FCC Proposes $48,000 Fine To Man Jamming Cellphones On Florida Interstate 427
New submitter freddieb writes: "An individual who had been jamming cellphone traffic on interstate 4 in Florida was located by FCC agents with the assistance of Hillsborough County Sheriff's Deputies. The individual had reportedly been jamming cellphone traffic on I-4 for two years. The FCC is now proposing a $48,000 fine for his actions. They say the jamming 'could and may have had disastrous consequences by precluding the use of cell phones to reach life-saving 9-1-1 services provided by police, ambulance, and fire departments.'"
Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming (Score:5, Informative)
It is Distracted Driving Awareness Month.. From http://www.nsc.org/safety_road/Distracted_Driving/Pages/Hands-free-is-not-risk-free.aspx
Isn't it just as distracting to talk to passengers?
- A passenger is able to spot and point out driving hazards
- A passenger is another set of eyes
- A passenger is able to recognize when traffic is challenging and stop talking.
Re:Another valuable investment of tax payer dollar (Score:5, Informative)
On April 29, 2013, the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) received a complaint from Metro PCS4 that its cell phone tower sites had been experiencing interference during the morning and evening commutes in Tampa, Florida. Based on the location of the towers and the times that the alleged interference occurred, the Bureau determined that the likely source of the interference was mobile along Interstate 4 between downtown Tampa and Seffner, Florida.
On May 7, 2013, agents from the Bureau’s Tampa Office (Tampa Office) initiated an investigation into this matter and monitored the suspected route. On May 7, 8, and 9, 2013, the agents determined, using direction finding techniques, that strong wideband emissions within the cellular and PCS bands (i.e., the 800 MHz to 1900 MHz band) were emanating from a blue Toyota Highlander sport utility vehicle (SUV) with a Florida license plate. On May 9, 2013, the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office (Hillsborough Sheriff), working closely with the agents from the Tampa Office, stopped the Toyota Highlander SUV. The Hillsborough Sheriff deputies reported that communications with police dispatch over their 800 MHz two-way portable radios were interrupted as they approached the SUV.5
So it took them a grand total of three days to find the guy. The two years figure comes from his own admission of how long he's been using the jammer.
Re:Why did he do it - and why didn't they ask? (Score:5, Informative)
Mr. Humphreys admitted that he owned and had operated a cell phone jammer from his car for the past 16 to 24 months. An inspection of the vehicle revealed the cell phone jammer behind the seat cover of the passenger seat. Mr. Humphreys stated that he had been operating the jammer to keep people from talking on their cell phones while driving.
Re:Sounds fair to me (Score:5, Informative)
Jammer was in car (Score:5, Informative)
If you read the article, you'll notice he was operating the jammer from his car while driving. It's a lot harder to track down a moving jammer than a stationary one.
Re:The Slashdot Beta (Score:4, Informative)
http://soylentnews.com/ [soylentnews.com]
Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming (Score:5, Informative)
What's the difference between talking on a cell phone and talking to a passenger?
According to Harvard [harvard.edu] it is quite different.
Re:Darwin shot and missed on this one (Score:4, Informative)
It did jam emergency communication equipment too
The Hillsborough Sheriff deputies reported that communications with police dispatch over their 800 MHz two-way portable radios were interrupted as they approached the SUV
...
...
On June 14, 2013, agents from the Tampa Office tested the seized cell phone jammer and confirmed that it was capable of jamming cellular and PCS communications in at least three frequency bands: 821-968 MHz, 1800-2006 MHz, and 2091-2180 MHz.
Public safety radio systems (such as those used by police, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians) operate in several portions of the 800 MHz band, which consists of spectrum at 806-824 MHz paired with spectrum at 851-869 MHz.
http://www.fcc.gov/document/48... [fcc.gov]
Re:That seems fair (Score:3, Informative)
Except with BART, they didn't interfere with the signal, they shut off the amplifier that they controlled. A BIG difference. A fine is an expected outcome for illegally interfering with airwaves.
He wasn't just jamming cell phones (Score:4, Informative)
In the article it states that the Sheriffs lost contact with dispatch too as they neared the car. So ignore his supposed noble effort to stop cell use while driving, he was actually endangering lives by blocking communications for first responders.
Re:Sounds fair to me (Score:2, Informative)
Fines can be both compensatory and punitive. Making taxes pay for it is equivalent to making everyone pay for the trouble one person caused.
Re:In the absence of an effective goverment... (Score:5, Informative)
Government has failed to act to address these safety issues.
But, sacdelta, you did have a comment when a government tried to act to address one of these safety issues:
Please! Take action so we don't have to take responsibility for our own lives. Heaven forbid we ever have to think for ourselves. [slashdot.org]
A better solution may be to force anyone who complains about how this type of thing negatively impacts them to take a class in self control.
Re:He wasn't just jamming cell phones (Score:5, Informative)
Sheriffs around here (FL) use the 800mhz public safety allocation (digital trunking /w encryption in their case - which requires a good signal to function), and a cell jammer would need to smash that range as well because some networks use frequencies around 800mhz or 850mhz.
This highlights why jammers are such a bad thing. The spectrum is crowded, and what might be perceived as useless by someone with a jammer might be neighbored by something important.
Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming (Score:5, Informative)
Also (cited later in the thread)
"It seems counterintuitive: why is talking on a cell phone while driving any more distracting than talking to a passenger? The reasons have to do with the way our brains process information, reports the Harvard Mental Health Letter."
"One study using a driving simulator found that drivers conversing by cell phone were more likely than those talking to passengers to drift between lanes and to miss an exit they were instructed in advance to take. When the researchers analyzed the complexity of the conversations in this study, they found that drivers and passengers tended to modulate their speech in response to external traffic cues. For example, they stopped talking when a traffic problem developed, or the passenger would offer advice to help the driver navigate. "
Ship AN. "The Most Primary of Care — Talking about Driving and Distraction," New England Journal of Medicine (June 10, 2010): Vol. 362, No. 23, pp. 2145–47.
Strayer DL, et al. "A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver," Human Factors (Summer 2006): Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 381–91.
article [harvard.edu]
Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming (Score:5, Informative)
You don't like people using the phone while driving. Well guess what, there are people in range that aren't driving that the jammer was Fing up. There have been multiple times I've been in a car and had to call in an emergency because of vehicular wrecks, semi-trucks driven by drunks, fires, and a trestle collision.
Don't forget about everybody else that's not even in a car, yet still in range to be Fd up by that jammer. People walking along, in their homes, etc.
Of course, if it just magically only affected cell phones, it would still be limited effects, but guess what, cell phones don't use a single contiguous band of frequencies. Other things do use those gaps between the cell phones, so you're screwing up even more things! In some cities that would be part of their emergency response systems. I know of a couple of places that have sensors at various places, and guess how they report their information? Yes, via cell phone.
The guy was an inconsiderate asshole that was a greater potential danger to the public than the morons using phones while driving. In my opinion, he's lucky they're only going for the fine instead of also slapping him with a public endangerment charge of some kind. (If he is in one of the areas where it might mess with the ERS, then they could totally screw him.)
If someone is doing something illegal, call the cops.
If someone is doing something you don't like, but it isn't illegal, suck it up fat boy!
If you choose to break the law and screw with everyone else, possibly putting people at risk instead of the previously mentioned actions, you deserve to have your sanctimonious ass thrown in a deep dark hole.