General > General Technical Chat

Man fined for criticizing govt using science, without a license

<< < (49/63) > >>

mfro:

--- Quote from: CJay on April 26, 2017, 10:51:21 am ---... I believIe engineers should be afforded some sort of professional status and right to use the title, I have heard that they are in some countries, Germany and Switzerland perhaps?

--- End quote ---

In Germany, we indeed have a title for graduated engineers ("Diplomingeneur") and it is considered crime to claim you'd be that if you didn't earn the diploma (can yield you up to a year in jail in worst case).

But maybe it's also a language thing. "engineer" appears to have a much broader meaning than "Ingeneur" in German. Somebody (without a title) doing engineering  is not considered an engineer, but a mechanic ("Mechaniker"), steering a steam engine doesn't make you an "Ingeneur" as well but just a "Lokführer".

T3sl4co1l:

--- Quote from: metrologist on January 07, 2019, 07:46:57 pm ---If this is the distinction, then who is authorized to identify what is qualified and what isn't? I am an internet jockey, I am a professional internet jockey. I should use relevant terms, such as technician or professional technician. Where can I peruse the list of "qualified" terms? This must be on a federal level if we are talking constitutionality. Is there something in law that is more specific to generally stigmatize the use of such a qualifier? Silly me I am looking for logic and consistency in law.

--- End quote ---

No, not federal, state.  That's part of the problem, like I said, it doesn't need to be consistent between states and you need to read each one to find the basis and scope.

So, get reading.  Laws are publicly available!

Presumably, states with reciprocity in this matter are similar enough to be reconcilable, which probably means there are sets of states which are mutually incompatible (including sets of size 1).

Tim

rrinker:
 That the US is not one big monolithic entity is, I think, one of the most commonly overlooked things by many Europeans.

The silliness of some states' PE certifications is one reasons I never bothered taking the PE exam here. At the time, not sure if still true, but the exam would be 50% on whatever your engineering specialization was, and 50% combination of all other engineering disciplines. Why in the world would someone wanting to practice as a professional electrical engineer need to demonstrate any competency in civil engineering, I'll never know. That combined with the fact that in the first year of my first post-graduate job, I did maybe 2 months of electrical engineering, and by the time I was in a position to prepare for and take the exam, I wasn't actually doing ANY electrical engineering made it pretty much pointless. With the path my career took, being able to add PE after my name wouldn't have benefited me too much. In this state, that's the only restriction - I can have a job title with 'engineer' in it - in fact my company calls me a "senior systems engineer" even right on the tax forms submitted to federal, state, and local agencies. But I can not call myself "john Smith, PE" without having passed the exam and being licensed by the state. There was a time when they tried to say you couldn't use "engineer" at all unless you were a registered PE, but at some point that changed. Maybe all the locomotive engineers complained.

Richard Crowley:
Popular YouTube lawyer Steve Lehto just posted this video on the Beaverton red-light cameras and government bureaucracy gone mad:

EEVblog:
I thought this issue was done and he won?
He's back in federal court?  :-//

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod