Deactivate Per Call Blocking

self | 9/17/01 | self

[VA Voter]

The phone company service provided to those wanting to remain anonymous is called PER CALL BLOCKING.

I recommend that Congress and the President require all phone companies in the U.S. to immediately deactivate this "service" so that the crazies and terrorists alike cannot hid from where they are making their threatening phone calls.

Likewise the phone companies should be required to provide CALLER ID to all phones so that all incomming calls can be traced.

VV

[litany_of_lies]

Do you want to flag the anonymous tips, too, so that reprisals can occur? Just a thought; the general idea is not a bad one. I've always had a problem with callers not willing to tell me who they are before I pick up the phone.

[jeffo]

Not so hasty now, that would make it very hard to make prank calls. It would destroy one of the Simpsons' best jokes.

Just kidding. I was under the impression that although you can block your number from the receiving party the phone company still has full records, and all it takes is a court order...

[Chad Fairbanks]

Bull$*t... I have Caller ID Block on my phone, and I also pay a fee to have an unlisted number. However, people have the opportunity to pay a small fee to have their phone NOT accept phone calls from blocked numbers. So, in the event I call someone who does not accept Blocked Numbers, I have to dial a code to turn off my caller id blocking for that one call.

I value my privacy, and do not do business with any company that needs to know my phone number just because I call to make an inquiry - I noticed that calls from telemarketers increased after I would call a business after turning off my caller id blocking, so now any business that requires my phone number be displayed when I call them can do business with someone else.

Government offices can refuse to accept calls from blocked numbers, and I have no problem with that. I DO, howver, have a problem with people telling me that I HAVE to provide my phone number to anyone and everyone who wants it.

[jlogajan]

The records still exist, it just isn't forwarded to the calling party. You can do a trace request, and surely the police can gain access. However, there are pay phones etc that allow this sort of stuff to occur. So you can't prevent it anyhow.

[Free the USA]

Per call blocking does not stop officials from knowing who called. The number does not show up on the recipients caller ID unit but is still temprarily stored in the phone company computers and can be retreived, at least here in Washington State.

[freeeee]

Um, haven't you heard of Pay Phones?

Just another attempt at restricting liberty, without even thinking things through is all I see here.

[PhiKapMom]

I don't answer unavailable calls. I actually have Privacy Manager so the person calling can say who it is, but since I found some telemarketers lying, I don't answer that either! Leave a message in my voicemail. If that isn't good enough for folks, then that is their problem not mine! BTW, the phone company has a record of all calls that are made and from where.

[HalfIrish]

Exactly right. I have that feature. If someone calls me, they cannot get through until the hiding feature is turned off. It's a great service. If you can't be upfront with me, you ain't getting through. Period. It completely eliminates telemarketers as well.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Exactly right... but then, I'm even worse... if I'm not expecting a call, I probably won't answer the darn phone ;0)

I have a BIG problem with the whole idea of ME being required to give up MY privacy because some idiots do something wrong...

[zeugma]

All calls are logged no matter what. There are even records kept by the phone company if the call is busy. Records are kept if even a single ring is made, and then the call hung up. What you are proposing will only further screw those of us who make an effort to protect some remaining shred of privacy. If you don't want to answer blocked calls, don't. That's simpler than passing yet another law don't you think?

[TexRef]

When you call an 800 number -- such as an airline reservation number -- call block does not prevent them from seeing the number from which you are calling -- even if you use call block.

This would do nothing anyway... Why not just use a pay phone? Steal someone's cell phone? etc, etc.

[Redbob]

Sounds like another great idea - for nibbling away at our freedoms.
Seems like whenever there's a crisis of any sort, the truly bad ideas surface first.

[discostu]

Blocking only blocks things from being shown to Caller ID boxes that are available for home use. Baby Bell knows the to and from in every phone call in the nation. All calls to 1-800, and 1-888 numbers are displayed regardless of blocking (same for fee based phone calls). You've got a solution without a problem.

[Salvation]

Likewise the phone companies should be required to provide CALLER ID to all phones so that all incomming calls can be traced.

BTTT!

[Eugene Tackleberry]

"You've got a solution without a problem"

May I respectfully change that to "You've got a FAULTY solution without a problem"?

[discostu]

Kind of what I was getting at. I'm deeply steeped in the religion of "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Therefore problemsless solutions are inherently faulty. Of course, even if there were a problem, this solution is pretty half baked.

Everybody should work for a big tech support house for a while. You'll learn a lot about how America's phone system works.

[Kithlyara]

This is a majorly, bad idea!

A couple of years ago, my brother was almost killed. Due to not all of the perpetrators being caught, and all of them knowing my brother's name, my parents moved, got call blocking, and changed their number to an unlisted number. A year or so ago, the phone company screwed up and accidentally listed a lot of unlisted numbers in the phone book. My parents were in a panic until they got a new phone number.

Having call blocking and an unlisted number may seem like a small thing, but it helps my parents, and my brother who lives them, feel at least a little safer.

[skip2myloo]

VA Voter -- while your suggestion is well-intended, it represents knee-jerk thinking. As another writer here suggests, all a terrorist has to do is use a pay phone, or a disposable cell phone for sale in any 7-11.

A terrorist knows these things -- so the only thing your suggestion would do is violate law-abiding citizen's rights to privacy.

And, this is a "slippery slope" issue too -- does the government have the right to listen in during a private face-to-face conversation ?? No, of course not.

Just because someone uses some technology to place a conduit in the path of the conversation, doesn't automatically impute to the government some unlimited new right to monitor private conversations. It doesn't matter whether it's tin cans and a string, or a phone or e-mail.

Once you start down this path, the next thing you know -- the government will claim an unrestricted right to read all the mail in America. After all, if a terrorist knows someone is listening to their converstaions -- they'll just spend $.34 and mail a letter. Yeah, it's slower -- but, it's secure, private communications. At least it is so far, unless the government obtains a court order.

Then, what's next after that ??