"Jamming a cell phone is illegal in the U.S. Very illegal. And not just by ordinary citizens. It's illegal for theater and restaurant owners to jam (block) calls, and even state and local police or prison officials. The U.S., in fact, has the strictest laws in the world against jamming cell calls." http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/160420/should_cell_phone_jamming_be_legal.html Should a church be allowed to jam cell phones during church services or during your mother's funeral? Should an upscale restaurant be allow to prevent customers from sending or receiving calls in the dining room? Should a theather be allowed to jam cell phones during concerts or should warbling cellphones and shouting users be legally protected? I suppose you've already guessed how I came down on this issue. I don't understand why your right to scream into a cell phone should trump my rights as a property owner in banning cell phones. I would happily, proudly, post a sign saying cell phone jamming was in progress. So, what is your opinion?
It would be a clear violation of FCC regulations to "jam" the signal. However, intentionally diminishing signal strength is not.
I just took a deep breath, Someone, and that probably violated a law or regulation in the U.S. I realize the U.S. has the strictest laws pertaining to interfering with cell phone operation and it would follow we also have draconian regulations on the same subject, but should we? Why should a property owner not have a right to ban cell phone use on his property. If you don't like it, don't go to the concert, church, restaurant, funeral, or whatever. Why should we all be required to listen to cell phones chirping and nitwits shouting inc concerts, funerals, and move theaters. I do wonder how we all managed to cope with "emergencies" before cell phones. Oh, we didn't. That's why we all died young.
If you can't shout "fire", then your phone should be off. If you are so indispensable that you can't go a couple of hours without it, stay away so others can enjoy the show. Otherwise you may find the signal is very poor. Alternatively more actors should do this. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuT6_uvB_9Q&feature=related"]Hugh Jackman Cell Phone Blow Up MUST SEE UN-Edited - YouTube[/ame]
The issue with jamming signals arises from the method by which a signal is jammed; you basically just send an even more powerful signal at the same frequency as the signal you intend to jam. That violates FCC regulations splitting up the spectrum. It's the same reason pirate radio stations are illegal, despite the fact that many of said stations provide much better signal quality than commercial stations. The electromagnetic spectrum is public property, not private property. The government merely sets aside some frequencies for public use, and licenses the others. Breaking apart this system would end up creating electromagnetic havoc where no radio signals could be expected to work reliably. Do you like having your cell phone function at all? If so, you like FCC regulations on the matter, because if they weren't so strict about the electromagnetic spectrum, your cell phone probably wouldn't work anywhere. The problem is that the concert hall, church, restaurant, etc... has no way of jamming that does not also interfere with people nearby. That's just a problem with how jamming works. What these businesses can do is build their buildings in such a way so as to reduce signal reception. That's perfectly legal. They just aren't allowed to broadcast hugely powerful signals on frequencies set aside for public use--which is how a "jammer" works.
I would agree that cell phones can be jammed on private property , I think for an example at a theater it would be applauded , a notice should be posted so a Doctor or somebody on call would know, I for one am sick of not hearing the movie due to rude cell phone users
Couldn't this be accomplished without destroying all radio communications? For example, by having movie theaters enforce a no cell phone policy? It seems a little harsh to condemn us to a world without wireless communications just to solve such a minor problem.
I don't buy it, Someone. We had a major discussion in Mexico when reporters figured out their cell phones were jammed in churches for funerals and weddings of famous people. No one during the discussions said the jamming units caused any problems with neighboring properties. It simply never came up as an issue. The government jams cell phones to prevent them from being used to detonate a bomb. It the jamming device sends out simply a stronger signal on the same frequency you would expect that to set of the bomb, too. When the subject has been discussed the two issues raised, until now, have been, I want to use my cell phone when and where I please and screw you and I have to have it for emergencies. The justification I've seen from the liberal government is that people have purchased cell phone service and if you jam it on your property it's theft of services. I think that's bull(*)(*)(*)(*).
how is someone going to call 911 if the signal is being jammed? if property owners are going to be allowed this equipment, how long will it be before criminals do? handheld cell phones aren't' the only things on these frequencies. home and commercial alarms are too.
Yes. Cell/mobile phones will have to be jammed at some point. Because of the obvious reason that people don't turn them off when asked or the situation arises. As usual with society, technology rules will be applied to save people from themselves. (i hope so anyway, cell/mobiles at the cinema, should be a criminal offence) Also criminalise annoying ring tones. And any phone that looks better than mine.
