Posted on 03/08/2012 3:55:59 AM PST by ShadowAce
The FCC is currently seeking public comments on whether or not it is appropriate and feasible to grant local police forces the power to shut down mobile phone networks.
The request for the public’s input comes after BATR officials in San Fransisco shut down cell towers in an attempt to stop a first amendment protected protest for “public safety” reasons.
An article published by CFO World broke down the FCC request in an easy to understand fashion:
The FCC asks several questions in its request for comments. Among them:
– When have government agencies in the U.S. considered interrupting mobile service?
– When would it be appropriate for agencies to interrupt service?
– What risks to the public could be caused by interrupted service?
– Could mobile carriers allow customers to still dial 911 if other service was shut down?
If the FCC does decide to grant local police the authority to indiscriminately shut down cell phone service whenever they feel there is a public safety concern you can count on legitimate, first amendment protected activities to be targeted throughout the country.
I would like to see Sheriff Joe shut down the Wash. DC Cell system.
Just another step on the road to a total Police State.
Giving any Law Enforcement agencies this knd of power invites disaster and abuse.
Very well aware of all that. They have become dangerous to liberty. They stopped being a peace keeping force and have become puppets in a dangerous game of power grabbing. The mere fact they want this capability without any need to do so says it all.
It doesn't harm the public, it harms the socialist agenda. IMO what they want to do is keep people from being informed. They do not want a portion of the population in one part of the country to let another similar portion know what's going on. As an extreme example, if they are "dealing with" Christians and Conservatives in Atlanta, they wouldn't want the Christians/Conservatives in Huntsville, AL to know.
“How does that harm the public?”
Communications is essential to safety for a variety of reasons. Any goverment act to turn off communications is a major violation of safety and civil rights. The First Amendment isn’t about talking to people, it also encompasses the ability to communicate through technical means such as newspapers and electronics.
“A scanner does not radiate so no one will know if you have one.”
Yes they do. They are ‘superhetrodyne’ type receivers. That means they have a small, low power oscillator used to beat an incoming received frequency to produce the desired frequency. While these oscillators are very weak, equipment exists that can receive them from a fair distance away.
Slight exaggeration? I have transmitting/receiving capability from 1.6 MhZ to 480 MhZ. Those Cabela Hand Held radios are good for a couple miles at best on a continuous basis.
I'm curious about the back story here. I don't know what the acronym BATR stands for, what rationalization they gave for believing there was a specific public safety threat posed by what specific protest, and how they explained that shutting down cell towers prevented this particular public safety threat from occurring. It would seem that if the FCC is considering granting this authority retroactively, that the BATR (?) didn't have this authority at the time they took the action. I didn't know that local law enforcement had this capability in the first place. The very thought that local law enforcement agencies can shut down cell towers by their own authority, or anyone else's authority for that matter, is ominous!
Seize of power is coming, look for it. NDAA/SOPA, being pushed, once Obama has the power, he’s going to use it....what use are guns when we can’t communicate, and they can? They don’t even need to take the guns.
So, how does having the ability to communicate “harm the public”?
Obviously, taking that ability away does more harm than good...
The sheer number of recievers would flood the detectors. They would have to invest massive amounts of manpower and resources to track down everyone with a reciever. You could just turn them off if you see detectors cruising your hood.
Simple because both parties are corrupt.
The entire political system has become intolerable and it’s happened incrementally over the last 60 years and this is the end result.
Our rights have sacrificed on the altar of fighting Communism and now Terrorism.
sure, so long as the granting body, known as the citizens, has the option of shutting down the FCC or local po-po whenever we *feel* that theres a saftey issue...
Sorry, I thought you were asking the opposite. Obviously, their excuse that they need to shut down communications for the public good is BS. Their reasoning was that the public would jam communications that the emergency personnel might need. However, turning off cell phones that the emergency personnel might use keeps them from also using it, so the argument is nothing but an attempt to take control over the people.
BATR Bay Area Technical Recruiters
BATR Bullets At Target Range (USAF/USN)
BATR Bande d’Atterrissage Train Rentré (French)
BATR Bouncing Around the Room (Phish song)
BATR Breaking All the Rules
BATR British Association of Toy Retailers
BATR Business Asset Taper Relief (taxation)
Wow, talk about parallel universe. I don’t understand why the British Association of Toy Retailers would want to shut down mobile phone networks?
;-p
Not an exaggeration on my part, LOL.
The ads say 20-50 miles, depending on the radio and price. They do say “in ideal conditions.” Must be there AREN’T any ideal conditions as customers are complaining about the claims.
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit, typo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.