"To jam or not to jam "

I am a regular subscriber of "Urgent Communications" online and hard copy magazine.
This issue captures my interest on jamming the cellphone band on a certain purpose, " disable cellphone's signal to be used as bomb detonator". This company who makes this jamming device may also jam the regular user within the area of a suspected bomb location.


TO JAM OR NOT TO JAM
Nov 19, 2008 10:26 AM, By Lynnette Luna
I first met Howard Melamed in 2005 during the APCO show in Denver. He was already deep into his one-man crusade to urge the FCC to allow public safety to use jamming devices to ward off the dangers of cell-phone-triggered explosives.
The CEO and president of CellAntenna was quite passionate and spoke seemingly a million words a minute during our meeting, stressing that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were the weapon of choice among terrorists. Three years later, his passion hasn’t waned, despite the fact that he can’t get the FCC to see his point of view.
It’s illegal to use any radio-frequency jamming equipment by private and public organizations. The law has been in place since 1934. CellAntenna mounted a judicial challenge to the constitutionality of the law in 2005, seeking to allow the use of cellular jamming equipment by state and local governments and first responders. It was unsuccessful as the court said it didn’t have jurisdiction. CellAntenna has now filed for a petition for rulemaking with the FCC to allow state and local governments to use jamming equipment.
Public-safety groups have filed petitions with the FCC over the matter too, including the GEO Group, which manages prisons around the country. It wants the FCC to allow state and local prisons to jam cell phone signals. Apparently cell phone smuggling in prisons has become a growing problem as criminals use them to traffic drugs, arrange murders or just gab for hours. Most recently, a Texas death row inmate used an illegal cell phone to threaten state Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, the chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, which oversees prison operations.
The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) opposes the idea of cell-phone jamming, saying the practice would have unintended implications, such as jamming up 911 calls and of course disrupting cell-phone signals for millions of customers which in turn could disrupt the businesses of the mobile-phone operators they represent.
Yet on Friday, Melamed and company plan to demonstrate CellAntenna’s jamming technology at a South Carolina prison, risking enforcement action by the FCC that could include $16,000 a day in fines. CTIA is urging the government to put a stop to the event. CellAntenna insists that its jamming technology has the ability to disable communications only within a certain area, without jamming signals of nearby users.
The reality is that the issue can’t be ignored. As cell phones continue to proliferate, so will the ways they can threaten the public’s safety, as well as those sworn to serve and protect. The FCC claims it doesn’t have the authority to grant waivers to state and local entities, only to federal agencies and only in extreme cases when the public is in imminent danger. Will it take an act of Congress?
All I know is that it’s time to begin exploring ways public safety can stop nefarious uses of cell phones, whether that’s cell-phone jamming or other technology such one promoted by Tecore Networks. It has developed selective call processing that restricts calls by differentiating user groups and enabling policies for each.
The wireless industry is full of intelligent folks. It shouldn’t be impossible to come up with solutions that don’t harm legitimate uses of cell phones. They just need the freedom to do so.

Courtesy of : Urgent Communications magazine

> Dandy Lachica, K6ZRH

 

Cell phone jamming should be REQUIRED in movie theatres and on airplanes.

OK... now I will be serious; I believe cell phone jamming should be allowed anywhere within your own property... such as a movie theatre or restaurant if the jamming does not extend outside the property. Then just require people or businesses operating jammers to post a sign saying "your cell phone will not work here". So if someone is an emergency room doctor or transplant patient or something they will know to just leave their cellphone with the receptionist.

It's like smoking; if you want to smoke while eating go to a restaurant that allows it. If you don't like it, go to a restaurant that prohibits smoking. If you like to hear jerks yakking on a cellphone after paying $16 to see a movie then you can go to the theatres that allow that. I'll go to the theatre that jams the cellphones (and I'll pay extra to see a movie in that theatre !).

 

Hmmm, sounds like ol Wyatt Earp when you had to hand over your gun before you went into town.

Seriously though, jamming should never be allowed. To solve the problem, manufacture and distribution of cell phones should be made illegal just like drugs.

K2WH

 

Jam

Jamming can mess up any possible use of the cellphone for normal use. But jamming is not likely to prevent the cellphone from ringing in any normal signal-strength area. Therefore, jamming is of dubious value in preventing use by terrorists and may even prevent calls for help after an explosion if the transmitter is concealed and thereby protected from damage.
I am sympathetic to those that hate that loud and vulgar cellphone user in a restaurant (etc.). Rather than jam, it should be permitted to remove the cellphone from the users lips with an ordinary baseball bat. Points should be added for hang time and form.

K5CO

 

Jamming's downside is that it can affect the two-way radios used by police and fire.

I like the analogy to "no smoking" and I wonder if it might be better to develop signal alarm systems that trigger when transmitted cellphone signals are detected.

The cellphone, while powered up, "polls" its nearby cell tower every so often even when the phone itself is not in use. That's how it's possible to track kidnap victims and crooks who have a known cellphone on them.

So, a loud, well-enforced alarm system would quickly discourage patrons in restaurants and elsewhere that they will be caught just as easily as blowing some smoke from lit cigarette.

 

A fan of cell phone jamming.

I have been a long time fan of cell phone jamming. I do not yet have such a device, but, if I did, I would use it in movie theaters, meetings, to return a driver's attention to the road, etc.

