Cellphone calls on planes? Don't ask the feds

Palmpilot

Palmpilot

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
22,442
Location
PUDBY
Display Name
Display name:
Richard Palm
http://news.yahoo.com/cellphone-calls-planes-don-39-t-ask-feds-192327690--finance.html

Excerpt:

WASHINGTON (AP) — It looks like the government is more conflicted about cellphones on planes than most travelers. Even as one federal agency considers allowing the calls, another now wants to make sure that doesn't happen.

Passengers — particularly those who fly often — oppose allowing calls in flight, polls show. In line with that sentiment, the Transportation Department signaled in a notice posted online Friday that it is considering retaining the 23-year-old ban on the calls and asked for public comments. But the notice comes just two months after the Federal Communications Commission voted to pursue lifting the ban....​
 
People are already annoying enough on airplanes. We don't need to add phone calls to the mix.

Edit: looks like Larry beat me to it.
 
Geico266 said:
:rofl:

Space Pimp? :rofl:
Click to expand...

It's an inside joke that only I get, but it makes me smile when I see it.

Basically I called my dad and asked him for some financial advice. He told me "don't spend money like a damned space pimp and you will always have cash in your account."
 
Last edited:
Text only. If that doesn't give you enough info,you must be real old.
 
Oh for pity's sake. Humanity really sucks sometimes.

If there is no legitimate safety justification for the ban, if must be lifted. I would hope that future bans would be overturned on first amendment grounds.

People seem so quick to discard fundamental rights when exercise thereof causes even the slightest personal annoyance. They'll never get to the point of pledging their lives, fortunes, or sacred honor so they can exercise their own freedoms if they can't abide a fellow citizen exercising theirs on occasion.

The tyranny of the majority - the greatest threat to freedom in a democracy.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Oh for pity's sake. Humanity really sucks sometimes.

If there is no legitimate safety justification for the ban, if must be lifted. I would hope that future bans would be overturned on first amendment grounds
Click to expand...

The first amendment doesn't work that way. You don't have freedom of speech in an enclosed compartment on public transportation. No one can shout about religous beliefs on an airliner. The crew will tell them to pipe down and then restrain them if they don't. Should you be allowed to talk on your cellphone just because you want to even though it annoys 100 other people? Of course not. You do not have that right. You are not more important than 100 of your fellow citizens. Does it really suck for you to be forced to be considerate of your fellow man?
 
Text with the hunt and peck one finger tech. ,never thought you had to have thumbs.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Oh for pity's sake. Humanity really sucks sometimes.

If there is no legitimate safety justification for the ban, if must be lifted. I would hope that future bans would be overturned on first amendment grounds.

People seem so quick to discard fundamental rights when exercise thereof causes even the slightest personal annoyance. They'll never get to the point of pledging their lives, fortunes, or sacred honor so they can exercise their own freedoms if they can't abide a fellow citizen exercising theirs on occasion.

The tyranny of the majority - the greatest threat to freedom in a democracy.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% against the government forced smoking bans in establishments. But, since I quit smoking, I don't go to places that allow smoking. It's just rude to sit down beside someone and fire up a smoke or a cell phone.
 
Years ago, before cell phones, and I was a corporate Jr. executive, the only place I could get away from telephones was when I was traveling, either in my car or on an airplane.

I used to look forward to those times, spending a whole day without anyone calling me.

I can understand business travelers not wanting cell phone capability on airplanes.

-John
 
Jim Logajan said:
If there is no legitimate safety justification for the ban, if must be lifted. I would hope that future bans would be overturned on first amendment grounds.
Click to expand...
Really? First amendment rights? Cellphones? Airplanes?

That is definitely in the top ten dumbest things I've ever read here.
 
The problem is people just talk too loud on cellphones. A landline had a feedback loop in it where the speaker plays what the mic picks up...so you hear yourself. A cell phone doesn't do that so people talk much louder than is necessary.

Not sure what the fix is. Either a mechanical one or a social norm one. But people should be able to talk on a plane without annoying others. A government ban on something for no other reason than annoyance seems silly.
 
bartmc said:
I'm 100% against the government forced smoking bans in establishments. But, since I quit smoking, I don't go to places that allow smoking. It's just rude to sit down beside someone and fire up a smoke or a cell phone.
Click to expand...

Well, that and other bans as well. I simply try to respect others when in a restaurant for example. I go there to eat, not to smoke.

In defense of the cell phone ban in airplanes, where do you go to get away from that loud woman with the screechy voice? Maybe ask her to step outside to take her call? :yes::D
 
Ya know a good sense of mockery would kill these social ills of being rude using a phone or being rude by being fat and having the gall to go out in public.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Ya know a good sense of mockery would kill these social ills of being rude using a phone or being rude by being fat and having the gall to go out in public.
Click to expand...

Ya forgot smoking Greg. Oh; and alcohol and every other bad habit.
 
Clark1961 said:
The first amendment doesn't work that way. You don't have freedom of speech in an enclosed compartment on public transportation.
Click to expand...

