Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 8/13/2011 3:35:06 PM EDT
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/13/san-francisco-transit-blocks-cellphones-to-hinder-protest/

the best quote....


"It all boils down to the safety of the public," Fairow said. "It wasn't a decision made lightly. This wasn't about free speech. It was about safety."



Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:37:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 3:38:05 PM EDT by E-Mag]
This quote comes to mind





Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.



I wonder what someone that needed to call for EMS was supposed to do or did they keep 911 open?



 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:41:48 PM EDT
Oh yes the safety of the public...............






Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:43:34 PM EDT



Originally Posted By E-Mag:


This quote comes to mind



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.



I wonder what someone that needed to call for EMS was supposed to do or did they keep 911 open?

 


they said they shut off the power to the cell towers, so basically, you can bleed out or get mugged with "no service" blinking on your phone



nice
 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:46:09 PM EDT
this is about as scary as it can get imo

Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:46:20 PM EDT
and the majority of san fran residents are to stupid/stoned or just to big of pussies to actually take a stand against bullshit like this
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:47:44 PM EDT
Wow.



Just wait, this is only "their" first step.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:48:22 PM EDT
Erosion.  Slow, almost undectable.  You don't notice it until it's too late.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:50:18 PM EDT
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.

Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:52:43 PM EDT
Years ago there were no cell phones, of course pay phones and things like fire call boxes have disappeared since then.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:53:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Phlather:
this is about as scary as it can get imo



Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:54:09 PM EDT


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:56:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 3:58:27 PM EDT by alphabavo]
Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.


Not to mention, I seriously doubt those repeaters belong to them. The space for them is typically leased, this would be the same if they killed the power to fox news, or the drudge servers.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:58:04 PM EDT
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 3:59:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 4:00:49 PM EDT by alphabavo]
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:00:22 PM EDT



Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.

Not the entire city of San Francisco.





Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.


if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.



now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line
 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:08 PM EDT


"OBEY"
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:37 PM EDT



Originally Posted By alphabavo:



Originally Posted By CWO:

People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.




It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.



 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:05:13 PM EDT



Originally Posted By _Matt_:





Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:






Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.

Not the entire city of San Francisco.





Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.


if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.



now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line





 


I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.



 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:07:37 PM EDT
Sounds like IRAN
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:11:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 4:12:43 PM EDT by Lomshek]
Originally Posted By CWO:

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 


It could be argued that the local government intentionally killed public communications with the express intent of inteferring with the publics right to assemble. Kind of the "AR's are common weapons and so can't be outlawed" argument. Since cell comms are how folks communicate plans to assemble and protest it violates that right to turn off the cell repeaters.

ETA - Not to mention it endangers the public by not being able to make emergency calls. Kind of funny my post is # 911 to make that point.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:12:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 

Like I said, its not the result, its the intent. How would you feel if .gov shut down Facebook, or god forbid, arfcom. Trying to inhibit communication sets a scary precedent.


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


Why would BART actually run the cell sites in the stations?
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:42 PM EDT
let me get this right, you can't call 911. LOL thats safe for the sheeple.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:57 PM EDT
Its for the children....
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:14:31 PM EDT
Wifi and facebook

unless the shut off the internet you can still control your group
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:16:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 

How would you feel if the Feds shut down all the repeaters in range of a Tea Party rally? Or shut down the satellite links to all of the news organizations that might want to cover it?


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:18:12 PM EDT
It's all fun and games until somebody gets the shit sued out of them for a stunt like this.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:18:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By FREEFALLE7:
Wifi and facebook

unless the shut off the internet you can still control your group

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE! The fact is, they tried to stop communications between individuals.


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:19:23 PM EDT
Who needs a gun in San Fransisco?  The cops are only a phone call you're not allowed to make away.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:19:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 


If I take away your Bible, how does that prevent you from worshiping?  If I take away all your paper, how does that prevent you from speaking freely?  If I take away all your ammunition, how does that prevent you from keeping and bearing arms?
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:21:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


This could be interesting. Most carrier owned or contracted sites have emergency power that wouldn't have gone down if BART shut off the power. If they jammed the signal the FCC would be all over them. I'm not sure how underground repeaters work though in terms of power or ownership.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:21:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


We have a winner.  I work for a major metropolitan transit company (by contract) and they own repeaters that are placed within a large transit tunnel.  They are perfectly within their rights to turn off their own equipment whenever they see fit.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:22:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 4:33:15 PM EDT by Bama-Shooter]
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:23:24 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BJohnson383:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


We have a winner.  I work for a major metropolitan transit company (by contract) and they own repeaters that are placed within a large transit tunnel.  They are perfectly within their rights to turn off their own equipment whenever they see fit.


Actually, intent has a whole lot to do with it.  Just because government is participating in a business does not mean it loses Constitutional restraints and is treated like a private entity.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:23:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Penguin_101:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


This could be interesting. Most carrier owned or contracted sites have emergency power that wouldn't have gone down if BART shut off the power. If they jammed the signal the FCC would be all over them. I'm not sure how underground repeaters work though in terms of power or ownership.


I would imagine that underground repeaters are not subject to the same rules that require backup power sources as real cell towers are. If they had backup power, chances are, there would not even be a story about it.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Lomshek:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 


It could be argued that the local government intentionally killed public communications with the express intent of inteferring with the publics right to assemble. Kind of the "AR's are common weapons and so can't be outlawed" argument. Since cell comms are how folks communicate plans to assemble and protest it violates that right to turn off the cell repeaters.

ETA - Not to mention it endangers the public by not being able to make emergency calls. Kind of funny my post is # 911 to make that point.



I do not see how they blocked the publics right to assemble. The public can still assemble just fine.

Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By Penguin_101:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


This could be interesting. Most carrier owned or contracted sites have emergency power that wouldn't have gone down if BART shut off the power. If they jammed the signal the FCC would be all over them. I'm not sure how underground repeaters work though in terms of power or ownership.


I would imagine that underground repeaters are not subject to the same rules that require backup power sources as real cell towers are. If they had backup power, chances are, there would not even be a story about it.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


How do you figure?  They were turned off.  I'm sure they can turn backup power off, too.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 4:26:10 PM EDT by Penguin_101]
Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By Penguin_101:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


This could be interesting. Most carrier owned or contracted sites have emergency power that wouldn't have gone down if BART shut off the power. If they jammed the signal the FCC would be all over them. I'm not sure how underground repeaters work though in terms of power or ownership.


I would imagine that underground repeaters are not subject to the same rules that require backup power sources as real cell towers are. If they had backup power, chances are, there would not even be a story about it.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


True. Looks like they're owned by BART. Makes you think how easily crippled communications would be if they lost power in a real emergency.

How do you figure?  They were turned off.  I'm sure they can turn backup power off, too.


If they're owned by BART that's true. If they're owned by carriers they shouldn't be able to get into the equipment to touch backup power.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:25:36 PM EDT


san fran would be a good place for the zombie apocolypse to start.

one can only imagine the scene.

Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:26:07 PM EDT
Very totalitarian of them.

Fitting that it would happen in some commie hell hole like San Fran.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:26:11 PM EDT



Originally Posted By alphabavo:



Originally Posted By CWO:




Originally Posted By alphabavo:


Originally Posted By CWO:

People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.




It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.

 


How would you feel if the Feds shut down all the repeaters in range of a Tea Party rally? Or shut down the satellite links to all of the news organizations that might want to cover it?





Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile




In the articles I read yesterday - the police didn't shut off cellular service.  The cellular providers did.  And from what I read - they did so without any orders from law enforcement.



So unless someone has authoritative information to the contrary - the police didn't shut off anything.





 
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:27:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By StretchMaK:
Originally Posted By Lomshek:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 


It could be argued that the local government intentionally killed public communications with the express intent of inteferring with the publics right to assemble. Kind of the "AR's are common weapons and so can't be outlawed" argument. Since cell comms are how folks communicate plans to assemble and protest it violates that right to turn off the cell repeaters.

ETA - Not to mention it endangers the public by not being able to make emergency calls. Kind of funny my post is # 911 to make that point.



I do not see how they blocked the publics right to assemble. The public can still assemble just fine.



This is not how it works.  

This is incorporated against the states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Now, SCOTUS has (right or wrong) recognized certain limitations (IE: Screaming "bomb" in a crowded theater).  However, government can't outlaw free speech and assembly in a public area as a general rule.  What if you wanted to conduct a protest in a public park, but your city said "no protesting within the city?"  You'd still be able to protest in another city or in the countryside, so it's cool, right?
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:28:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 

How would you feel if the Feds shut down all the repeaters in range of a Tea Party rally? Or shut down the satellite links to all of the news organizations that might want to cover it?


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


In the articles I read yesterday - the police didn't shut off cellular service.  The cellular providers did.  And from what I read - they did so without any orders from law enforcement.

So unless someone has authoritative information to the contrary - the police didn't shut off anything.

 


From the article:
Bay Area Rapid Transit officials have said they shut down power Thursday evening to cellular towers for stations stretching from downtown to the San Francisco's airport after learning protesters planned to use mobile devices to coordinate its demonstration.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/13/san-francisco-transit-blocks-cellphones-to-hinder-protest/#ixzz1UxUU4feh
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:28:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2011 4:29:32 PM EDT by Penguin_101]
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 

How would you feel if the Feds shut down all the repeaters in range of a Tea Party rally? Or shut down the satellite links to all of the news organizations that might want to cover it?


