Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

ij.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 408 posts

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#41

Post by hliyan »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #20

What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion! Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeles…

This is why the letter of the law is so important, paradoxically. It is never good to have unreasonable/archaic laws in the book and have law enforcement look the other way. Since almost everyone ends up breaking them, it allows law enforcement to basically charge any selected person. Such laws should be struck off the book. I believe in Latin, this is called Lex malla, lex nulla - roughly translates to "No law is better than bad law".

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#42

Post by wizzwizz4 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

The US was actually founded with the idea that this should be done to the entire constitution every couple of decades.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#43

Post by chiph »

civil_engineer wrote: post #21
clejack wrote: post #5

I first read this and immediately thought it was ridiculous. After a second read, I'm wondering if there is some deception going on. The idea that a license should be required to make advisement on designs impacting the public is reasonable. While nothing is guaranteed, it allows for a simple verification of skills. I find it hard to believe that any engineer would not know this because I was told companies and the g…

If he represented himself as an engineer or engineering expert in a legal proceeding, well, that’s where he may have made a mis-step. Even if it’s on behalf of his son. Maybe, he should have prefaced every sentence with IANAE, but…

That's what he did (mentioned in the article). He prefaced his testimony with that he was not a licensed engineer but had worked in the industry for many years.

A better question would be whether he had done piping & fluids vs. another civil engineering specialty such as bridge design.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#44

Post by SkeuomorphicBee »

clejack wrote: post #5

I first read this and immediately thought it was ridiculous. After a second read, I'm wondering if there is some deception going on. The idea that a license should be required to make advisement on designs impacting the public is reasonable. While nothing is guaranteed, it allows for a simple verification of skills. I find it hard to believe that any engineer would not know this because I was told companies and the g…

> The question here is whether this man was truly barred from speaking publicly about engineering or whether he was barred from testifying about engineering.

I don't think that is the main question, the testify vs speak is secondary. He is not a "Licensed Engineer", but he IS an "Engineer" (Graduated Engineering school, and worked legally his whole life as an Engineer in the subset of "engineering" that doesn't require a license). So he is an expert in "Engineering" (the subset) by schooling and legal work experience, and should be able to provide expert testimony on the field where he is an expert. He is not thou, an expert in "Licensed Engineering", so he can't provide expert testimony on that. The question them becomes: The testimony he gave applies to the subset of engineering that is only allowed to a "Licensed Engineer"? Or in other words, would he be forbidden from working on the thing he is testifying about? If the answer is yes, then he broke the law, by presenting himself as an expert Engineer in a matter restricted to licensed, then he wrongly presented himself as licensed. If the answer is no, if the matter discussed is something he was allowed to work on (before he retired) without a license, then there is nothing wrong with his testimony.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#45

Post by SeanLuke »

prepend wrote: post #29
roenxi wrote: post #3

No opinion on whether this is a new development or not, but needing a license to talk about engineering is really stupid. By far the majority of engineering work is stating the obvious. Even a novice with some calculus background could probably come to the right answer if they had access to the necessary data. Maybe they'd need a little help warming up. Engineers are just more reliable at getting to the obvious answe…

I think the issue is he gave expert testimony. So it’s not just speaking about it, but presenting from a position of authority without qualification. I think the whole expert testimony business is suspect as the definition of “expert” varies so much. But I think the correction is in the law specifying what is expect and not and making that better is the place to focus. It seems like the correction would be to invalid…

Being a licensed engineer is not a requirement to being an "expert" in expert testimony. You are an expert if the court deems you an expert and the opposing counsel has agreed. Full stop.

I think that the only thing an engineering license should grant you, in this case, is the right to call yourself a licensed engineer, which conveys some degree of authority. I don't think he made that claim.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#46

Post by dotancohen »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #20

What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion! Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeles…

  > It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without
  > issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking.
I'll take the opportunity to branch OT. This selective enforcement has always been such a problem, has there ever been any attempt - anywhere - to address it? Such that if a citizen can demonstrate selective enforcement he can also be absolved of the same crimes that the rest of the population is absolved of?

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#47

Post by phasetransition »

I'm curious to see where this goes. In my personal experience, it is standard practice to need/be requested to submit designs for review by a PE, if you aren't one.

I was originally trained as a materials engineer, and nearly 20 years ago there was no clear PE exam to take for that discipline, so I never considered getting one.

Today, I wouldn't want to be encumbered with the E&O insurance and other restrictions of a PE, and I would have to review extensively to pass the test.

In my professional experience, it has always been nice to have a 3rd party look over your design, and the expense is of no consequence if the customer/law require the review.

For a legal case, I'm not surprised that the barrier of entry for expert testimony might be a PE.

I'd be interested to understand from a lawyer here on HN what the extent of protected speech is in a courtroom situation.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#48

Post by brudgers »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

Texas is pretty big on licensure. Surveyors sit at the top for historic reasons. All that land you know. And there’s big money that gives a shit about surveying out in Texas…little money too.

Texas takes government Texas Ranger seriously.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#49

Post by erikerikson »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #20

What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion! Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeles…

Particularly in advertising providing medical advice and what can be said is highly regulated.

For good reason too. Intravenous bleach suggested by someone we trusted may have caused some real harm. It would seem reasonable to remove a doctor's license to practice medicine for giving such advice.

Of course broad scale communication is different than specific testimony in court, especially from a seasoned practitioner.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#50

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

strictfp wrote: post #40
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

Love this. I also have a silly question; is the sunset commission subject to the same principle?

Sort of: https://www.sunset.texas.gov/about-us/frequently-asked-quest...

And I had a mistake in my timing, it's every 12 years.

Post reply on HN