Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

[CaseyJones]

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/25392761/driver-caught-using-cell-phone-jamming-device

A Florida man is facing a $48,000 fine for using a "jammer" in his SUV to keep people around him off of the phone while he was driving.

The Federal Communications Commission says that Jason R. Humphreys used a phone jammer in his vehicle during his daily commute on I-4 between Seffner and Tampa for about two years before he was caught.

Metro PCS alerted the Feds of an issue in April of 2013. The company noticed that its cell phone tower sites had been experiencing interference during the morning and evening commutes.

Agents from the FCC used direction finding techniques to find that strong wideband emissions were coming out of a blue Toyota Highlander SUV driven by Humphreys.

The FCC says that Hunphreys admitted to using the jammer to keep people from talking on their phones while driving.

Federal law prohibits the operation of jamming devices in the United States.

The FCC says that jamming devices cannot be authorized because they can compromise the integrity of the nation's communications infrastructure, including 911 and police calls during an emergency.

 

[tod evans]

Another case of behavior that's acceptable for government is an indictable offence if a citizen does it...

 

[Matt Collins]

wow... I'd like more details on this thing... how powerful was it? How many watts was it putting out?

 

[angelatc]

Another case of behavior that's acceptable for government is an indictable offence if a citizen does it...

If you pay for a cell phone, is it really right that another "do-gooder" should be able to stop you from using it when you're in the same vicinity as he is?


I think they should be legal in theaters and churches - any place where the property owner wants them turned off. But this guy was shutting off people who just happened to be in his vicinity when he was in public. Is that freedom, really?

 

[Root]

Who owns the airwaves again? I forget.

 

[tod evans]

If you pay for a cell phone, is it really right that another "do-gooder" should be able to stop you from using it when you're in the same vicinity as he is?


I think they should be legal in theaters and churches - any place where the property owner wants them turned off. But this guy was shutting off people who just happened to be in his vicinity when he was in public. Is that freedom, really?

I'm not arguing for this guy to be able to jamb cells, I'm arguing against government doing it...

Government would be within the authority I'd grant them to point out the guy doing the blocking to those being blocked..But I'm not getting behind a $48k prosecution either....

 

[angelatc]

I'm not arguing for this guy to be able to jamb cells, I'm arguing against government doing it...

Government would be withing the authority I'd grant them to point out the guy doing the blocking to those being blocked..But I'm not getting behind a $48k prosecution either....

Gotcha. How much you wanna bet this guy gets in the left lane and drives the speed limit, too?

 

[Philhelm]

If you pay for a cell phone, is it really right that another "do-gooder" should be able to stop you from using it when you're in the same vicinity as he is?

I think they should be legal in theaters and churches - any place where the property owner wants them turned off. But this guy was shutting off people who just happened to be in his vicinity when he was in public. Is that freedom, really?

I hate cell phones and the fact that people are on them so often, on or off the road. The fact remains that cell phones are a distraction while driving, and I've seen too many dipshits almost cause accidents because of it. But having a couple of beers is a crime. Of course there shouldn't be a law to prevent people from talking on their idiot machines, but I applaud this guy for his jammer. Bravo.

 

[donnay]

Another case of behavior that's acceptable for government is an indictable offence if a citizen does it...

They will probably recruit him.

 

[Tod]

If you pay for a cell phone jammer, is it really right that another "do-gooder" should be able to stop you from using it when you're in the same vicinity as he is?


I think they should be legal in theaters and churches - any place where the property owner wants them turned off. But this guy was shutting off people who just happened to be in his vicinity when he was in public. Is that freedom, really?

there.

 

[brandon]

Who owns the airwaves again? I forget.

This is one of those great questions that I think has no good free market solution.

 

[Kotin]

lol guy is a sort of a badass for that in my mind.


wont argue for the right to do it but yeah..

 

[Tod]

This is one of those great questions that I think has no good free market solution.

This is actually very much like the smoker's argument that people don't own the air and therefore have no right to tell a smoker they can't smoke in a public area where other people are affected by the smoke. In this case, the jammer is the smoker and he would be saying that people don't own the airwaves and therefore have no right to tell a jammer they can't jam in a public area.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

But think of all the lost tickets this guy may have cost the police municipality... he may have forced them to do their real job, and go after real criminals. How dare he.

 

[fisharmor]

I've seen too many dipshits almost cause accidents because of it.

Technically, I almost get my wife pregnant about 15 times a month.

It's like saying "It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye". I hate that saying. OF COURSE it's all fun and games, why do you think we're playing Jarts to begin with?
You throw your Jart directly at someone, you decide this one time you don't need the rubber, or you try to finish your text while approaching a light, and you're going to lose the fun-and-games lottery.

 

[Ronin Truth]

This is one of those great questions that I think has no good free market solution.

The Philosophy of Ownership

Robert LeFevre

The significance of property ownership has rarely been fully appreciated, writes Robert LeFevre.
He proceeds to present the entire libertarian case for private ownership, with his characteristic clarity of exposition. He makes what is a radically hard-core case for the absolute integrity of self ownership and property ownership but in a way that comes across as common-sense. He shows that how a society thinks about the issue of ownership is not just a matter of details; our very survival depends on it.

Here is an excellent overview of a topic that Mises said was the foundational idea of liberalism itself. But it's more than an overview: it is a strong case for iron-clad, impenetrable, and no-exceptions social rules on ownership.

http://library.mises.org/books/Robert LeFevre/The Philosophy of Ownership.pdf

 

[brandon]

The Philosophy of Ownership

Robert LeFevre

The significance of property ownership has rarely been fully appreciated, writes Robert LeFevre.
He proceeds to present the entire libertarian case for private ownership, with his characteristic clarity of exposition. He makes what is a radically hard-core case for the absolute integrity of self ownership and property ownership but in a way that comes across as common-sense. He shows that how a society thinks about the issue of ownership is not just a matter of details; our very survival depends on it.

Here is an excellent overview of a topic that Mises said was the foundational idea of liberalism itself. But it's more than an overview: it is a strong case for iron-clad, impenetrable, and no-exceptions social rules on ownership.

http://library.mises.org/books/Robert LeFevre/The Philosophy of Ownership.pdf

Would rather hear your thoughts than be given a link to a 100 page PDF about property.

 

[francisco]

...OF COURSE it's all fun and games, why do you think we're playing Jarts to begin with?

LOL

 

[pcosmar]

lol guy is a sort of a badass for that in my mind.


wont argue for the right to do it but yeah..

Made me grin.

But then I don't use the damn things.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Would rather hear your thoughts than be given a link to a 100 page PDF about property.

Thanks, my thoughts are that the PDF is better.