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


In the articles I read yesterday - the police didn't shut off cellular service.  The cellular providers did.  And from what I read - they did so without any orders from law enforcement.

So unless someone has authoritative information to the contrary - the police didn't shut off anything.

 


SAN FRANCISCO –– A decision by San Francisco Bay Area transit officials to cut off cell phone service at some of its stations to thwart a planned protest drew angry response Saturday from one transit board member who said she was shocked that officials acted as "this type of censor."

Bay Area Rapid Transit officials have said they shut down power Thursday evening to cellular towers for stations stretching from downtown to the San Francisco's airport after learning protesters planned to use mobile devices to coordinate its demonstration.

BART Deputy Police Chief Benson Fairow on Friday told KTVU-TV that the agency decided to turn off underground cell service because it received reports that a rowdy group that had protested in July had similar plans.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/13/san-francisco-transit-blocks-cellphones-to-hinder-protest/#ixzz1UxUQAmXK
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:29:36 PM EDT
Wow. That's kind of interesting.
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:29:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 103:
Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By Penguin_101:
Originally Posted By ApacheScout:

Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By Vault_Boy:


Originally Posted By ApacheScout:
Hmmmm. It seems its about the BART police turning off the underground cell service at BART stations.
Not the entire city of San Francisco.


Still, I don't think they have the authority to do that. In fact, I think it might run afoul of some federal telecommunications laws.

if they jammed the signal, FCC would be all over their asses.  since they simply ceased to transmit, and it sounds like it is their own equipment, then i think they are ok.

now if the equipment is owned by verizon, att, etc., then they cut power and service to legally licensed transmissions, and the FCC should fine them- no different then cutting a radio stations transmission line


 

I don't know who would own the repeaters. Its under ground, so it may very well belong to BART and is offered as a "service" to the public. They do that in tunnels too, but again, I don't know who owns the equipment or license if any.
 


This could be interesting. Most carrier owned or contracted sites have emergency power that wouldn't have gone down if BART shut off the power. If they jammed the signal the FCC would be all over them. I'm not sure how underground repeaters work though in terms of power or ownership.


I would imagine that underground repeaters are not subject to the same rules that require backup power sources as real cell towers are. If they had backup power, chances are, there would not even be a story about it.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


How do you figure?  They were turned off.  I'm sure they can turn backup power off, too.


If they have backup power, and are privately owned, I doubt the gov weasels would go in and disconnect batteries and such. It makes more sense that the just went over and cut the power at the units power cut off switch, which would be more accessible. Not saying this is what happened, I wasn't there.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:31:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Penguin_101:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:

Originally Posted By alphabavo:
Originally Posted By CWO:
People protested just fine before cell phones.  Shutting off service in the immediate facility doesn't stop a protest.


It's not what they did, its what they were attempting to do. They were trying to halt communication, pretty sure that runs afoul of freedom of speech.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Explain to me how turning off a cellular site is a violation of Constitutional rights.
 

How would you feel if the Feds shut down all the repeaters in range of a Tea Party rally? Or shut down the satellite links to all of the news organizations that might want to cover it?


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


In the articles I read yesterday - the police didn't shut off cellular service.  The cellular providers did.  And from what I read - they did so without any orders from law enforcement.

So unless someone has authoritative information to the contrary - the police didn't shut off anything.

 


SAN FRANCISCO –– A decision by San Francisco Bay Area transit officials to cut off cell phone service at some of its stations to thwart a planned protest drew angry response Saturday from one transit board member who said she was shocked that officials acted as "this type of censor."

Bay Area Rapid Transit officials have said they shut down power Thursday evening to cellular towers for stations stretching from downtown to the San Francisco's airport after learning protesters planned to use mobile devices to coordinate its demonstration.

BART Deputy Police Chief Benson Fairow on Friday told KTVU-TV that the agency decided to turn off underground cell service because it received reports that a rowdy group that had protested in July had similar plans.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/13/san-francisco-transit-blocks-cellphones-to-hinder-protest/#ixzz1UxUQAmXK


pretty much says all that needs to be said...

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:33:48 PM EDT
On the one hand, it appears that they merely suspended a convenience offered by the city: facilities for cell transmission and reception inside the transit stations.

On the other hand, this confirms that attacks on civil liberties will always come from the right. Wait . . . .
Link Posted: 8/13/2011 4:35:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By _Matt_:

Originally Posted By E-Mag:
This quote comes to mind

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

I wonder what someone that needed to call for EMS was supposed to do or did they keep 911 open?
 

they said they shut off the power to the cell towers, so basically, you can bleed out or get mugged with "no service" blinking on your phone

nice


Many people seem to have an inexplicable belief in the need for instantaneous telecommunication at all times and in all places.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top