The Continental Army fought in uniform, under the command of officers, and did not hide behind non-combatants or deliberately target them. The British still regarded them as rebels, rather than POWs, at least during the outset of the war before the Americans captured significant numbers of British men and could retaliate for abuses committed against American POWs.

Either way, there's a huge difference between the actions of the Continental Army and those we currently describe as terrorists. Perception may be a different animal, though it's worth noting that the British never resorted to the sorts of tactics they used in Ireland or India to suppress rebellions.

Washington is a special case, defined by the US Constitution, but of course you already knew that.

Then sue on that basis. Or petition the FCC to override those franchise agreements. I'll support your efforts wholeheartedly. What I can't support is:

City: We want to get into the broadband (or garbage, water, food, or really anything) business.
State: You can't do that.
Uncle Sam: Yes they can.

I am not familiar with the NC Constitution but if the State Legislature is violating it your recourse is with the State Judiciary, not the FCC. The FCC has not claimed NC's Constitution has justification for this power grab. Even a Federal bureaucrat couldn't do that and keep a straight face.

In which case they deprived their authority from colonial charters. That authority was inherited by the States. There is no city within the United States that stands alone with supreme sovereignty. Any city within the United States could be dissolved tomorrow if the State Legislature decided to do it and their Governor was willing to sign off on it.

Red herring. I didn't claim the States could or should leave the Union. I simply claimed that the Federal Government can't decide for them how much power they wish to delegate to their political subdivisions. You should familiarize yourself with the 10th Amendment and concept of enumerated powers.

By all accounts he is talking to the authorities. He has retained counsel and has declined to talk to the media (a smart move that....) but NTSB says he's been cooperative with their investigation. As far as what happened, he claims to have no memory of the crash. That's quite common after head trauma, even the NTSB guys don't seem to think it's suspicious in the least.

I would find it more amusing to watch them plugged full of .50 BMG slugs. It's a proven man stopper that has mowed down men far more honorable than terrorist scum that ignore every rule of civilized warfare.

The technology to keep a low powered laser designator aimed at a moving target is no different than the technology needed to keep a high powered laser weapon aimed at a moving target.

In WW2 we had analog computers that could aim guns at moving targets from moving platforms. This is actually a harder proposition than aiming a laser; bullets don't move at the speed of light and you've got to compute lead. They did it without electronic computers. There's nothing that's particularly impressive about keeping a laser on target in 2015.

In the United States? Absolutely. That's how our system is structured. The States retain all powers not specifically surrendered to the Federal Government, per the US Constitution. They are sovereign entities in their own right, not dependent on Washington for their power. Their political subdivisions are completely arbitrary creations, that can be created or destroyed at the whim of the State Legislature.

If push comes to shove, what happens if NC or TN simply dissolve the political subdivisions that are attempting to do this? Will the FCC also try and prevent that? Where would that authority come from?

If the guys in the dingy are trying to kill you why would you limit your response to the non-lethal? You can defend against that shit with something that's nearly as cheap as the laser, which has more than a century of proven effectiveness in combat.

We don't need to spend millions (billions?) of dollars on laser technology to deal with small boat attacks. Some people like to talk a big game about swarm attacks but there's no where to hide on the open ocean; going after any modern warship on the high seas in speedboats is a fast way to meet your creator without taking any of your enemies along for the ride.

How do you lay a nice thick cloud of opaque smoke at hypersonic reentry velocities?

Phalanx and other gun based CIWS are being depreciated in favor of missiles like the Rolling Airframe Missile. Guns can't deal as effectively with supersonic missiles and/or those that undertake terminal evasive maneuvers. They've also got a stopping power problem; breaking apart an incoming missile doesn't negate its kinetic energy and the inbound pieces retain the ability to do significant damage to modern warships even without a warhead detonation. The British lost at least one warship -- HMS Sheffield -- in the Falklands to a missile strike without warhead detonation. Mission kills are even easier; take out a few radar antennas (highly exposed targets that can not be armored or otherwise protected) and the ship is rendered combat ineffective.

Drones aren't new to naval warfare. A missile is essentially a drone with a different name. One might even argue that a kamikaze is the same thing, at least from the perspective of the target. :)

We've had that technology for decades now; it's not new or impressive.

Show me the part of the US Constitution that says the Feds can tell a State it can't regulate its political subdivisions. My State limits the annual property tax hike that can be imposed by Towns, Counties, and Cities. Can the Feds override that too? Can they compel a State to allow its political subdivisions to set up municipal garbage service where such service is privatized? Water service?

The FCC's ruling here was a bridge too far. It's entirely proper for States to define the boundaries of acceptable behaviors for their political subdivisions. And what's the big fucking deal anyway? These States are simply saying that their political subdivisions can't get into the internet business. They're not stopping you from setting up a co-op; if the State tries that you should be able to make a Federal case out of it, because (amongst other things) they're interfering with interstate commerce and your right of free association.

The NTSB says he's been cooperative, so I guess your theory is bogus. As far as "lawyering up," well, that might have something to do with people like you that have already tried, convicted, and sentenced him. Retaining counsel is not an admission of guilt in our system of jurisprudence.