How could one generate enough radio noise to disrupt any kind of cell phone? I'm not looking for a terribly wide coverage area, say 30 feet in any direction. A friend of mine who is a school teacher asked me if I knew how to. Apparently text messaging has become a problem and I thought that would be the easiest way to disable any cell phone, short of turning the room into a giant faraday cage...
Generating Radio Noise
- Thread starter lexxmac
- Start date
I believe it's actually illegal to purposefully interfere with cellphone reception and transmission in the US. The FCC doesn't like anybody generating radio noise, and there have been concerns over people not being able to dial 911 and things like that. You are also likely to interfere with various other electronic devices, like computer monitors and wireless networks.
Many high schools have a policy against cellphone and pager use in the school building, or at least during class! The administration at your friend's school needs to deal with the problem, not cover up the symptoms.
Many high schools have a policy against cellphone and pager use in the school building, or at least during class! The administration at your friend's school needs to deal with the problem, not cover up the symptoms.
As Matthias said, it is illegal to broadcast in the same spectrum as cells phones without a license for that spectrum. The fines are hefty and criminal charges can be filed. You are allowed to passively shield for cell phones - ie. metal shielding. And there are devices that can detect cell phones that are turned on within a certain radius.
Tell him teachers have no right to violate a federal law to enforce his local classroom/school policies.
FCC prohibits deliberate interference with lawful communication and cellphone jammers are included. If your teacher does that to you, get your parents to call the district office that it's a violation of federal law and you'll pursue a complaint with FCC. If something happens as a result, such as not being able to make emergency calls, the district is legally liable for it.
FCC prohibits deliberate interference with lawful communication and cellphone jammers are included. If your teacher does that to you, get your parents to call the district office that it's a violation of federal law and you'll pursue a complaint with FCC. If something happens as a result, such as not being able to make emergency calls, the district is legally liable for it.
How about just saying "Anyone caught text messaging during class will be sent to the office. I will not tolerate that behavior."
If it is high school, the kids won't have the nerve to directly disobey. If it is college, he could just fail them (after a warning, of course).
Text messaging makes it very easy to cheat on quizzes/tests/etc., so there should be no problem outlawing that behavior in the classroom.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Are there schools that rely on cell phones for making outside calls? I thought most (ALL?!) schools were on land lines.
edit: I think the FCC should revisit the idea of it being illegal and allow the marketing of devices that block cell phone useage within a certain radius. Thus, places like movie theaters, schools, etc. could function more normally. In regard to the text messaging: it wouldn't be too awfully difficult for someone to build that feature into a graphing calculator - or to even remove the "guts" of a calculator and put in a text messenger. (in fact, isn't there one type that offers that feature?) Catch that one while they're taking a test. (or are you going to suggest that teachers stop and search every calculator before every test?)
No. But there is always the possibility of a landline failure - it may be quicker for someone to use a mobile phone to make a call than running across a campus to make a call.
This raises the problem of where do you stop. How would you define exactly where you can and cannot use such a device? How can you ensure that under any circumstance (forseeable or not) that your equipment will not disturb any equipment outside of the desired area?
Surely, all you need to do is tell people not use their phones in such places - surely it isn't too hard to ensure that they are turned off, or left in a locker? E.g. in school, make it clear if your phone beeps, rings, receives a text message etc. during a test that you will be evicted, and your answer paper destroyed (i.e. zero-tolerance). In a cinema, make it clear that if your phone bleeps, then you should expect to be thrown out of the auditorium.
Well, you could do what my school did. You were only allowed to bring a calculator if it was on a short list of models (mandatory requirements were no text memory and no program memory). You would bring your calculator to be examined by a technician some point during the year, and they would put a tamper-proof security sticker on it. Only calculators with an intact security sticker were allowed. All others would be removed during the exam.
Where I live it is actually legal to block phones in for example a lecture hall, all you need is a permit (I think you also need to show that you are not interfering with traffic on the outside)-
.
Some universities have already bought equipment that block the phones during exams.
.
Some universities have already bought equipment that block the phones during exams.
