Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Net Neutrality.

Passed, and they didn't even screw it up...I'm SHOCKED!!
They did it EXACTLY how it needed to be done.

On 26 February 2015, the FCC ruled in favor of net neutrality by reclassifying broadband access as a telecommunications service and thus applying Title II (common carrier) of the Communications Act of 1934 to internet service providers.

No new regulations, just applying the same regulations for television and radio that have always been in effect.

No new taxes, no 500 pages of some BS congressional law, no pork, just making ISP's like any other medium.

Mark this day down, something was done right in 7 years of the Obama administration.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/ ... over_again

Rush on Net Neutrality

Aren't they taking something that was un-regulated and regulating it?

If so....... how can THAT be good news?

The only problem is they have no legal right to write the law, that is for congress to do, so yes they did screw up.

Your link don't work.

See....... it's starting already.

So it took them 300+ pages to apply established law to the internet? You sure about the "no new taxes/laws/etc"?

No new taxes is a temporary benefit to get it passed. There is nothing in history that hasn't gotten more regulated, more expensive and less efficient when the government got involved.

Here's what the Republican minority on the FCC said about it:

Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai, who delivered some of the most scathing criticism of the plan Thursday, warned the policy represents a "monumental shift" to "government control of the Internet."

Further, he accused the FCC of bending to the will of Obama, who last fall came out in favor of such a sweeping regulatory plan.

Pai said the FCC was reversing course from past positions for one reason: "President Obama told us to do so."

He warned of a litany of negative consequences, intended or not, from the net neutrality plan. He said it allows rate regulation -- and, ultimately, rates will go up and broadband service will slow.

Pai said that while the plan defers a decision on applying a service fee to Internet bills -- much like is applied to phone bills -- that surely will change.

"The order explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes," he said. "Read my lips: More new taxes are coming. It's just a matter of when."

Further, he pointed to slower Internet speeds in Europe, which largely treats the Internet as a public utility, in warning that the additional regulation will lead to less investment and slower speeds in the U.S. as well.

"The Internet is not broken. There is no problem for the government to solve," Pai said.

Fellow Republican member Michael O'Rielly called the plan a "monumental and unlawful power grab."

See it's that kind of thinking that just floors me. When you just cast a wide brush and say all regulation is bad, that shows a fundamental lack of understanding of capitalism.

The regulation was applied to ensure that 5 big companies cannot do anti-trust.

Regulation is what you do when the market refuses to work it out themselves. The ISP market refused to self regulate, so that's when government steps in.

It is clearly flawed legislation - it involves the .gov.

Gullible...

Can you say agenda???/


Soros, Ford Foundation shovel $196 million to 'net neutrality' groups, staff to White House


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/s...ups-staff-to-white-house/article/2560702

From Matt Walsh via The Blade

Dear Foolish and Gullible Americans, Net Neutrality is Not Your Friend

http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...icans-net-neutrality-is-not-your-friend/

They are the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION. They have determined that a communication medium meets the definition of something that falls under an already existing law. They didn't write any law. Again, you guys have no idea what's going on other than what some talking head on the radio has told you.

Okay now that was funny right there!!!

I don't know what the 300 pages were, but there was no new law passed, just an application of a law that's been in effect since the 1930's.

Again- There was already laws in effect that regulate it. This was a massive power grab.

This socialist professor wack job even gets it. She has written quite a bit about it, but this is nice and simple.

Roslyn Layton from the Center for Communication, Media, and Information Studies at Aalborg Univ in fuggin' Denmark. A bastion of socialism. :

"Net neutrality sounds good, but it means different things to different people, making it easy for special interests to manipulate it for narrow political ends.

One definition of net neutrality is a user’s freedom to connect to any Internet content, application or service. This is uncontroversial, and Internet providers already agree to uphold this principle.

Using their own definitions, however, companies such as Netflix hijack the language of net neutrality to lobby for regulatory favors. They want the government to mandate that transit costs they pay for today become free. In the offline world, such a deal would mean that retailers could not negotiate agreements with their suppliers or even where products could be placed on shelves.

This campaign intensified when President Obama called for the Internet to be regulated under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. Title II would effectively give control of the Internet to the federal government, allowing it to monitor networks and set prices. For starters, expect a price increase of at least $150 per year due to new federal, state, and local fees on your Internet subscription.

Regulation proponents argue that without such rules your Internet provider would speed up or slow down websites. There have never been rules against this, but Internet providers don’t do it anyway. Simply put, the business opportunity to deliver an open Internet is far greater. Failing that, antitrust laws deter discriminatory behavior, already ensuring net neutrality. Of the billions of Internet experiences every day, there are only two minor net neutrality violations on record. They were resolved swiftly with existing rules.

Many Americans oppose Internet regulation. Recently, 60 tech companies and 100 American manufacturers –including IBM, Intel, and Black & Decker – warned that Title II regulation would harm the economy and reduce investment.

Americans, just 4 percent of the world’s population, enjoy a quarter of the world’s private investment in Internet infrastructure and drive one-third of the world’s Internet traffic. This investment delivers 5 percent of gross domestic product and employs 10 percent of America’s workforce, 11 million Americans. The unregulated Internet allows almost half of America’s employed to work from home and countless companies to grow. Fifteen of the world’s top 25 Internet companies are American.

With more high-speed wireless connections than any country, the US is the hotbed of mobile innovation. Do we need government regulations to preserve net neutrality? No. The Internet in America works extraordinarily well."

Go wipe your chin.

This is what you people don't get. No legislation was passed, there is no new law. The Internet is recognized as an information medium the same as radio and television...how is that wrong?

You fuuuuuucking idiot. When has that bunch of ass clowns regulating anything ever turned out well?

In the first damn place, I didn't say that ALL regulation is bad.

But....... it should ALWAYS be seen as a necessary evil, with emphasis on the "necessary", by right thinking people.

Do you know that guys like you are a dime a dozen? Ain't never been a shortage of those who consider themselves just a tad more intelligent than "the rest of us".

No wonder you get "floored" whenever you encounter common sense remarks.

GunGeek
If you think this is the end of it dream on, this was just the first move to totally control the communications amongst people.
All you need do is see history to know what is going on. Cheers NC