US lawmakers mortified at mobile phones
SOME SENSITIVE legislators in the US House of Representatives apparently think mobile phones should remain banned on airplanes because their owners are sometimes annoying.
Several members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee traded their personal anecdotes about having been subjected to obnoxious cellphone users whilst their planes were on the tarmac during flights back and forth between their home districts and Washington, DC.
On planes in the US, mobile phones may be used before takeoff and after landing but not during flights. The prohibition on inflight use is currently set to expire at some future date.
One humble servant of the people talked about his (presumably delicate) wife's discomfort at finding herself seated next to a woman who talked loudly about her sex life on her cell.
Another committee member one-upped that with his story about the bloke next to him who received a "Dear John" call from his wife or girlfriend just before takeoff. He said that the poor sod's abject begging and pleading was terribly embarrassing to have to hear, and that a flight attendant had to threaten to have the man arrested before he finally hung up.
Yet a third representative trumped the whole discussion by saying she had seen a man use the camera in his mobile phone to take photos of an airplane's " sensitive" interior, raising the dreaded spectre of a potential threat of (gasp!) terrorism.
On that note, the assembled lawgivers apparently had heard quite enough. By just a voice vote, the committee approved a bill that would direct the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to make the present ban on inflight mobile phone use permanent. Strangely, it didn't seem to occur to any of them that those incidents mentioned all happened under the existing ban on inflight cellphone use and that similar occurances would not be prevented by making the ban permanent.
Representative Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from (the politically correct People's Republic of) Portland, Oregon and sponsor of the Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace (HANG UP) Act, said "I do believe this is important that we don't make what is already a crowded and difficult environment for the traveling public and flight attendants" worse by allowing inflight cell phone use.
However, Representative John Mica, a Florida Republican, observed that there are many annoyances on airplanes that can't be prevented by just passing laws. Mica said, "You are trying to legislate courtesy, folks, and that just doesn't work."
The European Union has plans to allow passengers to use their mobile phones inflight and some airlines are already trialing technology to facilitate that. Should the US make its ban on inflight cellphone use permanent, it risks being left behind the rest of the world in this too, as it already is in other areas, like affordable health care and broadband adoption. µ
L'Inq
Yahoo
News
Share this:
Business Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Just like stop signs don't stop cars, they can pass all the legislation they want, people won't ever stop talking on their cel phones. Laws against talking on cel phones while driving haven't stopped that, either. 

You'd think the airline industry would just be jamming cel phone signals and back a ban on passenger cel phone use, anyway. Otherwise noone would need to use the overpriced in-cabin phone anymore.
Well, we have now found one area in which US is more sensible than the EU.
Should ban them on all bus and coaches too.

Trains have quiet areas. So should Buses.

"Should the US make its ban on inflight cellphone use permanent, it risks being left behind the rest of the world in this too, as it already is in other areas, like affordable health care and broadband adoption. "

Get real... Nothing We like better than listening to someone having the meaningless drivel conversations, that people have when there really is nothing to say, but they're bored. And you want to be strapped in next to one of these idiots for a cross country flight? There will be death... and the other passengers will cheer.

If this means that we have less respect in eyes of the "rest of the world" Who really cares? 

As for those who feel obliged to inform everyone around them of their personal lives, don't be offended when someone gives you advice on your rash or other unmentionable problems.
As the hive mind forms, it is important that refuseniks be assimilated with conditioning meted out in close quarters by the already Borg. Silence and its potential to engender thought are treason.
I think for once I will have to agree with those bozo's we vote for.... cell users in general are a loud, obnoxious lot... sitting next to some moron going on and on... my actions would probably put me on a terrorist/no fly watch muy pronto
Not having them talking in my ear on a long flight will save them from being beaten to death with their own phone.


ffs why anybody needs to pollute aircraft cabins with their shiny toys is beyond me, the 'dear john' guy could have tipped over the 'edge' and decided to 'end it all' and taken the rest of the punters with him !!! O_o

whats so furkin important at 35,000 feet that cant wait a couple of hours, ffs even if it is important, wtf ya gonna do about it whilst your at said 35,000 feet, these droids (you know who you are) wanna take time out, get a life and enjoy the view/ride ffs !!!!!

ITS A PHONE, NOT A FURKIN LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM !!!!!!
This bloke started yammering on his cell like there is no tomorrow inside a silent train car. What surprised me is how he lashed back at people that politely asked him to STFU, after giving him a few minutes of lenience.

Mission creep is endemic to bureaucratic restrictions. So why not use it as a force for *good*. Anyone pulling out a mobile, the Sky Marshals blow their head off. And all the other passengers applaud.
Sorry, I'm gonna have to side with the lawmakers here. I'm not going to sit for hours next to an idiot babbling on the phone, and I don't think anybody else would, either. If this means we are "left behind" by the "rest of the world" (I lol'd after reading that part.) then I couldn't care less.
Good! I'll vote for him if he wants to pass such a law. I, for one, don't want to be sitting a mere half a foot from someone yammering on a cell phone. It's bad enough there are so many babies on these damn flights. They should ban them from theatres as well, or at least jam them.

Can't legislate courtesy? Maybe not, but you can certainly destroy the means to cause discourtesy, and on flights, that should be quite easy.
Representative Peter DeFazio is not from Portland, rather from southern Oregon that tends to be republican.
Does it really fit within role of government to legislate phone usage? Whats next, a ban on sneezing because it'd be nice if people didn't sneeze anymore. Before you know it they'll try to take our guns. We'll be just like the UK where the pansies aren't afforded the right to defend themselves. Actually they aren't afforded many other rights for that matter. 
Get a real bill of rights people!
I fail to see how these people will be any different in what they say or do without phone use? They're just as liable to talk about the same stupid rantings with the people seated with them. The people are the problem, not the technology. If being annoying was outlawed everyone would be in jail.
... to your loved ones.

The law, and on-plane jamming, will have dis-allowed it.

Won't that please either god or satan...

: )

I wonder which of the two it would please?
Save Me Save Me,someone is to loud sitting next to me. What next you’re going to outlaw sleeping on planes so you don’t have the risk of hearing someone snore. A large number of people on planes are business people with blackberries and iphone that could continue to work while in flight. If you’re so darn sensitive buy some earplugs and stop stifling progress.
" [The US] risks being left behind the rest of the world in this too, as it already is in other areas, like affordable health care and broadband adoption."

What a pathetic statement! Only a moron would argue that something like an island with three people, 100% of its population, with broadband connection and a whole population having to shell out half of their income to self-serving states as benchmarks for anything.