Cell phone blockers are very popular, especially in Japan. Do a Google search. I have seen them for sale in the $100 range.They are intended to provide a quiet evening for dining out or the theater. They are on continuously in some restaurants. The range is a couple of hundred feet and for the most part fall under the RADAR as far as the FCC is concerned because of the low power. Myself, I would prefer some kind of homing missile. Go to www.phonejammer.com.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Great. Now, if more places would start using them... Nothing's worse than trying to enjoy a nice dinner at a fine restaurant than having to listen to some douchbag who thinks he's so important that he has to spend 10 minutes talking loudly into his cell phone which has already rung loudly (with a most obnoxious song, I may add) at least 5 different times.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
linkified (phonejammer.com)
Cool... $159. I'll bet it would be fun to play with... interupting cell phone calls made by idiots driving and chatting at the same time, etc.
Cool... $159. I'll bet it would be fun to play with... interupting cell phone calls made by idiots driving and chatting at the same time, etc.
That's all great... you think you are doing the world a favor by blocking cell phone calls in restaurants or driving on the highway.
Oh, that is until you inadvertantly block an emergency cell phone call to the doctor 2 tables away from you and some poor sap dies as a result.... or until the father 2 cars over from you misses the birth of his son because you are jamming him.
Yes, there are situations where it is annoying... but you cannot start depriving people of their property just for your convenience.
I think that if they could come up with a way of automatically placing all phones on vibrate in a certain radius, then we could talk... but to completely block the service is just wrong.
Oh, that is until you inadvertantly block an emergency cell phone call to the doctor 2 tables away from you and some poor sap dies as a result.... or until the father 2 cars over from you misses the birth of his son because you are jamming him.
Yes, there are situations where it is annoying... but you cannot start depriving people of their property just for your convenience.
I think that if they could come up with a way of automatically placing all phones on vibrate in a certain radius, then we could talk... but to completely block the service is just wrong.
From phonejammer.com:
Still illegal in the US. It's like a radar detector -- it's not illegal to buy or own one, but you're not allowed to use them in some states. Certain European countries allow these kinds of devices in movie theaters, restaurants, etc -- but I believe they also require signage indicating that one is in use, so that you don't get problems like the above post talks about (doctors not getting calls/pages, etc.)
Several cellphone companies are working on standards for doing this. You'll probably see it on the market in a year or two if they can get their act together. They also want to stop cameraphone use (at least the camera part) in certain areas (locker rooms, etc.), which has apparently been a problem lately in Japan.
Still illegal in the US. It's like a radar detector -- it's not illegal to buy or own one, but you're not allowed to use them in some states. Certain European countries allow these kinds of devices in movie theaters, restaurants, etc -- but I believe they also require signage indicating that one is in use, so that you don't get problems like the above post talks about (doctors not getting calls/pages, etc.)
Several cellphone companies are working on standards for doing this. You'll probably see it on the market in a year or two if they can get their act together. They also want to stop cameraphone use (at least the camera part) in certain areas (locker rooms, etc.), which has apparently been a problem lately in Japan.
Pulsar
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2003
- 5,224
- 306
- 126
Hey AbsolutDealage,
My GOD man, you're right! What DID these people do before cell phones! All those people dying, all the children being born, and all! And all those dead areas inside many restaurants where cell phones won't reach! They must be responsible DAILY for letting people die, etc etc.
Cell phones are an /unnecessary/ convenience. One that fails regularly. Batteries. Weather. A thick roof. Overloaded network. Dropped the phone. People who have mission critical operations damn well have a backup plan in place, because cell phones are about as unreliable as it gets.
The trick to understaneding all this is to realize that your convenience simply does not override someone else's right not to be obnoxiously intruded upon - when proposing marraige in an expensive restaurant, when on a first date, when watching a movie that you just paid out the nose for.
Jam them to hell and back. Make these overly pretentious folks with superinflated egos wake up and realize that other people inhabit the world they live in.
My GOD, what happens when these folks ride the subway........
My GOD man, you're right! What DID these people do before cell phones! All those people dying, all the children being born, and all! And all those dead areas inside many restaurants where cell phones won't reach! They must be responsible DAILY for letting people die, etc etc.