The proposed Transportation Department rules would make it a Federal offense to use a cell phone (because it is annoying, not because it is a safety issue) even where an airline would have rules that allowed their use. That would deny freedom of choice of both the owners of the airline and its passengers.

It would be no different than a federal law banning passengers from speaking with any other passenger on a plane unless they got prior written approval. The law would be neutral as to content, but wouldn't pass legal muster either.

No one can shout about religous beliefs on an airliner. The crew will tell them to pipe down and then restrain them if they don't.
Click to expand...
That is the airline's prerogative. The proposal is from a Federal agency.

Should you be allowed to talk on your cellphone just because you want to even though it annoys 100 other people? Of course not.
Click to expand...
An amusing and absurd hypothetical pretty much in line with all the other crazy people who support the ban. In their fevered imaginations they've got fights breaking out hither and yon, caused by cell phone "torturers." Totally insane rantings. Me, I can barely hear someone more than a couple aisles away, and I have good hearing.

You do not have that right. You are not more important than 100 of your fellow citizens. Does it really suck for you to be forced to be considerate of your fellow man?
Click to expand...
That consideration cuts both ways - the people in support of a Federal ban are somehow imagining planes full of continuous in-flight loud-mouthed jabber. It is the only way they can justify their own self-righteous shallowness.

timwinters said:
Really? First amendment rights? Cellphones? Airplanes?

That is definitely in the top ten dumbest things I've ever read here.
Click to expand...

You should read up on transit ad lawsuits to realize the First Amendment is indeed operative. Beyond that, all I can offer in helping you clear up your thinking are these points:

Is there a federal law or regulation being proposed? Check. Does it involve speech? Check. Does it usurp the right of choice of two private parties who might otherwise have chosen differently? Check.

The FCC was going to leave it to the airlines to decide. They still should.
 
Transit railroads such as Chicago's Metra now have 'quiet cars' no cell phones allowed. They are becoming more popular every day.
 
Clark1961 said:
Should you be allowed to talk on your cellphone just because you want to even though it annoys 100 other people? Of course not.
Click to expand...

Baloney! Of course you should! How is talking a cell phone any different from talking to your wife or a business partner -- or a stranger you've struck up a conversation with -- who is sitting next to you on the plane?

How self-centered can a person be. "Everyone must conform to my wishes, and I'm going to hold my breath until my face turns blue unless I get my way."
 
Cellphones should only be allowed on flights if guns are allowed on flights.

Problem solved.
 
Since airplanes already have WIFI I'm surprised more people aren't using VOIP. Or are they able to somehow block that?

I've seen the FA ask someone to turn down the movie they were watching on their laptop while not wearing headphones. I've also heard someone playing what I guess was a video game with whooshing and ringing noises.
 
tinerj said:
Baloney! Of course you should! How is talking a cell phone any different from talking to your wife or a business partner -- or a stranger you've struck up a conversation with -- who is sitting next to you on the plane?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you how it's different. Electronic devices make some people loose touch with reality.

I'm a bus commuter. Express - 45 minutes each way to downtown. Yes, people chat with their neighbor but overall the bus is usually very quiet EXCEPT for one of the following people:
1. Guy/Lady on the cell phone talking so loudly that all 50 people can hear their conversation. This can be a man in a business suit who is well-spoken and well-dressed. However, he just can't seem to hear out of the ear that isn't stuck to the phone so he must talk loud.
2. The moron with the cell phone's volume up so that we can all hear their Angry Birds gameplay.
3. Guy/Lady with the annoying ringtone who doesn't know how to put the phone on silent. Do we all really need to hear "Who can it be now" every 8 seconds while you have a conversation via text messaging?

And that's on a bus, not an airplane with sensitive avionics - a separate conversation.

NOBODY is so important that they need to have a phone conversation during a flight. Turn it off and take a nap.
 
Everskyward said:
Since airplanes already have WIFI I'm surprised more people aren't using VOIP. Or are they able to somehow block that?

I've seen the FA ask someone to turn down the movie they were watching on their laptop while not wearing headphones. I've also heard someone playing what I guess was a video game with whooshing and ringing noises.
Click to expand...

WHAT?!?!?!?! You were out of the cockpit? How did the plane not crash? Is the FAA doing anything about this?
 
timwinters said:
Really? First amendment rights? Cellphones? Airplanes?

That is definitely in the top ten dumbest things I've ever read here.
Click to expand...

I am SO SHOCKED a liberal thinks making a federal law telling everybody how they shall be allowed to exercise their rights, as long as that is justified by some other liberals is the way to go.

There is no length a lib will go to try and force their personal agenda on everyone, to make themselves feel important.
 
Am I the only one who remembers the seat back telephones that airlines installed as an enhancement to the service to their customers? Where was the FAA when all those annoying phone calls (at punitively priced "long distance" rates) were being conducted? This idea of banning the use of anything because it may "annoy" someone is an extremely dangerous frontal assault on our personal liberties. Laws and regulations can never grant liberty, they can only restrict the liberty that we inherently possess.

