Slashdot Mirror


In-flight Cell Ban Advances In Congress

narramissic writes "The awkwardly named Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace (HANG UP) Act was approved by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on a voice vote Thursday. The bill would make permanent the long-standing ban on in-flight cell phone calls by the FAA and FCC. 'Polls show the public overwhelmingly doesn't want to be subjected to people talking on their cell phones on increasingly over-packed airplanes. However, with Internet access just around the corner on U.S. flights, it won't be long before the ban on voice communications on in-flight planes is lifted,' said Representative Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon who co-sponsored the HANG UP Act in a statement. 'Cash-strapped airlines could end up charging some passengers to use their phones while charging others to sit in a phone-free section of the plane,' he said."

11 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. or perhaps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They could just let individual air lines react to market forces.

    1. re:or perhaps by dnwq · · Score: 5, Informative
      They thought of that -

      "The free market wasnâ(TM)t adequate to regulate smoking on planes and it wonâ(TM)t be sufficient to regulate cell phones either," DeFazio said. "I am pleased that we are taking steps to stop this disruption before it becomes an issue for American consumers."

  2. The Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Think of the children!

    No seriously, think about shutting up the fucking children. At least people on phones don't squeal for no reason. Normally.

    1. Re:The Children by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Funny

      No seriously, think about shutting up the fucking children. At least people on phones don't squeal for no reason.

      I never travel without ear plugs and a black-out mask. Or is that the alcohol... But seriously, kids travel. Plan ahead for your sanity.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:The Children by HungryHobo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can get behind this 100%.
      Nothing like a screaming infant with an apathetic mother on a 4 hour bus ride with a 5 year old running around trying to break things and being ignored.
      Seriously, if you can't take care of them don't procreate.

      By the end of it all I could think of was that poster with "Silence is golden.Duct tape is silver."

  3. Re:Good! by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did you ever try explaining to your boss how to use email on a foreign network?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Reminds me of a story by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the person with the phone is just a mental patient

    When I took Psych 1001, our lecturer told us a story of a patient in NYC with a history of talking to the voices in his/her head. Patient (not of said lecturer) went to therapist for help with said voices. Patient was otherwise "normal", had traditional job, paid bills, lived independently, etc... But of course had a hard time fitting in while talking to voices.

    Therapist suggested patient buy a used cell phone, and talk into phone (without turning it on or calling anyone) whenever the need arose to talk to the voices. It worked well, since of course society generally considers it normal to talk into cell phones.

    Except the patient was also using it on the subway, where signals are apparently very hard to get. Other passengers asked the patient what service he/she was using that had usable signal down there.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  5. Re:Good! by bwalling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While a majority may wish to have no cell phones on airplanes, it is no business of the government to pass a law regarding such a thing. If there were safety concerns, they could enter a say in the matter, but they have no business passing laws over a perceived desire for less chatter. This would get slammed in a court, so why should they even bother wasting our time and tax dollars?

  6. And why is the government involved again? by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Polls show the public overwhelmingly doesn't want to be subjected to people talking on their cell phones on increasingly over-packed airplanes.

    It's not the government's job to protect people from mild annoyances. If it's really true that the public "overwhelmingly" dislikes this, then that's a market the airlines can capitalise on. The market should solve this, and if it doesn't, tough.

    What next? The government monitoring the Internet and fining anybody who says LOL U WAT? 'Cause, you know, that irritates me, and apparently I have the right not to be irritated. Next up: passing the Freedom from Arm Rest Theft act.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  7. Re:Good! by Fungus+King · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally I think it's the business of the government to protect the interests of the majority... maybe... I'll have to think about that a bit more.

    Anyway. I'm English and there might be a different majority opinion in this country compared to the US (where I'd expect a more 'it's our right to use our phones on the plane'-type stance)... my personal opinion is that using a phone in a situation where you have to raise your voice significantly to be heard above the ambient noise - and subsequently by everyone else - is pretty rude - which is why I wouldn't inflict my conversation on anyone else (unless it's absolutely necessary, but it's hard to conceive of a situation where that might be the case).

    Perhaps it's a bit like the smoking ban in this country - most people don't want to breathe the smoke of others, the majority are happy about the ban, but there's a loud collection of unhappy smokers (obviously). To be honest they can moan all they want, it's not like the government's confiscated their cigarettes!

  8. False! by Suzuran · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is an urban legend.

    The pressurization system does not work that way. It has to be continually fed ram air from outside the aircraft and/or high-pressure bleed air from the engines to make up for the air that leaks out of the aircraft. If the airlines tried to simply "recycle the cabin air" the air would leak out of the airplane and the cabin would become unbreathable in a matter of minutes. See Payne Stewart and Helios 522 for examples of how quickly the cabin can lose pressure when not maintained.