07-02-2008, 07:18 PM
hotsauce Wrote:Noone will ever go for that. You have the amendments to contend with. we need to get more people on Supreme court who will read and interpret those crucial documents the way they were supposed to. They just put their political beliefs and say that those documents say one thing when thay say another
It isn't that easy though unfortunately. I work for a regulatory service of sorts that i cant go into any real detail about for legal reasons (its stupid because i could bitch directly about my job all day, but maybe thats why they have it set up like that), and with 1 solitary law, if it was drafted by two people, and you talk to each of them, 9 times out of 10 in my experience they have a totally different intent on its meaning.
Some of the amendments are dumb and can be removed anyway. Like seriously do we need an amendment to enable prohibition, and then another one to disable it? Just effing remove the law, is it that effing hard! Thats the main problem with what our government has become over time, instead of just repealing bad laws, they add more regulations on top of them to undo them, but also add in extra crazy hidden stipulations that puts their foot in the door.
Take net neutrality as an example: for those who arent familiar with this argument, it basically goes like this: Some people want the government to come in and make a law that says that ISPs cant do things like traffic shaping, tiered internet, and any other type of thing they want to do, and as the name says, make the internet completely neutral, BY LAW.
While it sounds all well and good, all this does is takes our current problems with things like Comcast doing traffic shaping, and addresses them, but at the same time puts the governments foot in the door. Just look at the quality of shows on broadcast tv that are FCC regulated and cable. That there itself is reason enough alone to want the government out of it.
What it doesn't do is address the real problem. While comcast's traffic shaping is absurd at best, the main problem is is that there are local ordinances (essentially) in effect that prevent competition from forcing comcast to change their policies. Comcast has gone ahead in my town and bought all of the cable lines and basically is in the back seat with our local government that says "We are the only ones who are allowed to run data over cable lines", so there is no other option if you do not want DSL, which here the only real DSL you can get for pretty much the same reason is verizon, who despicably send logs over to the MPAA and RIAA upon request.
The problem isnt that we need to enforce net neutrality, its that we need government to actually step up and enforce monopolizing laws that have been on the books for ages.
While i don't necessarily agree with monopolization laws being the hardcore libertarian i am, id much rather go that route than just throw more laws on the books and have the government have their foot in the door for regulating the tubes.
Bit of a tangent, but just a thought