This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
tools.
--0-1009399018-1184811292=:478
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Prof. Franz Blaha wrote:
> <=AE=A9=AE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:20070709054101.094$=
hv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I bet people are shaking in their boots afraid that you will
>> destroy their phone, no way, they are laughing at your
>> pencildick ass! Run to mommy you ****ing whiner!
>>
>>
>>
>> Jer <gdunn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> BruceR wrote:
>>>> Jer wrote:
>>>>> BruceR wrote:
>>>>>> > Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>> Jer <gdunn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:1392k4mg1j9k018@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>> What part of
>>>>>>>> "private property" is so difficult to understand? The front half
>>>>>>>> or the back half?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> While you might like to think that one's home is his or her castle
>>>>>> and that such rights are absolute, they are anything but.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dude, talk to the hand. I made a comment about an issue I'm
somewhat
>>>>> familiar with, and now I get a lecture on a buncha crap that don't
>>>>> even involve me. Take a break.
>>>>
>>>> Accent on "somewhat." The OP wants to know if jamming is legal
>>>> (presumably in the US). It's not. If you can't stand a challenging
>>>> reply, don't post.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you can't keep up with the thread enough to know who to challenge,
>>> I'd offer the same recommendation. So, to help you...
>>>
>>> To the OP: These folks say it's illegal, I've already said I don't
kno=
w
>>> nor care. Right or wrong, cell jammers exist for reasons I've already
>>> mentioned. Personally, I like the idea of cell jammers because it
beat=
s
>>> the hell out of destroying the cell phones of ingrates that can't seem
>>> to figure out where the off button is nor where the door is. FCC regs
>>> and opinions aside, do whatever you want just like everybody else.
>>
>
> Before the discussion deteriorates even more (if that's possible), let
me
> point out that the OP said s/he understood "they
> are illegal in the us (sic!) but they are available overseas," and
merely
> wanted to know if they did what they are supposed to do. It's a
technical
> question that interests me as well. For legal/moral questions (WHYis it
> illegal and SHOULD it be illegal?), one could start another thread
(which=
I
> would also be interested in).
OK, I'll start this thread. Cell phones are nice and convenient and being=
=20
used too much by the "me" generation who have come to the point where
they=
=20
can't live without "keeping in touch" with all the members of their
social=
=20
butterfly community and doing this in all kinds of inappropriate settings=
=20
(eg. busy traffic where cell phone distraction is known to be a factor in=
=20
accidents, movie theaters, church services, restaurants, and just
recently=
=20
at my barber shop where a guy carried on his commercial business in a loud
tone of voice so everyone heard his side and after he hung up the damned
thing rang and it took him five minutes to get it out of his pocket again
so we all had to listen to that annoying jingle all that time.
Yes, I have one. It is always turned off. I call it my heart-attack-car-
accident-emergency phone.
I can think of no drug, no behavior, no alcohol, nothing illegal, nothing=
=20
unhealthy that is as addicting as cell phones. And, people have no=20
courtesy, consideration, or forsight.
I think the idea that it is OK with THEM to force me to listen to their=20
conversations, their ringtones while they are on MY property, or in my=20
presence without my permission, is a personal offense against me.
And, what would my recourse/greivance be? Legally? Could I file charges
of=
=20
disturbing the peace?
Cell phone jammers can be found using search engines and I gather that
law=
=20
enforcement agencies use them, legally or illegally, in the course of law=
=20
enforcement and I'll bet that they worry more about their mission than
the=
=20
FCC's laws. There appear to be commercial cell phone jammers of high
power=
=20
and also used in cor****ate settings to deter industrial spying. Do they=20
have licenses? Apparently the military uses them to attempt to thwart
cell=
=20
phone mediated IED explosions/bombs.
Or, perhaps we should ask if anyone knows if there have been any cases of=
=20
person or persons using a cell phone jammer being caught and prosecuted=20
(apparently by the FCC?)? After all, there is sold IRS data that show
that=
=20
significant fractions of tax dogers (25% to 75%, depending on methods)=20
never get prosecuted by the IRS.
Not that I'm advocating broad scale disobedience of the law, but an
article
in the WSJ years ago said that it was OK for a jury to find 'not guilty'
in a clear case of guilt if the broken law was a bad law to begin with.
In=
=20
other words, there are bad laws out there. Prohibition never worked, so
it=
=20
was eventually withdrawn, too.
> Cheers,
>
> Franz
>
> P.S: Sometimes the law really is an ass (with compliments to Charles
> Dickens)
>
>
>
--0-1009399018-1184811292=:478--
|
