Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Noise Pollution and Abatement Act of 1972 is a statute of the United States initiating a federal program of regulating noise pollution with the intent of protecting human health and minimizing annoyance of noise to the general public. [1] The Act established mechanisms of setting emission standards (noise regulation) for virtually every ...
Noise regulation includes statutes or guidelines relating to sound transmission established by national, state or provincial and municipal levels of government. After the watershed passage of the United States Noise Control Act of 1972, [2] other local and state governments passed further regulations.
In international law, the principle is known as the Lotus principle, after a collision of the S.S. Lotus in international waters. The Lotus case of 1926–1927 established the freedom of sovereign states to act as they wished, unless they chose to bind themselves by a voluntary agreement or there was an explicit restriction in international law ...
How loud is too loud in Texas neighborhoods? Here’s what to know.
Noise laws and ordinances vary widely among municipalities and indeed do not even exist in some cities. An ordinance may contain a general prohibition against making noise that is a nuisance, or it may set out specific guidelines for the level of noise allowable at certain times of the day and for certain activities. [119]
A basic definition of disorderly conduct defines the offense as: A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally: (1) engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct; (2) makes unreasonable noise and continues to do so after being asked to stop; or (3) disrupts a lawful assembly of persons; commits disorderly conduct. . . [2]
An example of law, that has been criticized in the USA for vagueness is Federal Analogue Act, which establishes criminal liability for making/selling chemicals, which are "analogous" to known prohibited drugs, but fails to be sufficiently specific for the accused to know, whether an "analogous drug" is prohibited or not. According to this law ...
It prohibited "musical entertainment, singing, dancing or other form of amusement" without a license. [3] Critics argued that the license was expensive and difficult to obtain and that enforcement was arbitrary and weaponized against marginalized groups, [4] but proponents insisted that the law minimized noise complaints. [5]