You are right about your post in general. The sticking point is that 'minimum standard' and 'minimize risk' part. My job is risk analysis. You'll never minimize risk. You can minimize within reason (cost, time, etc.) plus what is one person' minimum is excessive to another. My point is that some of these rules have gone well beyond minimums-an apparent cash grab in many cases.

I think the comment "If you've nothing to hide... ... you've nothing to be afraid of." was meant for the police officer. What are they (the officer and his bosses) afraid of? Probably a lot of laws they have been breaking becoming common knowledge.

Except for the fact that GPS satellites are not in LEO orbit. It would not affect the GPS constellation at all. It could affect future launches of GPS by preventing future launches. Most, but not all comm satellites are in higher orbits. Also with the same caveats on future launches.

Yes but the work itself violates article 3: an existence worthy of human dignity. So, therefore, no a telemarketer does not have a protected right to work at that job. Let's face it, a shit-hauler has a higher social acceptance than a telemarketer.

And since the viewers all understand this, viewers understand that pirating is expected. In fact, Hollywood DEMANDS it. IF you don't, you're not Hollywood.

You're missing the point. Radio allows the user to get it for free. If the user uses the radio to listen to music instead of buying a CD, then the recording industry doesn't get paid (for a CD purchase). If everyone switches to radio and stops downloading, then the recording industry would still be complaining.

And the person has the right to burn down Verizon property worth millions following their dickish actions. Sure they'll have the right to remain silent afterwards, and the right to an attorney and all those other rights. And in the unlikely event they get a good enough attorney they'll have to walk around free. As you see, the right to be an asshole often leads to negative actions. Unfortunately, not often enough nor negative enough in the case of businesses. Oil companies come to mind right now. Cell phone carriers are close behind. Those two are by no means an exhaustive list.

I have strabismus. In my case, I had it as a child, corrected by surgery, but a car wreck at age 19 damaged my eye, and it got worse over time (20 years almost now). Much worse when driving. My glasses need high levels prism to adjust. When I had a pair without it, I often had to drive cyclops (close one eye) so I didn't see two sets of cars. I don't have this problem walking. Probably because it was so bad that near items appeared blurred but distance objects were completely separate items, though one was more of a ghost than the other.

According to Congress, who writes the laws, everyone of us is a criminal. If you're not, they'll write a law that makes you a criminal. Then that justifies 'protecting' you from those other criminals who live next door to you, taking your bribe money (either taxes, or actual bribes)

Since Monsanto sues anyone who grows anything with that genetic code for patent infringement, and no one else is selling the weeds, it is obvious that Monsanto is responsible for the weeds. The farmers should sue as they clearly asked for soybeans not weeds.

Yes but they already been granted a license for non-commercial use. If it not distributed in the MPEG format, is it a commercial use? The commercial use is the Ogg Theora format in this case, isn't it?

Actually, QCX (read the last as greek letter Chi - which I've always been told is the K sound followed by long I sound)

Actually having twice as much is sufficient. They don't need more than twice. If it had been 140 to 70, it passes. And failing this kind of math, simple election and voting math, should be sufficient to remove both individuals from their jobs.

Or how about this one? The driver passes another person doing twenty miles over the speed limit because he's NOT using a cell phone, so he's driving 'safe'. But he sees that person using a cell phone and gets upset because he was more interested in someone else's conversation than driving. Because of this and paying too much attention to that 'unsafe' driver he rear ends the car ahead of him.

Cell phones are NOT the only distractor, not are they the biggest safety issue. Are you going to eliminate drinks in the car? why all the cup holders? Music in the car? get rid of all the radios? Annoying passengers? Make them all personal vehicles, only one person needs to be in the car. Too young/old to drive? Fixed age limits, already have them on the low end. No driving at night because the darkness keeps you from seeing the dangers. Road rage? Get a bike.

You want to fix driving errors, you need to address the core issue-the driver. Anything else is not addressing the problem, except for DUI which can affect even the best driver. Make the test include cell phone use and prove they can drive safely with it. Make it include eating a sandwich while driving. Make it include two screaming kids in the back seat and an arguing spouse. Make them either retake the test if they fail those parts or chip the driver's license to not allow those things.

And they (Native Asians/Polynesians living in America) should have. Particularly when the Europeans brought their diseases with them. You see what happened when the (party of the first part) didn't? That's exactly what we (current Americans) should be trying to prevent. Those who forget history doomed to repeat and all.

You'll obviously bring up country founded on immigration (i.e., invasion) which was important to our country as we were growing. Just like a human, it is important for a growing teen (country) to eat more than normal (immigration) to thrive. But once you reach adulthood, it's important to watch your diet (immigration controls) and make sure you eat healthy (keeping immigration under control, proper skill sets, people who are willing to follow our rules and regulations which could be different than theirs)