San Fran shuts down cell phones to stop protest

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - San Fran shuts down cell phones to stop protest (Page 1 of 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."

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:37:10 PM EDT

[#1]

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?

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:41:48 PM EDT

[#2]

Oh yes the safety of the public...............

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

[#3]

Quoted:

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

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:46:09 PM EDT

[#4]

this is about as scary as it can get imo

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:46:20 PM EDT

[#5]

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

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:47:44 PM EDT

[#6]

Wow.

Just wait, this is only "their" first step.

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:48:22 PM EDT

[#7]

Erosion. Slow, almost undectable. You don't notice it until it's too late.

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:50:18 PM EDT

[#8]

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

Not the entire city of San Francisco.

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:52:43 PM EDT

[#9]

Years ago there were no cell phones, of course pay phones and things like fire call boxes have disappeared since then.

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:53:52 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
this is about as scary as it can get imo

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

[#11]

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:56:36 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:58:04 PM EDT

[#13]

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

Posted: 8/13/2011 3:59:56 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:00:22 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:08 PM EDT

[#16]

"OBEY"

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:21 PM EDT

[#17]

start here

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:02:37 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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.

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

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:07:37 PM EDT

[#20]

Sounds like IRAN

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:11:13 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:12:27 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:31 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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?

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:42 PM EDT

[#24]

let me get this right, you can't call 911. LOL thats safe for the sheeple.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:13:57 PM EDT

[#25]

Its for the children....

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:14:31 PM EDT

[#26]

Wifi and facebook

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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:16:37 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:18:12 PM EDT

[#28]

It's all fun and games until somebody gets the shit sued out of them for a stunt like this.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:18:14 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:19:23 PM EDT

[#30]

Who needs a gun in San Fransisco? The cops are only a phone call you're not allowed to make away.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:19:26 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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?

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:21:21 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:21:37 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:22:09 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Who owns what?

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:23:24 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:23:28 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:01 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:35 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:24:59 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:25:36 PM EDT

[#40]

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

one can only imagine the scene.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:26:07 PM EDT

[#41]

Very totalitarian of them.

Fitting that it would happen in some commie hell hole like San Fran.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:26:11 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:27:23 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:

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?

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:28:31 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:28:51 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:29:36 PM EDT

[#46]

Wow. That's kind of interesting.

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:29:50 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:31:29 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:33:48 PM EDT

[#49]

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 . . . .

Posted: 8/13/2011 4:35:39 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
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.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - San Fran shuts down cell phones to stop protest (Page 1 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us