Criminals and the insane, for instance, are certainly persons, but may have many of the rights limited and some outright revoked

Or companies, which have most if not all of the rights of natural persons (except for the right to vote), and few of the responsibilities.

These networks are owned by the ISPs. It seems to me that government, before it steps in and tells them how best to run their networks, should have the burden of showing how net neutrality is better for the network than prioritization schemes.

What you describe is exactly how it's supposed to work. If the government wants to control the hundreds of billions of dollars of network infrastructure that private companies have invested i

Except that those private companies have received 1. direct subsidies, 2. Free intellectual property usage (basic TCP/IP technologies) and 3. free usage of rights of way.

So, since we, the public, have heavily subsidised those privately owned networks, we should also have the right to regulate them. Finally, since the ISPs have been pushing for local monopoly status, they should accept that they are treated like a local monopoly (subject to regulation).

Face it: humans really are different from the other animals.

Oh, really?

"Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal,"

Nixon, 1977.

My personal "aha moment" came when I was talking to a policeman that I knew in a social setting. I mentioned an article that the local paper had published. In the article, the reporters described their experience of going around local police stations asking for information that the police were required to provide under state law. In a few cases, the reporters were given the information, but mostly the responses ranged from "no" to opening an investigation on the reporters.

To get to the point -- the response of the policeman, of whom I had no knowledge if he was personally involved in failing to provide the information, was to go from pleasant conversation to *very* frosty. Why? Once can speculate, but perhaps most likely is simply that he considered solidarity with his colleagues more important than the fact that the police were routinely breaking state law.

Pluto's designation is based on it's size, mostly

I thought that it had more to do with 2 factors: 1. Its composition (mostly ice) and 2: Its highly eccentric orbit.

There is a name for bodies which are mostly ice and have very eccentric orbits: "asteroid".

What's in this for the NSA, FBI and other LEO?

Will the phone owner be able to turn it off?

If the dealer requirement is removed so direct sells are allowed, expect an influx of inexpensive vehicles from SE Asia with no means of warranty repair or service. Yes, buyer be ware, but really, is it a good idea for the masses to be purchasing vehicles from Amazon?

Strangely, this anarchic sale of cars direct to the public by manufacturers that provide no after sales support has not happened in California. California would provide the best market for this activity, being on the west coast, with a large market.

As soon as Tesla set up shop in Iowa (the site they're doing the test drives from), it ceased to be interstate commerce.

So that's why the drugs the people buy from their local pharmacy are regulated by state laws and not federal laws .... oh wait.

The Supreme Court decided that just about anything can be interstate commerce. Growing weed in your own garden can be regulated as interstate commerce. Yeah, it's ridiculous, but that's the way things are.