If cell calls are an annoyance on an airplane, a private space, then it is up to the airline to enforce it's own rules of conduct to which every passenger contractually agrees to obey. It should only be a criminal case if safety is compromised.
 
DrMack said:
Am I the only one who remembers the seat back telephones that airlines installed as an enhancement to the service to their customers? Where was the FAA when all those annoying phone calls (at punitively priced "long distance" rates) were being conducted? This idea of banning the use of anything because it may "annoy" someone is an extremely dangerous frontal assault on our personal liberties. Laws and regulations can never grant liberty, they can only restrict the liberty that we inherently possess.

If cell calls are an annoyance on an airplane, a private space, then it is up to the airline to enforce it's own rules of conduct to which every passenger contractually agrees to obey. It should only be a criminal case if safety is compromised.
Click to expand...

Weren't the rates like $5.00 per minute? And that was 20 something years ago. I don't recall ever seeing anyone actually use one. I wouldn't have been annoyed had someone decided to use one, amazed would be more like it.
 
bartmc said:
Weren't the rates like $5.00 per minute? And that was 20 something years ago. I don't recall ever seeing anyone actually use one. I wouldn't have been annoyed had someone decided to use one, amazed would be more like it.
Click to expand...

And people weren't trained to being owned by a zombie phone back then. The anti phone people have the same idea as the anti recline the seat in front of me people, they think they are buying morespace, time, and comfort then they are. You bought a crap seat on a disgusting germ dart stuffed with filthy humans. Suck it up cupcakes or take your private train car, yacht, or C-172 if you want luxury and privacy.
 
ClimbnSink said:
And people weren't trained to being owned by a zombie phone back then. The anti phone people have the same idea as the anti recline the seat in front of me people, they think they are buying morespace, time, and comfort then they are. You bought a crap seat on a disgusting germ dart stuffed with filthy humans. Suck it up cupcakes or take your private train car, yacht, or C-172 if you want luxury and privacy.
Click to expand...

What you're failing to realize is that I'm special.
 
Everskyward said:
Since airplanes already have WIFI I'm surprised more people aren't using VOIP. Or are they able to somehow block that?
Click to expand...

Answered my own question. From United's in-flight magazine.

rurenuty.jpg
 
Florida Cracker said:
I am SO SHOCKED a liberal thinks making a federal law telling everybody how they shall be allowed to exercise their rights, as long as that is justified by some other liberals is the way to go.

There is no length a lib will go to try and force their personal agenda on everyone, to make themselves feel important.
Click to expand...

Yup, I agree, liberals are the only ones out there trying to limit freedom of speech. I think that's why our three SEMO newspapers. (All owned by the same company and all right wing...it is SWMO after all) started charging a minimum of $20 for political letters to the editor during the last election cycle.

But, my post that you responded to didn't even advocate any limitation, rather I simply stated that it's laughable that chatting on a cellphone is protected speech. But since you bring it up, I guess everyone should be able to chat on their phones at movies too. Employees should be able to talk on their phones all day long at work. Kids all day long at school, etc. All should be similarly protected speech.

But more importantly, it never ceases to amaze me how you can never make a valid argument using facts but rather you can only retort with throwing mud and turning everything into party politics.

Wrestling with pigs.
 
Last edited:
spiderweb said:
WHAT?!?!?!?! You were out of the cockpit? How did the plane not crash? Is the FAA doing anything about this?
Click to expand...
Haha, back in the cheap seats (actually a pretty expensive seat) again today.
 
timwinters said:
But, my post that you responded to didn't even advocate any limitation, rather I simply stated that it's laughable that chatting on a cellphone is protected speech. But since you bring it up, I guess everyone should be able to chat on their phones at movies too.
Click to expand...

In 2003 the New York City Council voted in a ban on use of cell phones in theaters and other places where live performances are taking place. To this day there is no indication that it has ever been enforced and was considered unenforceable by then mayor Bloomberg.

Employees should be able to talk on their phones all day long at work. Kids all day long at school, etc. All should be similarly protected speech.
Click to expand...

There are no Federal laws against chatting with someone next to you in any of those scenarios. An such law wouldn't pass a laugh test, much less a constitutional one. I have no idea what aspect you think a cell phone inserts into those situations that nullifies the protection of the First Amendment.

Wrestling with pigs.
Click to expand...

You've presented plenty of scorn and amusement, which are both as concrete and relevant as mud on a pig. No cites of statutes or case law that I can see posted by you.
 
Allowing texting would solve this problem for everyone.

But, allowing voice cell phone usage would be no big deal for me since I wear ENC (electronic noise canceling) earbuds at all times during airline flights. Library quiet!
 
Common courtesy, which seems to be nonexistent these days, would go a long way toward solving the problem. If I'm in the middle of something and my phone rings it can damn well wait till I'm done. I ain't gonna answer while I'm in a restaurant having dinner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top