Gun store Shooting Locations It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:43 pm



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me Shield NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar




Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 FCC votes to repeal Obama-era net neutrality regulations 
Author Message
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Nampa, Idaho
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011
Posts: 19386
Real Name: Rick
CNN
8:59 AM, Dec 14, 2017

Quote:
The Republican-led Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to approve a controversial plan to repeal Obama-era net neutrality protections. The repeal passed 3-2, along a party-line vote.


https://www.10news.com/news/national/fcc-holding-vote-that-could-end-net-neutrality-laws?autoplay=true

_________________
‘What’s the point of being a citizen if an illegal gets all the benefits’


Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:28 am
Profile
Site Moderator
User avatar
Site Moderator

Location: Duvall
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011
Posts: 8657
Real Name: Jaime
Stopping regulation on an issue that really didn't exist.

_________________
Consider donating to:
WAGUNS
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Join the NRA
Firearms Policy Coalition


Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:25 am
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar
Site Admin

Location: Olympia, WA
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 38292
Real Name: Dan
aaaaand team Inslee has already started the lawsuit..
http://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-release ... neutrality


Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:42 am
Profile WWW
In Memoriam
User avatar
In Memoriam

Joined: Wed Mar 6, 2013
Posts: 12018
Why not? Washington State has a ton of extra cash due to our clever legislators and bureaucrats, and we have to spend that money somewhere.
Sweet!


Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:44 am
Profile
In Memoriam
User avatar
In Memoriam

Location: Mukilteoish
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011
Posts: 11595
I miss Rob McKenna.

_________________
NRA Endowment Member. How did they know my member was well endowed?


Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:51 am
Profile
In Memoriam
User avatar
In Memoriam

Joined: Wed Mar 6, 2013
Posts: 12018
From Dan's link ^
Quote:
"We are 5-0 against the Trump Administration because they often fail to follow the law when taking executive action."


Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:54 am
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012
Posts: 7649
Rofl. Guess Inslime can't count, he is 5-13, not 5-0.

_________________
If you vote for Biden you are voting to be murdered when he sends Beto to come take your "semi automatic assault weapon" (any semi auto).
If you have family or friends voting for Biden show them this and ask if they are willing to vote for your murder or maybe even their own if they are gun owners or live with any.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/03/joe-biden ... n-control/
Quote:
“I want to make something clear, I’m going to guarantee you this is not the last you’ve seen of him (Beto),” Biden said Monday evening during a campaign rally in Dallas. “You’re (Beto) going to take care of the gun problem with me. You’re (Beto) going to be the one who leads this effort.”

https://www.newsweek.com/beto-orourke-g ... ns-1465738
Quote:
[Beto O'Rourke Suggests Police Would 'Visit' Homes To Implement Proposed Assault Weapons Ban] "In that case, I think that there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm... ..."If someone does not turn in an AR-15 or an AK-47, one of these weapons of war...then that weapon will be taken from them"


Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:29 pm
Profile
In Memoriam
User avatar
In Memoriam

Joined: Wed Mar 6, 2013
Posts: 12018
He is 5-0 on the cases he won.


Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:14 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Spanaway WA
Joined: Wed Jul 6, 2011
Posts: 6301
Real Name: Hugo Stiglitz
So is this a good or bad thing?


Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:14 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Auburn/Kent/Renton
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011
Posts: 766
The title of the thread is misleading but still technically accurate.
In the early 2000's the net neutrality rules was actually started by the Bush administration... it became more robust during the Obummer administration.

zombie66 wrote:
So is this a good or bad thing?



IMO it's yet to be seen. The next two years of actions by Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T, etc can only tell... but I think it stinks of greed and corruption.

Personally I do not believe the net-neutrality rules was an over-regulation, and I definitely don't trust Comcast to keep all websites and services on an equal footing without charging consumers more for accessing non-affiliated sites at the same speeds.

Put it this way... Would you trust Verizon to resist charging you more for a package that does not down-throttle the connection to your google phone, maps, drive?

_________________
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.
It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. - Ronald Reagan


NRA Certified RSO
SAF/NRA Life Member


Last edited by Blaze.45 on Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:37 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Auburn/Kent/Renton
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011
Posts: 766
BadKarma wrote:
Stopping regulation on an issue that really didn't exist.


The issue already existed before the rules... it's the only reason why gov does anything, people screamed loud enough about this issue back in the early 2000's.

_________________
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.
It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. - Ronald Reagan


NRA Certified RSO
SAF/NRA Life Member


Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:52 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: maple valley
Joined: Mon May 6, 2013
Posts: 2575
Real Name: Earl
Blaze.45 wrote:
zombie66 wrote:
So is this a good or bad thing?



IMO it's yet to be seen. The next two years of actions by Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T, etc can only tell... but I think it stinks of greed and corruption.

Personally I do not believe the net-neutrality rules was an over-regulation, and I definitely don't trust Comcast to keep all websites and services on an equal footing without charging consumers more for accessing non-affiliated sites at the same speeds.

Put it this way... Would you trust Verizon to resist charging you more for a package that does not down-throttle the connection to your google phone, maps, drive?

I agree, especially about greed and corruption.


Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:55 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012
Posts: 1367
I don't know why so many small government people think this issue needs to be addressed by government regulation, especially now that there is intense competition among service providers.


Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:56 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: maple valley
Joined: Mon May 6, 2013
Posts: 2575
Real Name: Earl
sreyemj wrote:
I don't know why so many small government people think this issue needs to be addressed by government regulation, especially now that there is intense competition among service providers.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fcc-votes-to-make-internet-harder-for-poor-people-to-access
"Over 56 million American households have no choice in internet service providers in their area, leaving them potentially tethered to an artificially slow internet under the new rules."


Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:03 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Spanaway WA
Joined: Wed Jul 6, 2011
Posts: 6301
Real Name: Hugo Stiglitz
Blaze.45 wrote:
The title of the thread is misleading but still technically accurate.
In the early 2000's the net neutrality rules was actually started by the Bush administration... it became more robust during the Obummer administration.

zombie66 wrote:
So is this a good or bad thing?



IMO it's yet to be seen. The next two years of actions by Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T, etc can only tell... but I think it stinks of greed and corruption.

Personally I do not believe the net-neutrality rules was an over-regulation, and I definitely don't trust Comcast to keep all websites and services on an equal footing without charging consumers more for accessing non-affiliated sites at the same speeds.

Put it this way... Would you trust Verizon to resist charging you more for a package that does not down-throttle the connection to your google phone, maps, drive?



Gotcha, thank you.


Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:15 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 60 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SurfPerch, TechnoWeenie and 67 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
[ Time : 1.173s | 17 Queries | GZIP : Off ]