Slashdot Mirror


Alien Contact Illegal in US

Hard_Code writes "Apparently it is illegal for United States citizens to make contact with aliens and their vehicles. " This is bizarre as hell. Not much in the way of proof, but its still pretty interesting. I'll definitely be giving extra terrestrials the silent treatment next time they try to abduct me. Update: 10/30 05:55 by CT : several people pointed out that this is an Urban Legend. Pretty cool.

32 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Found Where It Was Removed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2
     tags would allow somone to do something silly, like post a 32,675 character wide line. Because Slashdot puts posts on the article page, this fscks with the entire page layout. It's still possible to do this with the allowed tags, but it doesn't seem to happen too often anymore (possibly because these posts get moderated down).
  2. Re:meeept still welcome? by chazR · · Score: 2

    Yes, but does talking to aliens count as 'export'? If it does, then people in US can't talk to aliens securely (without breaking the law) , but those in the rest of the world can.

    The thing that worries me is that the US government has developed the same paternalistic attitude to other cultures that has lead to the downfall of empires (including the British empire).

  3. Spooky by AeiwiMaster · · Score: 2

    There is only one thing that bothers me with this story.

    What do Rob mean by "NEXT time they try to abduct me"
    When was last time ???

  4. heh. by SaxMaster · · Score: 2

    Well, i guess this means I can't e-mail my congressmen anymore :)

    --
    "Dancing is the vertical expression of a horizontal desire" --Robert Frost
  5. Uh oh.. by pen · · Score: 4
    I guess I better not post on Slashdot anymore...

    P.S. Very interesting, I got some errors when I tried to post this message - my browser refused to talk to www.slashdot.org (tried all 3 IPs). THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE ME!

    --

  6. Ignore bad laws -- just like motorway speed limit by Morgaine · · Score: 2

    Stupid/senseless/blinkered/over-zealous laws are nothing new. As always, just ignore them.

    Heck, on British motorways, only about 15% of drivers obey the speed limit. That's not because we're a nation of anarchists, but simply because there is no other recourse (this was never put to democratic vote, and politicians won't listen anyway), and stupid laws deserve contempt.

    I sure hope that nobody who comes face-to-face with an extra-terrestrial is so totally lacking in gray matter that the first thing on their mind is whether contact is allowed by some politician. Sheesh. We'd lose all universe-cred.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  7. The regulation has gone missing by wagnerer · · Score: 2

    I just checked out the Code of Federal regulations and that subsection they specify as containing this law doesn't exist. Take a look here for Title 14. It lists all the regs governing NASA.

  8. Um... it is legal, after all. by Kid+Zero · · Score: 5

    let's see if I can copy this right..

    http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.0199.html

    This article says it is legal again, since 1991.

    Which means it's been legal to talk to me since I was, oh, 23 or so.

  9. Reliability by bovinity · · Score: 2

    Just to let people know, "The Star" is a tabloid, so I wouldn't trust any of this information. However, like most tabloid articles, it's pretty humorous. :)

  10. This is B.S. by kaphka · · Score: 3

    You can find Title 14, Section 1211 (or rather, the lack thereof) at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cf r/14p1211.htm#14p1211s .

    I know Rob can't personally verify every story before he posts it. But shouldn't you be a little more careful with a particularly implausible and inflammatory one, like this one? It took me ten minutes on Google to find this information.

    (I hope this isn't a double post... my first version of this comment mysteriously vanished, along with about twenty other posts.)

    --

    MSK

  11. REPEALED by PD · · Score: 2

    http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/et-law.html says that the regulation in question was repealed in 1991. It's now OK to touch aliens in any way you like.

    1. Re:REPEALED by PD · · Score: 2

      More information, and a scanned image of the document signed by Richard Truly repealing the ET exposure law.

      http://www.abovetopsecret.com/etlaw.html

    2. Re: REPEALED by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      Ok to touch them any way you like? You better check their genitalia and age, just to be sure. We still have other laws, you know. :-)


      ---
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  12. Thoughts on the matter by Tobor+the+Eighth+Man · · Score: 3

    Well, in my opinion, I believe that this may actually be a good idea, to some degree. Imagine what happened to the native cultures when the Conquistadors landed in South America, but on a much larger scale. Any viral bodies that these "visitors" might be carrying could have devastating effects to humans.

    Now, while I don't think that this is necessary legislation (if indeed it's actually in existence), I think that it may indeed be a good idea to at least ask those aliens to wash their hands before you let them in your house.

  13. Hoax by breser · · Score: 5
    Title 14, Section 1211 CFR does not even exist. Take a look for yourself.

    *sigh* repost because /. lost my original post.