Did anyone actually bother to test it? And while it may work on a limited scale for a few certain events (as noted, we do that in the US as well), allowing anyone to broadcast on whatever frequency they want with however much power they want would create chaos. An anecdote about a well planned and limited use of a cell phone jammer does not in any way diminish the problem. ... that's not... how... a cell phone... works. Does your cell phone ring every time someone near you gets a call? No? Because the signal is complex; it's not just an overwhelmingly powerful broadcast sent out continuously. That's a poor way to talk about this, because the basis of this lies in taming the electromagnetic spectrum, not merely in facilitating communication convenience. Regular voters may feel that the imposition on them is the inconvenience of not having a cell phone signal, but the real problem would come from letting anyone broadcast whatever they want on any frequency they want at whatever power they want. That precedent would quickly result in the entire spectrum becoming unusable. The better justification lies in the threat this poses to management of the electromagnetic spectrum. There are good and valid technical reasons why you do not allow anyone to broadcast any signal they please on any frequency they want at any level of power they want... because that will simply jam signals. Just like picking up the signals from two radio stations on the same frequency at the edge of their broadcast range.
You can't falsely shout fire with the intent to incite a riot. There may be many good reasons to shout fire, such as if there really is one or if it is part of the production and the audience is not likely to panic over it. One could argue that there are also good reasons why cellphones should not be jammed, such as calling to report an emergency, or those who must leave their phones on in order to receive emergency calls. I would not propose criminalizing the use of jammers on private property, as it is the right of property owners to do what they please on their property. However, they may lose the business of those who rely on their phones for emergency calls, and they must not allow their interference with cell phones extend to the property of neighbors (without their express permission).
I think we need to know what rights prisoners have. Do they have the right to call whomever, whenever they want? If not, then having a cell phone violates the terms of their sentencing. Also, if a jamming signal is limited to the confines of the prison how is that going to affect anyone else? Maybe all new prisons should be Faraday cages? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage
"Therefore, when you use a mobile phone jammer, you don’t have to worry about putting yourself or anyone else in danger. Police, fire, and EMS radio users as well as pager users can still communicate, but your customers, patrons, or students won’t be disturbed by non-emergency mobile phone chatter. A cell phone scrambler can provide a quiet environment. Once the mobile phone jammer is turned off, the phones will automatically reestablish communication with the cellular base stations -- and those affected by the jammer will once again be able to receive cellular services. It should be noted that using mobile phone jammers does not damage phones in any way." http://www.thesignaljammer.com/page...-Usage-and-Maintaining-Emergency-Contact.html I'm not an engineer but the claim that jammers destroy cell phones didn't pass the smell test so I checked. Here's one site and one comment. If you go with Google you find a lot of information but I haven't found one yet that says the phones are damaged. Perhaps someone can find something saying jamming destroys cell phones.
Agreed. I don't talk on my phone like some of the annoying people referred to on this thread, but sometimes I need to be connected. So if your business jams calls I may just choose a business that doesn't.
on private property: 1. Post a sign. 2. Ensure that the signal disruption does not extend beyond property lines. 3. Make available a landline for emergency situations. Case closed.
Jamming phone signals on private property would open up a huge can of a legality worms. Ie, Anyone walking past your property or even driving past might lose their phone signal with the jamming device in operation. Private property vs public right of way and even vs goverment responciblity of city usage. Also vs the cell/mobile phone corperations who might even sue to stop their service being stopped.
And that is immiently reasonable and fair. I do think businesses, churches, concert halls, cemetaries, courtroom, and anywhere else, should be required to post a sign saying cell phones are being jammed.
And, of course, it needs to stop at your front door. It would get beyond annoying to have cell calls dropped as you pass certain businesses while walking down the street! Or driving by if it is jammed that far. But within your business that is fine. It is your business after all. Run it as you see fit. That's why I hate no smoking laws.
I dont see any harm. Maybe there should just be a range restriction on jammers (Not to exceed the property line)
Gee, Wolverine, it doesn't work, does it? Signs saying, "No Cellphones" or "Turn you cellphone off" are ignored by the self-centered nitwits who are convinced they're the center of the universe. That's why we still have cell phones ringing at funerals and concerts and why we still have nitwits in fancy restaurants shouting into the their cell phones. Wow, maybe we shouldn't allow homeowners to resist home invasions. We can just ban them. I'm going to put up my sign right now.