Cell phones are an /unnecessary/ convenience. One that fails regularly. Batteries. Weather. A thick roof. Overloaded network. Dropped the phone. People who have mission critical operations damn well have a backup plan in place, because cell phones are about as unreliable as it gets.
The trick to understaneding all this is to realize that your convenience simply does not override someone else's right not to be obnoxiously intruded upon - when proposing marraige in an expensive restaurant, when on a first date, when watching a movie that you just paid out the nose for.
Jam them to hell and back. Make these overly pretentious folks with superinflated egos wake up and realize that other people inhabit the world they live in.
My GOD, what happens when these folks ride the subway........
The fact still remains that these dead areas are caused by existing conditions. It is not the fault of the building designer or the roofers that cell phone signals cannot reach certain areas of a building... buildings are certainly not designed around cell phone usage. "Dead" areas in these cases arise from natural surroundings, and blame cannot be pointed in anyone's direction. The problem arises when you actively try to block these calls, because you are then liable for the situations that result.
The argument that the technology did not exist before is moot. The technology does exist, and people do depend on it. As for the unreliability of cell phones, once again, the argument holds no water. The weather/roof/overloaded network/etc conditions arise from natural occurrances, and no finger can be pointed. Batteries die and phones are dropped, but that is the owner's responsibilty to have the phone in working order. Cell phones can be quite reliable... if they are of high quality and are in the hands of the right people. At the end of the day, you are still actively removing service, and then you could be responsible for what happens.
First of all, you have no "right" to a quiet and peaceful surrounding. Any time you are surrounded by people, you have to deal with the fact that you will be "intruded upon". Can you go rip the shoes off the guy behind you who is incessantly tapping his foot? How about slapping some duct tape across the mouth of the girl who keeps laughing really loudly? While we're at it, why don't we outlaw singing "Happy Birthday" in restaurants... that's an "obnoxious intrusion" to me...
You need to realize that there are people who have phones that are not a "convenience". For some people, thier livelihood (among many other things) depends upon their cell phones. In essence, you are saying that your "silence" is worth more than *anything* that could come from them having a cell phone. When you do that, once again, you are the fall guy.
Also, not everyone who has a cell phone is inconsiderate. When I go to a movie/church/nice restaurant/first date/etc, I put my phone on vibrate. When I get a call, I make sure it is not from work, and then dismiss it. If it is from work, I move to a more appropriate location and take the call. I understand that not everyone is as curteous, but you cannot take away someone's property simply because they annoy you. As I see it, this is not an issue of anyone's "rights", this is an issue of etiquette. Just because there are ignorant people out there is not a good reason to take away service from everyone (including those who use their phones in a more socially acceptable manner).
Just because you may need a cell phone does not make you "overly pretentious", nor does it give you a "superinflated ego". Some people need cell phones, whether you like it or not. They pay for the service... and as you put it... you need to "realize that other people inhabit the world..."
But you go ahead and jam them... really... have fun.
When the FCC comes knocking on your door, and you're stiffed with a $25,000 fine, post back so I can laugh at you. The FCC is there for a reason, you obviously have no concept of that.
Maybe they don't, because they know there exists a "natural" dead-zone, and they cannot miss a call.
Yes.. I know... "Well then they will not go to the movies/restaurants/etc because they know that those places have jammers". Realize that you are, in this case, actively preventing those people who need thier phones to go into such places. You have no right to deny them access simply because of their job/pregnant wife/etc.
As a practical matter, if you are using a cell phone jammer the only thing cell phone users would notice would be that their phone doesn't work. The chances of being caught are minimal especially if your device has a range of only a hundred feet or so. With any luck at all the judge would have one in operation in his courtroom.
there are bands that are unlicensed, and you can in theory, still cause interference on other frequencies, if you know how to bounce things properly. =P
I wouldn't go testing that. I know a guy who got caught using an unlicensed HAM... that was a nice hefty fine. I would never think in a million years they would go after someone for a HAM radio (given the demise in its popularity over the years). The FCC is very picky about the airwaves, I would not go mass-polluting them if I were you.