As in most social issues, the self centered actions of the few dictate actions that affect the many. In this case, many cell phone users are courteous, but, it only takes one idiot to disrupt a movie. Therefore, legal or not, if the house does not have a jamming system in place, individuals should take the initiative and carry their own.

On a related note, I have a 10 gHz hand held transmitter that I carry in my car. Those speeding scofflaws who think their radar detector gives them a free pass to speed on the highway are in for a surprise when they come within range of my tractor beam. I feel I'm doing a civic duty in slowing the speeders near me. Plus, it's a lot of fun.

 

Let's think this one through. A first responder shows up on the scene, and turns on their cel phone jammer to prevent a secondary explosion triggered by a cel phone.

If such devices come into common use, the simple counter-measure would be for the secondary explosion to be triggered by the jamming device.

 

measures and countermeasures

Been there and been done. One advantage to knowing your signal might cause a secondary is you detonate from under cover. Most EOD guys will tell you the safest way to deal with an IED is to blow it in place. It won't hurt you if you are somewhere else when it goes off.

Terrorists have even been known to plant dummy bombs and surrepticiously film how the first responders deal with the device. The idea of using one bomb as bait for the victims of a second device are old hat.

Still, it may not be common knowledge yet, but the Federal government does jam cellphone in some areas. While possession of a Minox camera and a Luger pistol tipped you off to the Nazi spy in those old movies, virtually no device as ubiquitous as the cell phone with cameras, recorders and GPS built in has ever been better suited to espionage and nefarious deeds. No spy needs to steal the plans anymore, he can copy them to his thumb drive.

 

bunk
don't hand out any
civic duty bull
you are not doing any civic duty

their breaking the law does not justify
your breaking the law

as much as i do not care for cellphones
keep mine turned off

jamming of cell phones
is is just as bad or worse than some fool
disturbing your movie viewing pleasure

doctors, volunteer firemen, and other public service
people need to be available

so are you going to jam their cell phones

does joining a volunteer fire department
mean never dining at a first class restaurant

jamming cell phones
what next
which other service bugs you

making it legal to jam cell phones

sets a legal precedent
that can lead to places
we don't want to go

would rather suffer a dozen
yahoos with their cell phones

than one self righteous " blank blank "
that decides to do something

mac

read or die

 

This is as stupid as saying a deer rifle may be used as a snipers weapon, therefore they should be banned. If eateries and theaters made offenders pay for the tickets or meals of other patrons maybe you would see less of this rudeness. Theaters could be built as a faraday cage, but that would be too expensive, I do like the baseball bat removal idea. This is just too slippery a slope to start down.

 

Maybe I'm Missing Something

But I don't see his argument regarding improvised explosive devices. If cell phones couldn't be used to trigger a bomb, what's to stop the bad guys from using any of millions of other radio frequency devices? A child's walkie-talkie, or even a garage door opener, for example. Lots of cheap one-way transmitters are available. Those old "no transmissions, blasting zone" signs were there for a reason.

 

jamming for first responders to any terrorist theat or simmilar threat should be common practice.it is a valueable asset that saves lives when used correctly.ive seen it it works and it works well with "radio" controled explosives, ie cell phones and other 2 way devices. the jamming can be limited to a small area or a very large area depending on whats used and wont effect the radios of the first responders when done right.

as far as using it in resraunts and movie theaters that is just retarded. you re just going to have to deal with it as anyoing as it is.using things for safety is one thing but using it because your were inconvenced is another


K8GJP

 

That would defeat their whole storyline. They insist you turn cell phones and any other electronic devices that transmit a radio signal off while on a plane under the threat of it interfering with navigational equipment. To use a signal capable of jamming such devices would likely require the same signal although stronger and under their current words of wisdom would be sure to bring planes down left and right.

 

The flight attendants recite the "because it may interfere with navigational equipment" mostly to ensure compliance. That might be one of the reasons, but the main reason that cel phone use is prohibited airborne is because (especially with the analog cel phones) of the potential for interference to cels on the ground. Since you might be within range of dozens of cels, you take one frequency out of commission in each one. It's actually an FCC regulation that prohibits their use in aircraft. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the FAA regulations simply cross-referenced the FCC rule.

But it's a lot easier for the flight attendant to make a statement about interfering with flight instruments, and it ensures greater compliance. "Don't use your cel phone, because it might make it harder for people on the ground to make calls" isn't very dramatic. But "don't use your cel phone, or the plane might crash" carries a bit more weight. And other passengers will be much more likely to rat you out.

 

You're right on the fact that all the device needs is a ring signal. I've seen plans for remote rocket and fireworks detonators using cell phones (same principal different purpose). They all involve ringing, it does not take any electronics knowledge to figure out how to do it, just think. I do see legitimate civilian uses for cell phone jammers, but a license should be required. These uses are:
-Police Search Warrants and other raids
-Courtrooms
-Jury Rooms

Notice how Movie Theaters, Restaurants, and even classrooms did not make my list (classrooms almost did). These three areas involve a safety risk, in Movie Theaters and restaurants a cell phone would be useful in the event of a choking emergency. Classroom jamming may have too wide of a range and the jamming devices may not be turned off when needed (tests). I also removed Sensitive Corporate environments as the range of the jamming would be too wide and it would be too easy to justify an area as sensitive. These leave only local and state government uses. Searches and RAIDs would be jammed to prevent communication by the suspects. Courtrooms would be jammed to prevent several problems such as distractions in the trial and to prevent jurors who sneak a cell phone past to receive outside influence, the jury rooms are on the list for the same reason.