  14. INS Devision 6 by Forge · · Score: 2

    I'm Agent Manhine and my Supervisor ( Agent Black ) Was able to confirm that this is indead ligit.

    That 1 year jail term is realy a cover so we can recrute the best of those contacteas and "reeducate" the rest.

    --
    --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
  15. Imagine that... by quonsar · · Score: 3

    and here I am on my way out the door to meet the ambassador from Arbarkulous Maalb for lunch.

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16

  16. Found Where It Was Removed... by 8Complex · · Score: 3

    1211 Removed in 1991 and I think its a page next to it 19259, but who the hell would have a copy of this thing on their shelf with THAT many pages...

    http://frwebgate3.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgat e.cgi?WAISdocID=203086071+14+0+0&WAISactio n=retrieve

    That is the line where I found it... If you're too lazy to go see it I'll paste that small section here...

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1991

    14 CFR
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 FR
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page
    Chapter V
    1204.501 (a) revised........................................... ............57592
    1204.503 (b), (f)(3)(i)(D), (ii), (g) and (i) revised.............57592
    1204.504 (a), (e)(3)(ii)(B), (iii), (f) and (h) revised...........57592
    1204.1400--1204.1407 (Subpart 14) Revised................35812
    1205 Removed........................................... ...................14191
    1209.100--1209.104 (Subpart 1) Revised........................8910
    1211 Removed........................................... ....................19259
    1213.102 (a) introductory text revised..............................66787

    Hope the HTML works, I'm not too familiar with it on /.

    [after preview] Ok... so you can't use PRE on the board? What a pain in the ass... So I formatted with Period's by hand... hope you all can read it :-)

    - 8Complex

  17. Laws vs. Regulations by phliar · · Score: 3
    14 CFR 1211 100 through 108 was removed by Richard Truly on 26 Apr 1991 (which in itself struck many people as odd, since theoretically only Congress can repeal laws

    There's a difference between Laws and Regulations, and CFR means Code of Federal Regulations. (14 CFR, for example, contains all the Federal Aviation Regulations: Parts 1 - 199.) Regulations are a civil, not a criminal, matter.

    You cannot be imprisoned for violating a regulation, but other sanctions and fines can be applied. But you don't necessarily have the usual constitutional protections of due process etc. in a regulatory process.

    The CFR's tend to be very technical, and the average congress person has no hope of understanding them. Try browsing Title 14. For example, 91.175 - Takeoff and Landing Under IFR.

    --
    Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  18. Phone home--best rates by Scurrilous+Knave · · Score: 4

    Hey, I mean, If you saw an alien who needed to use your phone what would YOU do?

    Probably the same thing Ed O'Neill did, and tell him about 1-800-COLLECT. Save fifty percent to all calls in the Orion Arm, sixty after Galactic Midnight.
  19. Studies show otherwise... by Brecker · · Score: 2

    I'm going to be very unscientific, because I have no data on hand. However there have been numerous stories published in the major Western-US newspapers (where the speed limits tend to be raised) that show that the average speed over the limit decreases when limits are raised. People still speed, but by less. The claim here is that most people only speed by a few mph, while a handful still drive 15 mph over the limit. This frees up the law enforcement teams to ticket those drivers who are most dangerous, without making judgments about moderate speeders.

    Take this with a grain of salt, as I don't have any studies or figures onhand to cite.

  20. Someone didn't do their research... by kkenn · · Score: 2

    If you actually read the text of the law, which was repealed about 8 years ago (see other posts), it's quite clear that it's a provision for quarantine of things which have been in contact with another planet, i.e. a space probe which returns from mars, a manned mission to the moon, etc, on the off chance they could bring back viral or other contamination (the original apollo 11 astronauts were quarantined for exactly this reason, probably under that same law).

    Nowhere does it mention contact with extraterrestrial BEINGS (maybe the confusion came from the use of the phrase "extra-terrestrial" in the (perfectly clear) sense of "beyond earth", but was interpreted in the E.T. sense by a credulous reader.

  21. Uh, Dont Look Now, But... by quonsar · · Score: 3

    Alright, about ten minutes ago there were about two dozen comments-- where the hell did they all go??

    Can you say "alien abduction"?

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16

  22. Re: Actually, not a serious threat... by sterno · · Score: 2
    This is just my opinon completely unbacked by any sort of scientific study. However I believe it to be reasonably rational and logical so here goes...

    The reason that the viruses the conquistadors brought with them were a problem was because ultimately the natives and the spanish were biologically very similar. The genetic differences between ethnicities are very minor and viruses don't require much if any adaptation to jump from one to the other.

    An alien virus would be adapted to effect the biology of alien species. The likelyhood that an alien species would be genetically similar to humans is INCREDIBLY slim. Thus the virus would get here, find no suitable host, and either die or go into some sort of hibernation state.