Whether you know it or not, people do monitor radio traffic, and people do get caught using unlicensed equipment. You may not get caught today or tomorrow, but eventually you'll be busted.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
First of all, I'll agree wholeheartedly with you that it's really an issue of etiquette.
However, on realizing that other people inhabit the world, and everyone's personal little rights to do things...
You seem to forget that a person's right to do things STOPS when it interferes with other people's rights.
Your right to use your cell phone doesn't necessarily give you a natural right to use it in your car, causing your attention to be diverted from driving, and causing an increased risk to me. In most states, it's not illegal (yet) to do so, nonetheless, stating you have the right to do something simply because it hasn't been outlawed is wrong. If I invented a flashlight that was 20 times brighter than the sun, could I shine it at people's houses all night long, keeping them from sleeping... I'll bet there isn't a law in most communities barring such a thing, but that doesn't mean I have the right to do so. I mean, I have the right to read outside at night and see where I'm going, don't I??
Your rights end at the tip of my nose. I have the right to enjoy a movie that I pay to attend without it being interupted by cell phones going off. I'd suggest (and bet many people would applaud) that legistlators write laws banning having cell phones ringing in theaters, punishable by a fine, but... (Hmmmm, what *are* the buts for that one? Oh yeah, lobbying money.) I'd suggest that there be laws written banning the use of cell phones while driving. Numerous studies have proven that drivers are more dangerous and distracted while talking on a cell phone... much more so than other activities such as drinking coffee or eating take-out. And, some states (NY was the first) even HAVE a law banning the use of cell phones while driving... however, NY caved in to lobbyists and only banned hand-held cell phones, even though studies have shown that "hands free" isn't any better. (think- - more money for cell phone companies by selling accessories)
Yes, you mention that cell phones are necessary for some people's livelihoods. Granted. That doesn't give them a right to be intrusive upon other people's rights. If my livelihood was pig farming, it wouldn't give me the right to walk into a restaurant for lunch, reeking of pig sh!t, with slop stuck all over my clothes. Of course, I wouldn't have time to shower, 30 minutes for lunch, and that'd be down time. It's my livelihood afterall. My choices: shower or don't go to the restaurant. The entrepreneur's options: turn off the phone's ringer, or stay out of the theater. And if you have it set to vibrate and it's an important phone call, leave the theater BEFORE you answer the phone.
Again, except for the issue of presenting a danger to other drivers while using a cell phone, it's mostly an issue of etiquette.
Cellphones while driving are a safety issue, and many states already have laws against using them (at least without a handsfree kit) while driving. Whether or not they will be enforced (they're not; I still see it all the time) is another question.
Shining bright spotlights onto someone's house at night would likely fall under "disturbing the peace" in at least some jurisdictions. Many areas have laws about light pollution. It's usually in the same statutes about noise pollution (ie, playing loud music late at night).
I agree, but where do you draw the line? What about people that munch loudly on popcorn and talk with their friends during a movie? What about teenagers who make noise during a movie? What about parents with kids that keep talking or crying during a movie? Should we make all those illegal, too? Maybe we should just place all the annoying people in the US under house arrest indefinitely.
A better solution would be for the theater to unceremoniously throw out anyone whose cellphone rings during a movie, but that wouldn't be very popular with people who use cellphones regularly (and would require them to actually have people sitting there during every movie enforcing it, at least for a while).
If Congress starts passing laws solely to enfore etiquette, I'm outta here.
Shining bright spotlights onto someone's house at night would likely fall under "disturbing the peace" in at least some jurisdictions. Many areas have laws about light pollution. It's usually in the same statutes about noise pollution (ie, playing loud music late at night).
I agree, but where do you draw the line? What about people that munch loudly on popcorn and talk with their friends during a movie? What about teenagers who make noise during a movie? What about parents with kids that keep talking or crying during a movie? Should we make all those illegal, too? Maybe we should just place all the annoying people in the US under house arrest indefinitely.
A better solution would be for the theater to unceremoniously throw out anyone whose cellphone rings during a movie, but that wouldn't be very popular with people who use cellphones regularly (and would require them to actually have people sitting there during every movie enforcing it, at least for a while).
If Congress starts passing laws solely to enfore etiquette, I'm outta here.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter