Why do we have laws like this?

[Kelvin Mace]

I asked this question in relation to a story about charges being dropped against a man who was accused of "groping" a 14 year-old girl on an airplane. I won't address the validity of the charges, since evidence to draw such a conclusion is lacking in the story, but I want to ask about this sentence that bugs me:

Aboubacar Soumah had been charged in federal court in Utah with abusive sexual contact aboard a plane

Do we have an entirely separate part of USC that simply restates the entire body of criminal statute and then adds the words "aboard a plane"?

If not, why would we need a separate law to prosecute what is already illegal on the ground, in a mound, on a ship with a whip, or in a box with a fox?

This reminds me of the whole "Communications Decency Act" in the 90's making it illegal to solicit a child for sexual acts "via modem". Well hell, why stop there? What about by telegraph? Or smoke signals? Let's not forget semaphore, signal flags and two cans connected by string. Wait, wait, I forgot sign language!! Then we must be concerned about solicitation of minors by rebus, crossword puzzle, classified ad, fortune cookie, Little Orphan Annie decoder rings and Bazooka Joe comics.

[SteppingRazor]

1. It probably dates to the beginning of commercial air travel.

A new law had to be written to make sure that what was already law on the ground also applied to the air.

Those "modem" laws you mentioned were instituted for similar reasons.

[Kelvin Mace]

6. seems easier to add a single statute

"All criminal statutes herein apply to airplanes, spacecraft, teleportation devices, and TARDIS' (TARDII?), etc..." than repeating the entire penal code and adding "on an airplane".

[closeupready]

2. I'm not sure, but I think often, it's a way for lobbyists to find ways

in order to draw lawbreakers into their sphere of enterprise, whether it's monitoring bracelets or special id cards or electronic databases of offenders or whatever. That is, charging someone in the traditional means fails to line someone's pocket.

[elleng]

3. A jurisdiction issue; 'technical.'

[Warpy]

4. The laws applied relate to the airspace

the plane was occupying at the time. If it was over Utah, then Utah laws will apply to the scum bucket.

It gets more complicated when the plane is over international waters.

[Kelvin Mace]

5. I understand jurisdictional concerns

But I am sure that even Utah has a law against sexually assaulting a 14 year old.... (OK bad example). I am sure that Utah has laws making "mopery" illegal. You determine where the incident occurred (whose airspace), then you charge the person with mopery, not "Mopery aboard an airplane."

Creating an entire subset of laws which just adds "aboard an airplane" seems pretty freaking stupid IMHO.