    ---

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  23. Now.. whay was that law made.. by Manifest · · Score: 2

    This makes me ponder .. why was that law made ??
    That is as long back as 1969 isn't it ?? Doesn't this mean that even then they thought that Aliens can contact men .. so much so that a law was made ??

    Hey on second thought.. that also opens up the chance that maybe, maybe even as way back as '69 Earthlings had made contact with Aliens.. oh maybe it is the other way around !

    Manifest

    --
    ... "follow me" the wise man said, but he walked behind ...
  24. Fight the power by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5
    Right now the ACLU is fighting to keep movies like E.T. and Starman, which glamorize criminal alien activities, from being taken off the shelves at local video stores.

    "1211, talking to aliens is no fun!" chanted an angry crowd outside of Blockbuster today. Debbie Smith, local protester, had this to say, "Look at Drew Barrymore, she played with that little brown alien and look what happened to her - drugs, booze, sex, is this what we're trying to tell our young people?!?"

    ACLU spokesman Kent Harris replied, "Talking to aliens is every man and woman's right. George Washington was a mason and all they do is talk to aliens, well sometimes they talk to scientologists but thats about the same thing."

  25. Hardly sensational by Chris+Marlowe · · Score: 4

    The point about the Star being a tabloid is well-taken. Certainly it explains the bizarre slant given the story.

    The regulation in question was the enforcement for the biological-isolation régime observed after Apollo 11, 12, and (I think) 14. Astronauts returning from the moon had to wear respirators and (at first) suits; the command module had to be sealed, and anything exposed in the course of getting the astronauts out of it disinfected; the crew had to spend a couple of weeks in a negative-pressure lab; workers exposed to moon rocks were also put in the lab.

    It was done, not because anyone thought it likely that there were Moon Germs, but because if there were, it'd look stupid not to have taken precautions.

    As with any quarantine, this had the force of law, and the power to enforce it resided, not in the Public Health Service or USAMRIID, but NASA, in the person of its administrator. That's all the reg said.

  26. Very Much a Hoax by wesmills · · Score: 2
    This was reported in the Dallas Morning News about 6 years ago (and the Times Herald earlier than that). 14 CFR 1211 100 through 108 was removed by Richard Truly on 26 Apr 1991 (which in itself struck many people as odd, since theoretically only Congress can repeal laws, but that's another matter).

    The reason the section says "RESERVED" is because of the text of the repeal document, which specifically stated that 14 CFR 1211.100-108 would be "removed and reserved." It is common practice to do this, since if the section were not reserved, laws below it would need to be renumbered in keeping with the CFR's layout.

    FWIW: This law was probably passed as a security measure in case we did find anything and ticked them off badly. I suppose the government thought the only way they could get the people who were "contacted" to come in for examination was by brute force.

    --------------------

  27. Will the real aliens please stand up??? by HamNRye · · Score: 2

    How nice to hear. Don't forget that it was Nov. 3rd, 1883 that the Supreme Court declared Native Americans "aliens". With my being a Miami "Injun", just replying to my post would be illegal, and also touching my car.... Who would have thought that an alien would drive a Ford Taurus. Hey, I'll have that meter maid arrested! ~Jason Maggard "It's almost dawn and the cops are gone, let's all get dixie fried!"

  28. One part is logical... by Chokai · · Score: 2

    Well all I can say is the part giving them the ability to quarintine contactees is VERY logical. After all you don't want to wipe out the population because of some nasty alien virus. Yeah I know it sounds like something from a bad sci-fi movie but it is something to be taken seriously. Especially if you consider the fact that a virus from earth survived 3 years on the moon and was brought back home by the Apollo astronauts.

    This highly important aspect seems to have been ignored by the author, hoax or not.

  29. It might be legal NOW... but... by J.+FoxGlov · · Score: 2
    Note that 14 CFR lists Part 1211 as [Reserved]. Note also that this page suggests that "NASA is removing 14 CFR Part 1211 since it has served its purpose and is no longer in keeping with current policy."

    So it might be legal now, but there were 22 years that made "ET Phone Home" illegal in America.

    So maybe Steven Spielberg was encouraging kids to break federal law if they encounter wrinkly aliens?

    J.

    --
    damned vulpine http://sb.drtwister.com/
  30. in the light by lawn_ornament · · Score: 3

    of this, I think this little play is appropriate:

    "ET phone home... ET PHONE HOME!!"
    "Hell no.. I'm not allowed to have any sort of contact with you, I'll be damned if I let you use my phone!"

    Hey, I mean, If you saw an alien who needed to use your phone what would YOU do?

    ---

    --

    ---
    Killroy Woz Here