Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC Proposes $48,000 Fine To Man Jamming Cellphones On Florida Interstate

Posted by Soulskill on from the can-you-hear-me-now dept.

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.'"

10 of 427 comments (clear)

  1. Probably saved more lives with jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's just disgusting how many people use their cell phones while driving.

    1. Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming by Drethon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More likely killed more people who were looking down at their cell phone "Why isn't this damn thing working!".

    2. Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming by Drethon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd be less worried about the people going 80 down the freeway with a cell phone and more worried about the ones doing 45 in the city with a cell phone.

    3. Re:Probably saved more lives with jamming by Enigma2175 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "There's a long list of reasons that a phone call is different from a passenger."
      None of which has been actually shown to distract any more then having a passenger, or kids, or the radio, or a blond in a convertible drive by..

      Yeah, talking on the phone is only as bad as drunk driving. From the study: "We found that people are as impaired when they drive and talk on a cell phone as they are when they drive intoxicated at the legal blood-alcohol limit”. It doesn't matter if the call is made on the phone or using a hands-free set, having the conversation is the distracting part. From the article:

      "The study found that compared with undistracted drivers:

      Motorists who talked on either handheld or hands-free cell phones drove slightly slower, were 9 percent slower to hit the brakes, displayed 24 percent more variation in following distance as their attention switched between driving and conversing, were 19 percent slower to resume normal speed after braking and were more likely to crash. Three study participants rear-ended the pace car. All were talking on cell phones. None were drunk."

      It is true that there are a lot of things that distract drivers and every time there is a cell phone thread this point is brought up. The world isn't black and white (distracting vs. non-distracting). There are differing levels of distracted driving depending on the activity performed. Tuning the radio is not as distracting as watching TV. Smoking is not as distracting as making icy margaritas. And talking to a passenger is not as distracting as talking on a phone (although talking to a passenger while driving is distracting). When laws are made to restrict driving, legislatures must balance taking away freedom with a compelling public interest. Obviously some states feel that the freedom to use your phone while driving is outweighed by the societal harm from drivers distracted by such activities.

      With your sig, I am really surprised that you take this position. Long before Dunning and Kruger wrote their famous paper it was well known that nearly everybody overestimates their skill in driving (c.f George Carlin on "idiots" and "assholes"). Have you considered that maybe you don't drive as well as you think you do when you are talking on the phone?

      --

      Enigma

  2. The Slashdot Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Slashdot Beta is already having disastrous consequences on this website. The beta site just crashed my browser, and while there currently is an option to proceed to the old version (which I managed to click, just in time, after restarting my browser), I'm sure that even this option will soon disappear.

    I'm not an old timer ranting just for the heck of it, (Disclaimer: I've just been on this website for close to 6 years now, five of those were during my engineering degree. Note that 6 years is a very short period of time, compared to some of the commenters who frequent this website, they've been here for much longer, though the way things are going, I doubt that they're going to stick around). The beta is truly unusable, is just a blatant advertisement for tech jobs by the new owners of this website, and destroys the comment system entirely.

    I don't come here to read "News for Nerds", because the submissions made these days are just a blatant waste of time. What I do come here for are the comments. There is an absolute wealth of experience among the users on this website, from system admins to web developers to people with all sorts of careers, and from all sorts of backgrounds, not just technology. I come here to read their comments. This is also one of the greatest places to find absolute gems of wit (+5 Funny, I'm looking at you). I attempted to use the Beta to this purpose, but it failed miserably.

    TL:DR; I come here for the comments, I won't be coming here any more if the beta becomes the default. Yes, this is a rant. Yes, this is offtopic. Yes, this will be modded as such. But I just needed to say that. Thanks.

  3. Collateral Damage? by mosb1000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know if this has occurred to you or not, but not everyone inside a car is driving a car. And if you do get into a car accident, it would be nice if you or someone in the area could call emergency services.

  4. Re:Maybe blocked a roadside call... by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Definitely stopped several talking and driving accidents.

    How are you so sure? Because you like vandalism, so it should be supported?

    --
    Learn to love Alaska
  5. Re:In the absence of an effective goverment... by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

    His vigilantism wasn't necessary. He accomplished nothing at all with his nonsense than to possibly create a public hazard. What about car passengers? Are they "allowed" to use the phone? How many drivers do you suppose tried redialing again and again? He solved nothing at all. What arrogance.

  6. That seems fair by Minwee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Particularly since the FCC levied a similar fine against BART in August of 2011...

    Oh, wait. They didn't do anything at all then. But they're coming down like Thor's hammer on Florida Man.

    How does that saying go? "You're everything we've come to expect from years of government training".

  7. Jamming is a terrible solution. by thevirtualcat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most jammers work by blasting noise on whatever channels you are trying to block.

    Perfect band pass filters are not a thing the exist, especially not for transmitters. Especially not for transmitters cobbled together by some guy on the cheap. The assumption that they do is why they (rightfully) smacked down LightSquared.

    So, let's do a little exercise:

    First, look at the 800 MHz Band Plan
    http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedi...

    See that slot right below "Cellular?" You know, that cut-away that has all the "Public Safety" allocations? Now, let's look at a quote from the FCC posting:
    "According to deputies from the Sheriff’s Office, communications with police dispatch were interrupted as they approached Mr. Humphreys’ vehicle."

    The jammer was blocking police radio. Not just cell phones. He was actively interfering with public safety communications. NON-CELLULAR public safety communications.

    Personally? $48,000 is getting off easy. I'd add another order of magnitude onto it.