Cell jammers

[Perfection]

This is bad...

Cool as hell, but very bad. Not only are you interfering with others right to the airwaves which they are paying for, but you are releasing quantities of potentially unhealthy radiation without their consent. I'm not sure if it would be very dangerous, but considering there re concerns over cell phones causing cancer, and these things pump out WAY more power than cell phones... I mean it's probably not much opf a risk, but it's still unethical to expose people too without their knowledge.

I wouldn't worry about the radiation too much, these things don't pump out that much power. Microwave radiation is pretty harmless unless you get enough of it to cause thermal damage.

Cell phones are a vital piece of infrastructure and jamming them in public needs to be illegal. Now as to what sort of legislation should be put into place is a whole different animal and it's tricky to say if they should be allowed in private establishments or not. Private establishments often have other options (faraday cages) but they are expensive and aren't always workable (say in an open air cafe).

 

[ParadigmShifter]

So are you guys saying you would rather put your head inside a 600watt microwave oven than have 10x60 watt bulbs shine on you?

 

[Perfection]

So are you guys saying you would rather put your head inside a 600watt microwave oven than have 10x60 watt bulbs shine on you?

Of course not! The microwave oven is far more efficient at getting heat into my body (and an isolated part of it at that) then the light bulbs in your case, if it was a 600 watt light bulb in my mouth I'd be hard pressed to say which would be worse for me.

But this situation is quite a bit different from puny ~1Watt cell phone jammer.

 

[El Koeno]

I don't see the whole problem with people having cell phone conversations in public transport (here in the Netherlands, the railways do feature special silence sections by the way, in which cell phones are not allowed). I mean, it's not really that much more annoying than a real conversation taking place next to you: at least there's only one possible annoying person, instead of two or more.

And since when is it your "right" not to be bothered by other people's conversations? I'll tell you: since never, as it's complete nonsense. Just be a bit more tolerant to other people and you don't need your cell phone jammer.

 

[MrCynical]

So are you guys saying you would rather put your head inside a 600watt microwave oven than have 10x60 watt bulbs shine on you?

Neither has a risk of causing cancer since one photon in the visible or microwave part of the spectrum still doesn't have enough energy to break a chemical bond in DNA. The number of photons doesn't matter from a cancer point of view.

Where power does matter is the thermal effects. Since you've specified they have exactly the same total power output they are by definition putting out the same amount of energy in any given time period. It comes down to the relative absorption/reflection of microwaves and light. The microwave happens to be much more effective at transferring heat, and so will heat your head to a damaging degree more rapidly. I also think you'll find that sticking your head in box the size of a microwave with 10 60 watt bulbs won't do it much good either. Thermal effects are not an issue with cell phones though. By definition you'd feel your head heating up adjacent to the cell phone, and it would need to physically burn you to do any real damage.

 

[IglooDame]

These things are actually pretty bad because

1.As people become increasingly reliant on cell phones the ability to interrupt the ability to communicate with them becomes more potent.

2. Imagine that you are going to rob someone that lives in an apartment building. Taking into account that apartments are close together, and might be inhabited mostly by people with cell phones only (like my apartment is), you could almost instantly negate the victim, and any neighbor from contacting the authorities.

The benefit of being "less annoyed" is not compelling enough to warrant the risk of disabling the only form of communication people have and the potential exploitation by criminals.

Yeah, because criminals are dissuaded from acquiring them to assist with violent home invasions because they're currently illegal. Surely there's a few landlines or VOIP internet connections within earshot of the breaking & entering? Or perhaps the potential victims should seek multiple layers of protection, instead of relying purely on 911 and its somewhat variable response time?

QFT.

In fact, I have one in the trunk of my car that jams all cellphone signals within a 4km radius around my vehicle. Not only does that allow me to jam drivers' cell phones, but the large radius makes it difficult to pinpoint where the jamming is coming from.

4 kilometers? You sure about that? Aside from the improbability of your car alternator powering such a beast, 4km radius blackout would guarantee that you become a major target to the FCC (and means that you'd be easier to triangulate upon, think lines of bearing rather than arcs of range).

 

[mrt144]

I knew that you would propose that people should have firearms.

regard

 

[MobBoss]

QFT.

In fact, I have one in the trunk of my car that jams all cellphone signals within a 4km radius around my vehicle. Not only does that allow me to jam drivers' cell phones, but the large radius makes it difficult to pinpoint where the jamming is coming from.

I would very much like to call bs on this one. AFAIK, only the military has ones that can project that kind of area...and they are bigger than a car trunk.

 

[IglooDame]

I knew that you would propose that people should have firearms.

regard

Actually "multiple layers of defense" doesn't per se include firearms. Exterior doors made more sturdy, pepper spray, interior "safe rooms", landlines, all kinds of things one can think of to help resist home invasion. Obviously, I think firearms would be one of those.

But anyway, my main point was that making these jammers illegal so that criminals don't use them in committing crimes is a somewhat illogical contention. Would you agree?

 

[mrt144]

I knew that you would propose that people should have firearms.

regardless, if you made them legal you would most definitely increase their accesibility. also you can't refute that you support one person to not be annoyed vs.people like me using theirf cells peacefully like I am right now.

 

[IglooDame]

I knew that you would propose that people should have firearms.

regardless, if you made them legal you would most definitely increase their accesibility. also you can't refute that you support one person to not be annoyed vs.people like me using theirf cells peacefully like I am right now.

I have at no point argued that one person has a right to not be annoyed vs... well, versus anything. People don't have a right to "not be annoyed" in public. I simply dislike bans in general, and feel that banning a small hunk of electronics is not a good idea.

If you want to ban the use of a jammer on public transportation, have at it. Obviously banning the use of a jammer as part of some other crime seems pointless but again feel free. I do think a business owner should be able to enforce cellphone-free zones on their property either personally or electronically, assuming appropriate notice is given so that those requiring absolute connectivity are able to take their business elsewhere.

 

[Shylock]

This could be used by people who want to cut off comminications in an area.

I.e thieves, murderers, rapist etc. Which is why if the phone doesn't work and you're in trouble, get your gun and put your back against corner.

Calling the police really doesn't do much other than dispatch a cleanup crew anyway. Besides they might try to arrest you for defending your home.

 

[mrt144]

I have at no point argued that one person has a right to not be annoyed vs... well, versus anything. People don't have a right to "not be annoyed" in public. I simply dislike bans in general, and feel that banning a small hunk of electronics is not a good idea.

If you want to ban the use of a jammer on public transportation, have at it. Obviously banning the use of a jammer as part of some other crime seems pointless but again feel free. I do think a business owner should be able to enforce cellphone-free zones on their property either personally or electronically, assuming appropriate notice is given so that those requiring absolute connectivity are able to take their business elsewhere.

what harm is there in banning a small hunk of electronics if all they can be used for is to infringe on the ability of other people to talk?

I admit it is a bit fallacious to think that criminals would use these in numbers that mean anything, but then again, people just messing with other people and being pricks about it seems more likely.

 

[Commodore]

I would very much like to call bs on this one. AFAIK, only the military has ones that can project that kind of area...and they are bigger than a car trunk.

Oh, believe me, it was VERY expensive and difficult to acquire. It is about 3 feet in length and 1.5 feet in height. The documentation I have for it says its effective range is 4km. I'll double check it to make sure

But who knows, maybe the company lied about its effective range to make it more marketable.

EDIT: Just checked the documentation, it's not 4km, it's 3km. Still that's a damn good range. Also, there are techniques one can use to prevent the jammer from emitting a constant signal, therefore avoiding FCC detection.

 

[ShannonCT]

My portable cell jammer ("jammie" I used to call him) was a godsend when I was living in Chicago and riding the El and buses every day. Some cell phone users are just complete idiots and need to be stopped, and asking a cell phone yacker politely to quiet down generally results in you being ignored, cursed at, or assaulted on big city public transportation. I'm not saying jammers should be legalized in public places, but a portable jammer with a 5-meter radius of operation is pretty innocuous and hardly a menace to society.

Jammers in private buildings should be completely legal. If it's legal to build a building so as to block cell phone signals, it should be legal to block the signals electronically. No one has the right to talk on their cell phone in someone else's place of business. The whole "I need to be connected at all times in case of an emergency" argument holds no weight. There are plenty of places where cell phones are out of range of transmitters or are blocked by physical barriers anyway. If your children/spouse/parents don't have multiple people they can call in case of an emergency, then you have failed to prepare them.

 

[MobBoss]

Oh, believe me, it was VERY expensive and difficult to acquire. It is about 3 feet in length and 1.5 feet in height. The documentation I have for it says its effective range is 4km. I'll double check it to make sure

But who knows, maybe the company lied about its effective range to make it more marketable.

EDIT: Just checked the documentation, it's not 4km, it's 3km. Still that's a damn good range. Also, there are techniques one can use to prevent the jammer from emitting a constant signal, therefore avoiding FCC detection.

Dude, if you got caught with that you would go away for a very, very long time.

 

[MobBoss]

No one has the right to talk on their cell phone in someone else's place of business.

Why not?

8910

 

[ShannonCT]

Why not?

8910

Because court after court has ruled that businesses have the right to refuse to admit/serve/accomodate a person based on his/her behavior if that refusal serves a legitimate business interest. Keeping polite patrons from being annoyed by cell phone abusers certainly qualifies as a legitimate business interest. Hence, businesses can have "no cell phones" policies and can build Faraday cages.

 

[Perfection]

I've never owned a cell phone in my life. I hate cell phones. They are the scourge of modern society.Sorry but cell phones are unessecary completely. They haven't improved our quality of life or anything they've just made things worse and more complicated.

I have never found myself in a situation when I needed a cell phone, and I have no intention of ever getting a cell phone either. People got around fine before cell phones existed, I don't see why they're oh so indespinable now. Use a bloody normal phone like people did before or something.

All this can be blamed on the bloody advertisers and companies, who are creating false demand for their product by making it seem nessecary when its actually not. Cell phones are yet another symbol of capitalist decadence. Corparations do this sort of thing all the time, selling people products they don't need. They've created an entire bloody pseudo-culture and lifestyle around cell phones. My class mates were horribly shocked and horrified when I told them I didn't have a cell phone, never owned one, and never would. They went on and on about the many vauge and unlikley situations that could befall me due to me not having a cell phone. Oh so very terrifying, I've managed to survive for the first bloody 17 years of my life without a bloody cell phone and I can bloody well contiue to do so.

Humans are just bloody sheep aren't they. Advertisers brainwash them into thinking cellphones are this amazing device sent by Allah himself but seriously WTH. Their bloody not. I don't need their fancy feautrues or cameraphone, built in map, GPS and loads of other crap they put in the phones tese days. Especially that Applie iPhone which is the largest piece of . .. .. .. . I've ever set eyes on. Damn apple. The iPhone, and the iPod and Mp3 players are all products of modern consumerist society. Damn that.

Damn cellphones.

I approve of cell phone jammers the Flying Spaghetti Monster has delivered it through divine intervention. May he be praised.

Oh for Pete's sake. Cell phones are popular because they're handy. Just because you can survive without them doesn't mean that they're loads of crap. They're nice to coordinate meetings and can act as a permanent number for people with nonpermanent homes (college students). I was quite late in getting a cell phone but it was difficult to communicate with employers/potential employers without it.

In fact, I have one in the trunk of my car that jams all cellphone signals within a 4km radius around my vehicle. Not only does that allow me to jam drivers' cell phones, but the large radius makes it difficult to pinpoint where the jamming is coming from.

I would very much like to call bs on this one. AFAIK, only the military has ones that can project that kind of area...and they are bigger than a car trunk.

Oh, believe me, it was VERY expensive and difficult to acquire. It is about 3 feet in length and 1.5 feet in height. The documentation I have for it says its effective range is 4km. I'll double check it to make sure

But who knows, maybe the company lied about its effective range to make it more marketable.

EDIT: Just checked the documentation, it's not 4km, it's 3km. Still that's a damn good range. Also, there are techniques one can use to prevent the jammer from emitting a constant signal, therefore avoiding FCC detection.

I'm thinking you probably got lied to here (and I'm not certain you aren't lying either), looking at the stuff on the internet it seems that the trunk sized stuff operates at less then a kilometer and those that operate over are quite large.

But at that range I think it's pretty irresponsible for people to use them for simple convenience, you're not going to be able to determine if the call is meritious of being stopped (and even then I'm not warm to the vigilanteist usage of low power cell phone jammers).

Jammers in private buildings should be completely legal. If it's legal to build a building so as to block cell phone signals, it should be legal to block the signals electronically. No one has the right to talk on their cell phone in someone else's place of business. The whole "I need to be connected at all times in case of an emergency" argument holds no weight. There are plenty of places where cell phones are out of range of transmitters or are blocked by physical barriers anyway. If your children/spouse/parents don't have multiple people they can call in case of an emergency, then you have failed to prepare them.

There's a significant difference between a faraday cage and installing a jammer. That is a jammer can affect people off the property. Your cafe jammer can't be allowed to disrupt the signal of everyone who passes in front of the store or are at thier neighbors. As such it is important that if these things are to be used they must be installed properly and inspected through a tightly regulated government certified process. You shouldn't be able to purchase and install these devices from the home depot.

 

[Japanrocks12]

IMO these things should be installed in movie theatres.

this is the only place they need to be allowed. Otherwise, they need to stay illegal. It's like the only justification for this is the annoyance of the third party that isn't talking on the phone, which isn't nearly enough of a reason to allow these to be used.