Slashdot Mirror


Private Spaceflight Law Passes Senate

Neil Halelamien writes "HR 5382, the commercial spaceflight bill which has been previously mentioned on Slashdot, has been passed by Congress at the last minute (almost literally). The bill had previously been stalled several times due to disagreements about how much the FAA should regulate crew and passenger safety. It's now headed to the White House to be signed into law. Under this legislation, the FAA's role until 2012 will be to protect the uninvolved public on the ground, and allow passengers to ride as long as they've been properly informed of the related dangers. Also, the FAA will be able to regulate certain aspects of the vehicles if they prove to be dangerous."

6 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wel... by Eric+Giguere · · Score: 5, Insightful

    no right to interfere with what a person does on their private land

    It's more about regulating what happens above the private land rather than on the private land. How far above your land does your ownership extend?

    Besides, if you build a rocket and launch it from your private land and land on me as I sit (in private) in my washroom, it's too late to go to the courts!

    Eric
    Please, people: JavaScript is not Java
  2. This is what happens when... by CodeWanker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Our pile of bureaucrats are afraid of losing a shiny toy to some other country's bureaucrats. Governments that have to compete for something can - SURPRISE - do a much better job of not mucking it up too much. If Scaled Composite's design involved specialized launch facilities instead of a flat piece of concrete, you can bet this bill would've been really restrictive... Because the control freaks in congress would've had a better opportunity to control it.

    --


    "Wow. Now THAT'S a lot of angry Indians." - Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer
  3. an ounce of prevention... by Fross · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Also, the FAA will be able to regulate certain aspects of the vehicles if they prove to be dangerous.

    uh, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interests if this could be regulated *before* it's "proven" to be dangerous, ie an accident's occured?

  4. Not Bad for a Change by trongey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If this law works out the way it looks then Congress might have gotten it just about right. Protect the public from the nutballs, but let people make their own choices about risk/reward. That's how exploration should work.

    --
    You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
  5. A STATEMENT TO NON-LAWYERS IN THE /. COMMUNITY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is always a Good Thing when people get involved in the legislative and judicial processes. It's a Good Thing when they question a court's decision, or question a proposed resolution, etc.

    But please, oh please oh please oh please, see what you're doing from the lawyer's perspective. If a lawyer with no training in electronics came up to you and ask you to "install Windows on his RAM", or something to that effect, you'd be laughing your ass off, might make a joke of it here on Slashdot, put it in your sig, and generally ridicule those with no knowledge whatsoever of computers.

    On the other hand, lawyers go through an extra three years of school to get to where they are, and their backgrounds are diverse. Yes, there are in fact many many engineer-lawyers who know far more about either profession than people on here.

    Now stop, and think for a moment, about what uninformed comments about our legislative or judicial system look like to a lawyer. You look just as dumb as a luser looks to you. Not that you probably give a rat's ass what the average lawyer thinks, but I want to believe that geeks WANT to learn, and legal knowledge is LEARNED, not bestowed upon birth. So please, everyone, take some effort to actually understand our legislative process before criticizing it, to understand our legal process before criticizing it.

    I promise, if you take the time, you will find that the system works a whole lot better than people give it credit for.

    Thank you.

    1. Re:A STATEMENT TO NON-LAWYERS IN THE /. COMMUNITY by Longstaff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I agree that I know less of the law than, say...a meter maid, and agree with 90% of your statement, I find one fundamental difference in the two fields.

      Engineering is a learned, *technical* discipline while the study of the law is absorbing the arbitrary rules set forth by our predecessors.

      Asking someone to "install Windows on his RAM" is laughable because it is simple not possible (don't give me ramdisk arguments, either - I doubt windows will work that way). That action is limited by technical barriers.

      The fact that my property line should extend to low orbit but does not is an arbitrary desgnation made for politcal, commercial and/or societal reasons. That "fact" can change based on geographic borders, political climits, etc. The study of law is therefore a study of how one particular, arbitrary system functions now and has functioned in the past (precedent).

      Again, I agree that there are a number of armchair lawyers that spout on about things they know nothing about (like me ;) ) and I think most lawyers are very intelligent. I just think these are very different disciplines at their base.