are not necessary to life. They may make life more convenient but they certainly aren't necessary.
 
Gaius46 said:
Cars, cell phones, internet access are not necessary to life. They may make life more convenient but they certainly aren't necessary.
Click to expand...

Obtain a middle class job without all three of those. Go ahead. The car is SOMETIMES negotiable in a very urban area, but not always. I live in the middle of Washington DC and I need my car sometimes for work. The metro and buses can't get my everywhere I need to go. No one in the suburbs can operate without one. Or try to start a business without all three of those things. You will fail.
 
"In the US almost all phones are subsidized, hence you are paying for the phone over your contract... it is especially relevant for the expensive iPhones.... unless you actually believe that the nice shinny iPhone 5 actually only costs 200 dollars..... if so, then I have a bridge in San Francisco I want to sell you."

I would be amazed if an Iphone costs more than $20 to manufacture in China.
 
fmw said:
"In the US almost all phones are subsidized, hence you are paying for the phone over your contract... it is especially relevant for the expensive iPhones.... unless you actually believe that the nice shinny iPhone 5 actually only costs 200 dollars..... if so, then I have a bridge in San Francisco I want to sell you."

I would be amazed if an Iphone costs more than $20 to manufacture in China.
Click to expand...

Assembly is only a small portion of Apples' expenses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom