Slashdot Mirror


State Prison Officials Blame An Escape On Drones And Cellphones (usatoday.com)

An anonymous reader quotes USA Today: A fugitive South Carolina inmate recaptured in Texas this week had chopped his way through a prison fence using wire cutters apparently dropped by a drone, prison officials said Friday. Jimmy Causey, 46, fled the Lieber Correctional Institution in Ridgeville, S.C., on the evening of July 4th after leaving a paper mache doll in his bed to fool guards into thinking he was asleep. He was not discovered missing until Wednesday afternoon. Causey was captured early Friday 1,200 miles away in a motel in Austin by Texas Rangers acting on a tip, WLTX-TV reported... "We believe a drone was used to fly in the tools that allow(ed) him to escape," South Carolina Corrections Director Bryan Stirling said...

Stirling said prison officials are investigating the performance by prison guards that night but pointed to cellphones and drones as the main problem. The director said he and other officials have sought federal help for years to combat the use of drones to drop contraband into prison. "It's a simple fix," Stirling said. "Allow us to block the signal... They are physically incarcerated, but they are not virtually incarcerated."

It's the second time the same convict escaped from South Carolina's maximum security prison -- albeit the first time he's (allegedly) used a drone. The state's Law Enforcement Division Chief also complains that the federal government still prohibits state corrections officials from blocking cellphones, and "as long as cellphones continue to be utilized by inmates in prisons we're going to have things like this -- we're going to have very well-planned escapes..."

223 comments

  1. What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Where did he get the drone?

    1. Re:What I would like to know: by BenJeremy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Clearly he smuggled it up is ass

    2. Re:What I would like to know: by sabbede · · Score: 1

      Called a friend apparently. So what I'd like to know is why prisons can't block cell phones. Or intercept them with one of those stinger thingies.

    3. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Cartman smuggled Disneyland in his ass so any things possible ;)

    4. Re:What I would like to know: by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Where did he get the drone?

      He didn't. Someone on the outside used a drone to fly wire cutters to him on the inside.

      (goes along with the whole idea of prisons wanting to make it illegal to fly drones around prisons that Slashdotters got angry about last year because it violated their rights to fly drones wherever they wanted)

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I DO have a right to fly drones near prisons. There NO LAW AGAINST IT.

    6. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      FTFS - "The state's Law Enforcement Division Chief also complains that the federal government still prohibits state corrections officials from blocking cellphones"

      https://www.fcc.gov/general/jamming-cell-phones-and-gps-equipment-against-law

    7. Re:What I would like to know: by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I DO have a right to fly drones near prisons. There NO LAW AGAINST IT.

      But should there be? We have laws restricting drone usage around airports. I know some people are worried about some sort of precedent where dones are blocked from more and more places... but it makes sense to set up exclusion zones around prisons.

      Naturally, the very people such a law would be written to stop would be the same people that would be more willing to break the law... but it makes the act of preparing the smuggle stuff into prisons using drones more risky for the person on the outside. If you're flying a drone outside a jail with wirecutters strapped to them- it would make it legal for police to arrest you.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re:What I would like to know: by Rei · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't understand how that's supposed to address the drone problem. So you can't fly under manual control? Fine, fly to GPS coordinates and do everything automatically. A prison yard isn't exactly a small target, you don't need precision. Are they planning to jam GPS too? Fine, you're not talking a long flight, inertial guidance on a calm day should do it.

      With the amount of money involved in drug smuggling, I don't think any of this poses a hindrance except to amateurs with no connections. So unless they're planning to HERF or shoot drones out of the sky...

      --
      Dear Diary...today I was pompous and my sister was crazy.
    9. Re:What I would like to know: by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      But if there were a law against it, it would foil the plans of criminals! Oh, wait...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    10. Re:What I would like to know: by ckatko · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Drug dealers have known to use catapults.

      http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/...

      I doubt eliminating drones completely will have ANY significant affect on our nationals drug problem overall.

    11. Re:What I would like to know: by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      > Where did he get the drone?

      From the prison workshop's 3D printer of course.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    12. Re:What I would like to know: by DickBreath · · Score: 2

      If prison workshops would have 3D printers that could print wire cutters, there would be no need for drones.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    13. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Kremlin is jamming GPS, I don't see why prisons can't do the same.

    14. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drug dealers have known to use catapults.

      Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam..

      Also, if you outlaw catapults, only criminals will have catapults.

    15. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not just put a net over the whole place?

      Far cheaper. You can't possibly block every single signal that could be used to operate a drone. That's just asking for homemade solutions to get around that.

    16. Re:What I would like to know: by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      FTFS - "The state's Law Enforcement Division Chief also complains that the federal government still prohibits state corrections officials from blocking cellphones"

      https://www.fcc.gov/general/jamming-cell-phones-and-gps-equipment-against-law

      Well yeah. We have a tendency not to allow that becaise thase darn radio waves don't just stay in and around the prison.

      It's fun to be reactionary, to figure out how to never ever allow prisoners to use drones and to block their cellphones, any more in perpetuity.

      But it is hard to imagine that the same people demanding prisons use jamming techniques would not act like whiny little bitches when they find out that their phones are jammed as well.

      Damn physics anyway, getting in the way of ideology!

      Let's have a vote on Ohm's law while we are at it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:What I would like to know: by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how that's supposed to address the drone problem. So you can't fly under manual control? Fine, fly to GPS coordinates and do everything automatically. A prison yard isn't exactly a small target, you don't need precision. Are they planning to jam GPS too?

      Careful - you are giving them ideas.

      Maybe this isn't a good time to note that the drone was probably controlled by wi-fi if not GPS coordinates, so we need to allow wi-fi jamming as well

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    18. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pro Tip

      The types of folks who are using drones to smuggle in contraband could give two shits about any laws in place designed to prevent it.

      The same logic thinks banning guns inside banks will somehow deter folks from robbing one because " It would be illegal to bring a gun inside " :|

      Complete waste of time.

    19. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about netting above outside areas the prisoners have access to? Jamming GPS really fucks stuff up, read about the Navy war games off the coast near San Diego and all that GPS jamming did there.

    20. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck needs a catapault? I'm pretty sure only criminals have catapaults already.

    21. Re:What I would like to know: by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      If you're flying a drone outside a jail with wirecutters strapped to them- it would make it legal for police to arrest you.

      Sorry, officer -- what do you mean? That's not MY drone still hovering over the yard. The other one, I mean MY drone is still sitting right here. I was just playing with the flight controls before launch. I don't know who that one belongs to. Oh, gee, I forgot to bring my battery -- I'll be right back.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    22. Re:What I would like to know: by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      From Amazon.com, where else?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    23. Re:What I would like to know: by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. Those 3D printers are busy using Ninjaflex to print RealDolls 24/7.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    24. Re: What I would like to know: by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      I don't quite see why they need to jam mobile signal. I would instead listen/record/process all the incoming/outgoing calls.
      Trace them and all illegal users would be caught.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    25. Re:What I would like to know: by mysidia · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Because jamming creates a safety hazard for innocent people.

      We should probably start by making assisting/aiding an incarcerated person's escape attempt, or facilitating a person in eluding authorities crimes punishable with much greater severity, instead of the current minor penalties. They should also depend on what crimes the escaped people committed.... springing an offender with a life sentence out of jail should land a minimum of 30 years on the violator.

      Make it a misdemeanor just to fly a non-commercial aircraft within 500ft horizontal distance of a prison facility at a height of less than 1000ft.

      Finally, they should employ means of detecting drones: monitor them closely, train their employees accordingly, and identify/pick up any dropped items --- basically, more vigilant guarding.

    26. Re:What I would like to know: by Charlotte · · Score: 1

      Link?

    27. Re: What I would like to know: by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      That was Candyland even Cartman nor cremier have an ass big enough to fit Disneyland in..

    28. Re:What I would like to know: by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      As an electrician I would like to see Ohms law forbidden. It would make my job a lot easier if I could just coax the electrons to do what o want them to do instead of what they want to do.

    29. Re:What I would like to know: by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      From someone who has been to prison. First off there are people serving life sentences for weed. They should be let out or atleast get a reduced sentence as a lot of America has or is in the process of decriminalizing weed. Second your part about the guards guarding. They sit in the bubble(what inmates call the locked room the guards few safe in) and they play on their cell phone and look thru the naked pictures of the inmates girlfriends that get sent in. If they had to actually work they would complain. They want to do nothing but be the bully they couldn't be in high school. Look up how many prison guards have domestic violence arrests for beating their wife's. Way more than there should be I can tell you that. And that's the shit they brag about on shift.

    30. Re: What I would like to know: by Highdude702 · · Score: 2

      OI THIS IS SLASHDOT! We don't have room for common sense here. Either tell us that you want to ban all harmful activity or you're a slimy trump supporter!

    31. Re:What I would like to know: by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      they could just put a mesh net over the prison yard. maybe take it out of the budget they use for locking up non-violent offenders for decades at a time.

    32. Re:What I would like to know: by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course not, because the problem with drugs is that they are illegal. Drug prohibition is the stupidest policy in the Western world.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    33. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do inmates even have cellphones? They are contraband in jail but not in prison? If they are contraband, they cant br blocked, but they could certainly be detected

    34. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drug prohibition is the most profitable policy in the Western world.

      FTFY.

    35. Re:What I would like to know: by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I think they're complaining about real time communication with the innmate for the planning.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    36. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would imagine that they tend to leave them off 99.99% of the time, and keep them hidden in... themselves, at least during time of likely cell inspection.

    37. Re: What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I need catapults and walls to protect me from these shitty Mongolians.

    38. Re:What I would like to know: by sabbede · · Score: 1
      A "no drones over prisons" rule should be simple enough, but I don't see much room for a public safety argument for keeping prisons from jamming cell phones. It's not like they would be the first government facilities that block cell signals.

      My bet is that the FCC's rules on interference are why they can't jam, and nobody has bothered to ask for an exception. My second bet is that they could go to the cell providers directly and have them refuse connections from prison grounds. Either by triangulating the location of the phone or using the GPS data

    39. Re:What I would like to know: by sabbede · · Score: 1
      I'm not saying there aren't people in prison that shouldn't be there. Nor am I saying the guards are pillars of virtue. All I'm saying is that prisons should block cell signals. Let the guards be inconvenienced. Their job involves preventing contraband like phones from getting in and unmonitored communication from getting out. They should appreciate the help.

      "Good news CO, you don't have to worry about illicit cell phones anymore. You're welcome!"

    40. Re:What I would like to know: by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It's not like they would be the first government facilities that block cell signals.

      Building structures or installing materials to block cell signals is FINE.

      What is not fine is what some prisons would want to do, which is: set up RF transmitters and emit jamming signals to disrupt communications.

      The RF at sufficient power level to prevent cell phone communications would definitely have a very high risk of affecting other Cellular and Radio communications not by prisoners both On and Off prison grounds, Because wireless RF energy travels.... under certain weather conditions, the signal that normally travels 1 Mile to cover the prison could affect a location 1000 Miles away.

    41. Re:What I would like to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course not, because the problem with drugs is that they are illegal. Drug prohibition is the stupidest policy in the Western world.

      Yes, Drug prohibition is a stupid policy. But it's not even remotely the stupidest policy. The USA allowing businesses and lawyers to bribe politicians in the form of "campaign contributions" is far more stupid. The USA practice of allowing corrupt politicians to select judges is another far more stupid policy. The numerous policies in USA law that condone unethical practice of law (which includes the above two, but also many more) are, collectively, yet another far more stupid policy.

      Given the importance of the global marketplace, these policies collectively have an enormous negative impact on societies throughout the world - considerably more impact than the drug policies.

    42. Re:What I would like to know: by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

      It really just seems like you wanted to talk shit about the US, rather than actually respond to what I said. I hope it was cathartic.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    43. Re:What I would like to know: by sabbede · · Score: 1
      Are you sure about that? I know it's true for short and medium wave signals, but microwaves like cell and wifi don't bounce around the upper atmosphere the same way. At least so far as I know, which may not be all that far.

      But that's not the important part. The important bit is that the range of a jammer isn't limited to one mile. They don't have to be that loud to work. You can get one that only works within 30, 300 feet, whatever. Government agencies can get waivers to use them, and this includes prisons. Someone commented here that there are prisons with a small jammer in every cell. Which I assume was done for reasons other than providing a basis for puns.

    44. Re:What I would like to know: by mysidia · · Score: 1

      but microwaves like cell and wifi don't bounce around the upper atmosphere the same way

      If there's a RF range the prisons don't jam, then eventually I would expect rogue modified cellphones pairing with rogue criminal-controlled cellular base stations to be a concern....

      There are some cell phone frequencies in the UHF ranges around 800mhz. Emissions in these ranges are still subject to tropospheric ducting.

    45. Re:What I would like to know: by sabbede · · Score: 1
      I don't think US cell phones operate in that range anymore. Not since they went fully digital.

      That's an interesting idea though - criminal organizations setting up their own towers. Though I don't think they'd be able to tie it into the national phone system, so it would be rather more like a 2-way radio setup.

    46. Re:What I would like to know: by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Though I don't think they'd be able to tie it into the national phone system

      Like tying into the phone system is hard these days...... Teenagers are doing it with nothing more than an internet connection and a VoIP service.
      Either a free one like Skype, or a more enterprisey SIP trunking service.

  2. In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Trust me on this, if you've ever been to a SC prison, you know the guards are the real problem. They're paid shit and are often just ghetto thugs themselves. This is the perfect formula for guards willing to look the other way or even help for a small bribe. There have been numerous escapes in recent years where it was later revealed that the guards themselves had smuggled in handcuff keys and bolt-cutters to help in escapes.

    Bryan Sterling was a pure political appointee who wants to distract from the real problem by blaming drones, cellphones and other bullshit excuses so he can continue to insist that his agency doesn't need additional funding to hire decent guards and staff. He and other directors were under direct orders from Nikki Haley to never ask for a budget increase, and I suspect he's still under similar orders from Henry McMaster. It's an ongoing problem in a state where the Republican status quo is to continuously cut taxes to appease their political benefactors, no matter the consequences.

    1. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Njorthbiatr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Prisons are such a money sink already.

    2. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sauce?

    3. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Turn prisons back to prisons instead of making them profit centers for the private prison complex and you'll not only see cheaper but also better run prisons.

      Seriously, I've seen what prisons cost in the US and ... let's put it that way, for that per-capita price I'd expect to see those prison bars be made of solid gold.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think there are already plans afoot to get rid of private prisons in this country. Private prisons are being phased out... at least for now, unless Trump or a later President decides to reverse that decision.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    6. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Rei · · Score: 1, Funny
      --
      Dear Diary...today I was pompous and my sister was crazy.
    7. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That really sucks, I had missed that bit of news.

      No excuse for that.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by burtosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think there are already plans afoot to get rid of private prisons in this country. Private prisons are being phased out... at least for now, unless Trump or a later President decides to reverse that decision.

      Are you nuts? While it's not really true Jeff sessions owns private prisons it most certainly is true private prisons lobbied trump lavishly, and he accepted the money including over 250k usd for just the inauguration. Further Trumps cleansing of America of immigrants requires a detainment period at, you guessed it, prison of which many are private. It's no wonder Sessions is bringing back 1960s hystaria around marijuana and minor offenses either, the shitshow of how private prisons are run in the USA needs to end but is instead expanding.

    9. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Pascoea · · Score: 2

      No excuse for that.

      I mean, there's an excuse for it, you and I just don't like what the excuse is.

    10. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      In the 21st century aren't prisons supposed to be profitable? For-profit prisons generate revenue, from that profits, from that executive bonuses and increased shareholder value.

      The education system could be designed so that half the student population is pigeon holed towards a future of occupying cells of a for profit prison. The other half the student population would be pigeon holed into menial labor jobs that generate enough domestic GDP to (1) keep the for-profit prisons operating efficiently, and (2) keep the ruling class fat and happy.

      Problem solved. Everyone happy. No need for prisons to be a money sink as you say.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    11. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turn prisons back to prisons instead of making them profit centers for the private prison complex and you'll not only see cheaper but also better run prisons.

      Seriously, I've seen what prisons cost in the US and ... let's put it that way, for that per-capita price I'd expect to see those prison bars be made of solid gold.

      Blame the costs on the courts, which essentially have outlawed work gangs, require payment for prison work, require law libraries, regular libraries, exercise equipment and entertainment ( tv, movies etc).

      When you look at the public cost vs the private cost as well as the times to build, private prisons get built faster (probably not better) and cheaper..

    12. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Odd. We have all that too in our prisons and the cost isn't going through the roof.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by azcoyote · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look, I share your concern about for-profit prisons and I recently went to a conference that was largely about the issue. They should be abolished. However, they can also be a red herring here. According to Pew:

      In 2015, just 8% of the nearly 1.53 million state and federal prisoners in the U.S. were in private facilities, up slightly from 5% in 1999. (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/11/u-s-private-prison-population-has-declined-in-recent-years/)

      For-profit prisons represent a very tiny portion of the overall prison system, and so while they may be a symptom of the deeper problems with the system overall, they are not in and of themselves the cause. We can abolish these for-profit prisons, but just like taking cough medicine, it will not do away with the deeper causes of the problem.

      Besides that, the actual prison mentioned in the abstract is not a for-profit prison, but a maximum security state-run prison.

      --
      Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
    14. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      The solution is simple: turn prisons from money sinks to money fridges.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    15. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, but we as a society should bare the cost of prison. It becomes a discouragement to imprisoning people. Prison should only be used for people who are either A) Dangerous to society or B) People who refuse to work with a rehabilitation program. And in both of those cases, the prison should act as rehabilitation centers first. Help these people get an education, learn a trade, something. Try to identify why they're committing crimes and help them solve it.

    16. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, stop locking up people for non-crimes (and crimes that are almost non-crimes that should be handled with fines or community work) and you're set. But as long as your justice system is based on revenge instead of deterrent and paying back society...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    17. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      There is no evidence of a Haley/McMaster bump in numbers of escapes. Here are the figures for SC department of corrections inmate escapes for the last quarter century by year and facility type. How does the vast decline in escapes between the 1990's (~100-ish per year) and the present (11 in 2016) square with your "austerity ruins everything herp derp" group-think? SC has observed the same decline in escapes as every other region in the US despite similar growth in prison population.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    18. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Further Trumps cleansing of America of immigrants requires a detainment period at, you guessed it, prison of which many are private.
      How many?
      You're connecting dots and weaving a narrative that seems to imply that Sessions and Trump are doing what they do at the behest of the prison industrial complex.
      Like maybe if there weren't private prisons, Sessions wouldn't care about marijuana or Trump wouldn't care about illegal immigration.

    19. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 2

      Yup, that seems to be the American model. I prefer the Nordic model where prisons are run more like colleges with a view to rehabilitation so that when people are released they're more likely to be fully functional citizens and less likely to re-offend. The fact that some of those countries are closing prisons for lack of inmates says it all. For that to happen in America would mean dumping the market fundamentalist idea that putting everything in the private sector makes it work better.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    20. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Profit always wins. Moral values only ensure that good people never win.

    21. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      That's just crazy talk. Next you'll be suggesting that people should be able to have health care. And other pesky things, like rights.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    22. Re:In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prisons are such a money sink already.

      Prisons actually make a lot of money from slave labor

    23. Re: In SC prisons the real problem are the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8% of free-money, is worth imprisoning an extra 92% just for the big.

      idiot. its greed, it isn't rational.

  3. Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When someone can escape a prison with a pair of wire cutters, a drone is not the problem. How did he get access to the fence? Why does it only take the possession of a pair of wire cutters to escape the prison?

    This is a "think about the children" moment where the signal blocking technology is what they want, but not the problem.

    1. Re:Deflection by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The problem is that a fence is supposed to keep a criminal in. I don't know, but back where I live we use walls and steel bars, inside the walls and as replacement of windows, to do the trick.

      And behold it works.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Deflection by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      When someone can escape a prison with a pair of wire cutters, a drone is not the problem.

      He wouldn't HAVE the wire cutters if someone didn't fly them in on a drone. The drone is very much a problem in this case.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Deflection by cob666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He wouldn't HAVE the wire cutters if someone didn't fly them in on a drone. The drone is very much a problem in this case.

      NO, the drone is a result of real problems, such as lax security and protocols. Most likely, the guards weren't being paid to look the other way when inmates have cell phones and there weren't adequate measures in place to prevent an inmate from being in an escape position with a pair of wire cutters.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
    4. Re:Deflection by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Having never been inside the prison I couldn't make an educated guess on whether there was lower than stand security at play. I would certainly think it should be standard procedure at prisons to block cell phones and do routine searches, but I'm not an expect as to what actually happens (and why that might not happen).

      I will say, the drone DID directly have an impact on the escape though. One can assume that since they used that method to get wire cutters to him, that was presumed to be a more reliable method of providing him access to escape tools.

      If you try smuggling in wire cutters with a person, that person is risking arrest himself, and wirecutters will likely set of metal detectors. (phones might not). A drone can be operated with relative safety.

      I saw one suggestion to put up walls instead of fences. Certainly, this would be a better solution for preventing escapes and I hope high security prisons all have walls. Clearly this comes with a lot more expense so might not be practical for all prisons.

      If a drone can fly in wirecutters they can fly in a gun, a knife, who knows what else.

      I'm not sure the complete solution, maybe there are problems with other security checkpoints, but regardless, drones could pose a major potential problem for prisons going forwards. They need to start implementing plans on how to tackle outside actors using drones to smuggle things in.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US the signal is not blocked. This is against federal law. In many countries jammers are indeed used.

    6. Re:Deflection by dwillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Many areas use fencing with few if any escapes. usually two layers of fencing with sensors to report contact with (cimbing) and cutting of the fencing with motion sensors in between the two fences, as well as cameras and... Wait for it, a most radical idea: Guards who watch the fences and warn prisoners to stay away from them.

      Evidently SC prisons lack all these high falutin technologicnal type features. So a prisoner can walk up to the fence and cut a hole in it and wander off without anyone realizing what has happened until they realize the "body" in his bed hasn't moved in a couple days.

      The Drone is the least of their problems. Though it's also a simple problem. Tell the guards, any drone that approaches the fence-line is a skeet target. No more drone problems.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    7. Re:Deflection by DickBreath · · Score: 2

      Prisons should stop focusing on signal blocking. The FCC is against it for good reason. It can disrupt communications for legitimate users. The wireless carriers paid handsomely for exclusive use of that spectrum. The prisons have no right to be actively transmitting any signals on that spectrum.

      Here is an idea: How about signal detection instead! OMG. It would mean that cell phones could be used in designated parts of the prison occupied only by staff. It would mean that cell phone signals in prison population areas could be instantly detected -- even from the moment a phone is turned on and before it is used. You could potentially track the location of a phone as it moves throughout the prison. You would know the approximate location of a contraband phone, and could shake down and search cells in the area until you find it. You might also be able to determine who calls or is called by a contraband phone and gather intelligence, preventing future contraband. I'm sure a prisoner has a limited number of outside sources willing to help him/her. Once you eliminate that network, they probably aren't getting much more contraband items.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    8. Re:Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wouldn't HAVE the wire cutters if someone didn't fly them in on a drone. The drone is very much a problem in this case.

      NO, the drone is a result of real problems, such as lax security and protocols. Most likely, the guards weren't being paid to look the other way when inmates have cell phones and there weren't adequate measures in place to prevent an inmate from being in an escape position with a pair of wire cutters.

      The real problem is that most people don't want to be prison guards as the pay is horrible and the possibility of serious injury or death is extremely high, which results in prisons that depend on 1 person watch 20-30 camera feeds, when what is needed is 30-60 more guards.

    9. Re:Deflection by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      ...at least until drones come back armed. Guess drone warfare ain't so cool anymore when it's on your own soil.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Deflection by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I would certainly think it should be standard procedure at prisons to block cell phones

      Unless you build a Faraday cage around the prison, those ideologically blessed jamming waves have a tendency to get out and jam law abiding citizens cell phones. Fortunately at these frequencies the signals aren't going to go far. But if you cover the entire prison ground, interior, offices, and courtyard, and at least in our local one, maybe fifty square miles of fields where prisoners might be working - which an interstate runs through, you are blanketing a pretty large area with jamming RF.

      Then again if we build a fine mesh Faraday cage over everything, the drone can't get in.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    11. Re:Deflection by Doke · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried to triangulate wifi clients from access point signals? There are a lot of technical problems. Anything metal creates reflections. Anything dense, ie concrete, creates shadows. You need a lot of access points, and a very detailed cad drawing of the building, including the material of each wall and duct. It's expensive and time consuming to set up. To do that in a prison, you would need hundreds of cell phone sensors. You would also need to pay thousands of hours of contractor time to set up the maps. You might even have to factor in if the cell doors are open vs closed.

    12. Re:Deflection by dddux · · Score: 1

      Back where I live we use minefields. Very effective.

      --
      "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
    13. Re:Deflection by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I saw one suggestion to put up walls instead of fences. Certainly, this would be a better solution for preventing escapes and I hope high security prisons all have walls. Clearly this comes with a lot more expense so might not be practical for all prisons.

      What expense? Bricks are cheap, manual labor is free.

      All in all it's probably cheaper than a fence.

      --
      No sig today...
    14. Re:Deflection by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Back in Russia, they just use Siberia. No fence. No wall. You want to stay. Trust me.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:Deflection by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I know you can buy small devices that block cell phone signals locally over a small area.

      Understandably illegal; but were it legal for prisons they could theoretically have multiple low power devices placed around a prison rather than a big powerful one that will impact a larger area.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    16. Re:Deflection by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      What expense? Bricks are cheap, manual labor is free.

      All in all it's probably cheaper than a fence.

      So if we arrest a bunch of Mexicans we can make the Mexicans pay for the walls (with free labor)?

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    17. Re:Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw one suggestion to put up walls instead of fences. Certainly, this would be a better solution for preventing escapes and I hope high security prisons all have walls. Clearly this comes with a lot more expense so might not be practical for all prisons.

      What expense? Bricks are cheap, manual labor is free.

      All in all it's probably cheaper than a fence.

      I think you'll run into otehr problems if you use the prisoners to build the wall (and otehrwise manual labor is not free).

    18. Re:Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever tried to triangulate wifi clients from access point signals? There are a lot of technical problems. Anything metal creates reflections. Anything dense, ie concrete, creates shadows. You need a lot of access points, and a very detailed cad drawing of the building, including the material of each wall and duct. It's expensive and time consuming to set up.

      To do that in a prison, you would need hundreds of cell phone sensors. You would also need to pay thousands of hours of contractor time to set up the maps. You might even have to factor in if the cell doors are open vs closed.

      Yet somehow we're told the local stores at the mall can track where you are in the store from the moment you enter until you leave using your cell phone.

      This shouldn't even be that hard. Get a general area to start with, doesn't need to be exact.

      Register all the known "good" phones with the system to filter them out. Again, that mall store is supposed to be able to tell one person from another.

      So, either this isn't a hard problem to solve, or all the marketing and privacy people are full of it.

    19. Re:Deflection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A recent escape had an inmate escape walking past / in plain view of no less than 5 guard towers. Which had not been manned in over a decade.

    20. Re:Deflection by liquidsin · · Score: 1

      If a drone can fly in wirecutters they can fly in a gun, a knife, who knows what else.

      If a drone can fly in any of those things, there's a real good chance that a human on the outside of the fence could simply throw those things over said fence. Or cut through the fence from the outside. This really isn't a drone problem, it's a lack of guards who care, or perhaps a lack of security cameras and staff to monitor them.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    21. Re:Deflection by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 1

      I suspect the point was that if you are calling your facility "maximum security," then that implies certain things about it, i.e., it's hard to escape from. For an inmate to escape from a max with no tools other than a pair of wire-cutters is farcical. It's like the Keystone Kops running a prison. We're talking Fisher-Price security, here. That's why he said the drone wasn't the problem.

      Security can be what I call "policy security" (what you train your people to do) or what I call "infrastructural security" (how you build the facility and how you use technology). They are clearly relying on policy security and neglecting infrastructural security. Maybe this is a funding problem that is beyond their control, but that prison should probably not be designated as maximum security. That's the problem.

      I see others have mentioned the federal law against cell jamming, but I don't think that's the best solution,either. There is a company selling cell phone signal detection systems to prisons, I saw some of their press stuff while I was locked up. This system learns which calls are from staff phones and ignores them while finding others. With multiple antennas it can triangulate and ignores phones outside the prison. This way you know immediately when and where an inmate is using a cell phone. Then the guards bum-rush the area and strip search everybody. When the inmates lose so many phones so fast it stops being worth getting them in and the problem goes away. Expensive to start but effective and inexpensive to run.

    22. Re:Deflection by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 1

      I see others have mentioned the federal law against cell jamming, but I don't think that's the best solution,either. There is a company selling cell phone signal detection systems to prisons, I saw some of their press stuff while I was locked up. This system learns which calls are from staff phones and ignores them while finding others. With multiple antennas it can triangulate and ignores phones outside the prison. This way you know immediately when and where an inmate is using a cell phone. Then the guards bum-rush the area and strip search everybody. When the inmates lose so many phones so fast it stops being worth getting them in and the problem goes away. Expensive to start but effective and inexpensive to run.

    23. Re:Deflection by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I've not much experience with that technology, but if it exists and is reasonably accurate I would prefer that solution. If it turned out to not be accurate for whatever reason- I'd still say multiple-small range blockers around the prison would be a decent alternative (if made legal).

      But yeah, if what you suggest works- I'm all for that instead.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    24. Re:Deflection by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Have a number of local femtocells in the prison. Mobile devices will use them because they have the most bestest signal. Based on a pattern of which femtocells a device uses, you get a rough idea where the mobile device is located. A shakedown and search of that area should turn up the device. Remember a device is detected from being merely turned on, not from being used.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    25. Re:Deflection by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Um, it's a prison.

      Lots of people standing around doing nothing.

      --
      No sig today...
  4. We must outlaw cellphones & drones NOW by THE_ALT_WHITE · · Score: 0

    democracy has spoken

    1. Re:We must outlaw cellphones & drones NOW by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Clearly democracy itself is the problem and must be outlawed. Now if only we had a dear leader who was bold and unconventional enough to help us. /s

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  5. No blocking of cellphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will continue to be unblocked everywhere. Any attempts to jam will be met with hostile force. End of story.

    1. Re:No blocking of cellphones by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      I mention in another reply that the focus should be on signal detection rather than jamming. You could narrow down the location of contraband phones. Know how many there are. Know who they call or receive calls from. And further, designated areas of the prison would be safe places for staff to use cell phones. The neighbors wouldn't have their legitimate cell phones jammed as a side effect.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re: No blocking of cellphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just, I dunno, put a fine net of the whole thing.

      Problem solved. Cheap, too.

      But cheap, easy, fast, and effective means there is little room for gift, which is what most prisons are built for. Whereas a custom and expensive jamming service provides plenty of corners to cut and plenty of possibility for cost over-runs.

    3. Re: No blocking of cellphones by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Jamming is the problem. It creates a lot of collateral damage. If a cheap physical net works, then great. But there are other ways to smuggle phones into the prison. You, yourself mentioned grift. So I propose that your cheap net simply won't work. So I pointed out detection of mobile phones rather than jamming.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  6. The FCC should make a simple rule by gurps_npc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the prison pays for all outgoing and incoming calls, then they may block cellphone calls.

    Prisons have instituted ridiculously expensive phone plans to help pay for their costs.

    This is wrong, placing an undue burden on both the families and the prisoners. Wealthy prisoners should not be allowed to buy a better prison experience, which means you can not overcharge prisoners for so called luxuries.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Yeah, when the call for your pizza is more expensive than the pizza itself...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cellphone jamming would interfere with communications outside of the prison as well, this is the reason it is illegal (except for national securities facilities like a certain DOE research lab in the southeaster united states that helped assemble two fission devices in the 1940s).

      Now if you wanted to build a Faraday cage around the prison tuned for cell broadcasts that would be legal.

    3. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by sabbede · · Score: 1
      They should be able to block cell phones because prisoners aren't allowed to have unfettered and unmonitored communications with anyone but their lawyers. Yes, the fees for phone calls are ridiculous and borne by (let's assume) innocent family members, which is just plain wrong. But smuggled cell phones aren't a response to outrageous fees, they're a way to conduct criminal activity from within a prison.

      Like, "There's a guard giving me trouble, kill his wife." Or, "No, we need $1100 per kilo. If they don't like it, kill them. Now, where are we on finding that witness? I need them silenced before my appeal."

    4. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Correct prisoners should not be able to buy a better experience. They should NOT be permitted any outgoing calls except to their legal representation.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should be able to block cell phones because prisoners aren't allowed

      so the employees and lawyers and guests are denied their rights too?

      hey just go breaking international law and create a police state because you are stupid, yeah, that's the ticket

    6. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They should NOT be permitted any outgoing calls except to their legal representation.

      Blocking all calls to friends and family could be considered a violation of the 8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment). I don't think blocking communication with what may be the more stable elements in a prisoner's life to be a good step in reducing reoffending rates.

      If they don't talk to the outside, they talk to the inside.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Doke · · Score: 1

      Most cell phone jammers are small, with a limited range. You wouldn't have one big one, you'd have many small ones distributed through the prison. Their range would be small, and probably not even reach the fence.

    8. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Prisons have instituted ridiculously expensive phone plans to help pay for their costs.

      This is wrong, placing an undue burden on both the families and the prisoners.

      More to the point of the article, it creates what economists would call a market distortion that encourages a thriving black market in cellphones. As long as they don't allow phone service at anything approaching market rates, there will be black market phone service. This is as close as economics has to an immutable law. This situation is no different than the USSR back in the day trying (and failing miserably) to set their own currency conversion rates. Or Canute trying to order the tide.

      So the contraband phone problem is 100% their own fault.

    9. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up, +4 isn't high enough.

      My dumbass brother in law is in prison and deserves to be there. For him to call us costs $8 for a 10 minute call. Loading $20 onto the phone account through an automated voice prompt system charges a $3 fee too.

      It's an abuse of power. Even worse, crime correlates strongly with poverty, so it's an abuse against those that can literally least afford it.

      I can't help but feel that we could lower prison violence and criminal recidivism if we treated prisoners like human beings instead of animals.

    10. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If the prison pays for all outgoing and incoming calls, then they may block cellphone calls.

      In America, jamming radio is illegal. People can and do get some hefty fines when they try it. Doesn't matter who is paying.

      Unfortunately, too few people understand that you can't jam teh evilz prizzoner's cell phone without jamming everyone else's phones in the vicinity.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    11. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      They should be able to block cell phones because prisoners aren't allowed to have unfettered and unmonitored communications with anyone but their lawyers.

      Are you willing to have everyone in the vicinity of the prison to have their cell phone service blocked as well?

      Because that is what you are proposing.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re: The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, we have prison jammers here. It is a small jammer in every cell. They are automatically or manually switched off in an emergency.

      I never noticed anything outside the prison walls and I frequently walk past one.

    13. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lick the boot, bitch

    14. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Are you willing to have everyone in the vicinity of the prison to have their cell phone service blocked as well?

      Well, I don't think that's a problem really....most any prison I know of, is WAAAAY out side the any cities, isolated on rural lands, where the nearest neighbor is miles away.

      They could jam away and not bother anyone really.

      It isn't like prisons are built close by to cities, etc. for many reasons.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    15. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      Prisons have instituted ridiculously expensive phone plans to help pay for their costs.

      Well, no, the ridiculously expensive phone plans are there purely for profit, there is no such concept as "help paying for costs" when we are mostly talking about highly profitable private prisons.
      The whole problem starts by having for-profit prisons in the first place - it is wrong for so many reasons, e.g. they benefit if you are a repeat "customer", what they call "profit" I call state tax dollar waste etc.

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    16. Re: The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cage also conveniently prevents wire cutters from being dropped through it.

      Double the defense!

    17. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I can't help but feel that we could lower prison violence and criminal recidivism if we treated prisoners like human beings instead of animals.

      You're absolutely right, but revolving door prisons keep the prisons flush with cash. Thus we can't have that!

    18. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      But the pizza with the correct ingredients will be worth every cent.

      "Hello Papa Jo's"
      "Hello I'd like a Hawaiian with wirecutters baked into the crust, and completely covered in anchovies."
      "Why all the anchovies?"
      "Get it past the guards".
      "It'll be there in 30min and you're free".

    19. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should be able to block cell phones because prisoners aren't allowed to have unfettered and unmonitored communications with anyone but their lawyers. Yes, the fees for phone calls are ridiculous and borne by (let's assume) innocent family members, which is just plain wrong. But smuggled cell phones aren't a response to outrageous fees, they're a way to conduct criminal activity from within a prison.

      Like, "There's a guard giving me trouble, kill his wife." Or, "No, we need $1100 per kilo. If they don't like it, kill them. Now, where are we on finding that witness? I need them silenced before my appeal."

      It really breaks my heart that you are so ignorant, yet so sure of yourself.

      The huge huge majority of cell phones in prison are used by inmates to call their families for support and a bit of normalcy. Sure they are also used for crime, but the huge majority are not and the prisoners react negatively if they think someone is planning to use one in a crime. Nobody wants that, if that happens they do searches and they all lose their family contact.

    20. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no, it's "I want a large pizza topped with the heads of my enemies who died in unfortunate accidents."
      "Why no, I didn't call a hit on those people, I just ordered a pizza."

    21. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how much it costs to bribe a guard to bring in a cellphone? Or pay to borrow someone elses? A lot more than the regular phone costs. Prisoners get years more time if they're caught with a cell phone, or months/years in solitary for lifers, they're not going around letting poor inmates chat with their families out of the kindness of their heart. And eliminating prison commissary just isn't a helpful suggestion, it will backfire, if you were speaking to luxury items beyond phone calls.

    22. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 1

      May I suggest you use Google maps to look up United States Penitentiary Atlanta

    23. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 1

      No, we're not mostly talking about private prisons. We're talking about almost every jail and prison in this country, and private facilities are a TINY minority. The telephone service is provided by a private vendor who contracts with the prison system in question and THEY are for profit, and HUGELY profitable. They are monopoly providers of a desperately desired service. They are blood sucking leaches. But they have nothing to do with the private prisons per se.

    24. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct prisoners should not be able to buy a better experience. They should NOT be permitted any outgoing calls except to their legal representation.

      You shouldn't be permitted to fucking breathe, you autistic little shitstain.

    25. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by sabbede · · Score: 1
      Hardly! For one, there's more than one way to skin the cell-blocking cat. Don't want to risk interfering with nearby signals? Doesn't the carrier know where a handset is within a few feet? Certainly with enough accuracy to prevent calls on prison grounds.

      Or what about carefully arranged directional antennas to broadcast jamming noise? Put them around the prison, pointing inwards and broadcasting just loud enough so that their cumulative effect is to block signals in the prison, but not loud enough so that their individual broadcasts interfere with signals outside the prison. Sure, maybe you only get one bar next to the prison wall, but that's hardly a major issue.

    26. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Well, we have to legalize jamming first. Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    27. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

      Great example of a true but totally irrelevant comment. It demonstrates honesty but ignorance.

      Here, let me explain.
      1) You reference jamming being illegal. This is due to the FCC regulations.

      2) So the only way to legally jam would be for the FCC to pass a new regulation.

      3) My article is about having the FCC pass a new regulation.

      Hence, your comment is totally true, and has no relevant content.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    28. Re:The FCC should make a simple rule by sabbede · · Score: 1

      It's not legal for individuals to jam, but the FCC grants waivers to government agencies and law enforcement, and may soon allow State prisons to use them. There's also the "managed access" solution, where the prison basically has it's own short range tower.

  7. Only let the story break when he's caught by kelanos · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Just imagine how many escapes like this you don't hear about!

    Totally unrelated: editors wiped out my karma because they don't like my messages, they can't just let the system do it's work, they manually censor this place

    1. Re: Only let the story break when he's caught by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How do you know that an editor modded you down instead of ordinary users? Claims like this require supporting evidence.

    2. Re:Only let the story break when he's caught by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Or maybe you wiped out your own karma...if you ever had any:

      https://slashdot.org/comments....
      https://slashdot.org/comments....
      https://slashdot.org/comments....
      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      Now as I've been on a brief review of your comments, I did see several that were actually well thought out contributions to discussion. However, any positive you have is drowned out by the anti-Semitic rants you go on. Obviously you believe that as firmly as you believe in what you put in some of your more insightful, but that definitely is the source of your karmic deficit.

    3. Re: Only let the story break when he's caught by kelanos · · Score: 0

      because I have very few -1 comments, confirmed the amount of moderations on those comments, and my total karma should be +7

    4. Re:Only let the story break when he's caught by kelanos · · Score: 0

      Just add them up. The total karma is well positive.

      "anti-semitic rants"....anything you don't want to hear is a rant, and you give service to the SUPER SPECIAL brand of "racism" only for the SUPER SPECIAL people? Statistics do not lie.

      High-ranking people are more inclined to psychopathy -> Jews are inclined to high-ranking position -> ???? (logic censored due to ANTISEMITISM)

      come on, how are you going to live your life like that, having a gaping fissure in your brain because you've been told again and again "anti-semitism is wrong on all levels"? Do you really have ZERO free will in the matter? Could you even evaluate the validity of the claim if your life depended on it?

  8. Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make inmates wear tamper-resistant collars with a grenade attached. They mess with the collar, they get blown up, and so does anyone else that was messing with the collar. Also make it so that the collars can be remote detonated. Someone escapes a California prison and goes to Maine? One phone call, and the felon's body gets ripped to shreds. :) Bonus points if his or her family members also get blown up.

    1. Re:Easy Solution by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      Make inmates wear tamper-resistant collars with a grenade attached. They mess with the collar, they get blown up, and so does anyone else that was messing with the collar. Also make it so that the collars can be remote detonated. Someone escapes a California prison and goes to Maine? One phone call, and the felon's body gets ripped to shreds. :) Bonus points if his or her family members also get blown up.

      Did you by any chance vote for Trump?

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      God no. I voted for Hillary. When I heard about what she did to Seth Rich, I fucking cheered.

    3. Re:Easy Solution by robinsonne · · Score: 3, Funny

      Make inmates wear tamper-resistant collars with a grenade attached. They mess with the collar, they get blown up, and so does anyone else that was messing with the collar. Also make it so that the collars can be remote detonated. Someone escapes a California prison and goes to Maine? One phone call, and the felon's body gets ripped to shreds. :) Bonus points if his or her family members also get blown up.

      Someone's been watching too much Running Man. Where are we going to find a sufficiently sadistic game show host for phase 2?

    4. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good news Trumpette of fake news, Nancy Pelosi and her daughters are cocaine trafficer, so says Fox News, AND Russian today, so it must be true since its confirmed.

      Seriously, you may put your 'team' politics above your country, but when it's revealed Trump is feeding US secrets to his Russian friends, I hope you'll put country before party then. None of this traitor crap. You stand with your country and repel the invaders. Even if they're cyber- invaders, even if they want to put your guy of the moment into power.

    5. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you complain about fake news... and then talk about something that very well MAY BE fake news? (You're acting like something is true even though it hasn't been proven to be true.)

    6. Re:Easy Solution by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      > Where are we going to find a sufficiently sadistic game show host for phase 2?

      Seriously? There are a whole slew of congress critters voting to take away people's health care and try to starve poor people. They don't even think themselves to be savages.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    7. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that lying on a security clearance form is a federal crime don't you?

      So when Jared said on his form he hadn't had contact with Russians, and then admitted he'd met the Ambassador in Trump tower earlier, that's a confession to a crime.

      Sure Trump may sack the special prosecutor to prevent its prosecution, but its still a crime.

      And todays reveal about the meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya the Russian lawyer lobbyist against the Magnitsky Act, Trumps son, Jared and Manasfort, that's another confession to a crime. This also was not declared on the clearance form.

      Trump Jr can say "we didn't know her name beforehand, and she didn't tell me anything useful and pops wasn't involved" etc. but its still a crime to then lie about that on the security clearance form later.

      As to this latest thing.... well if he didn't know her, how did she manage to get a meeting with 3 top advisors, how could Trump be in the building and not know yet his top advisors are there, and how did she get in past the entry security without so much as a name.

      So you may wish to ignore all the evidence, but at some point you won't be in denial anymore, and I expect you to stand with red-white-blue not just red.

  9. Not a solution by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At this point, premade UAVs can easily be reprogrammed to be fully autonomous (with minimal skill) and microwave jamming won't do anything to stop it. What's really needed here is for the prison guards to actually... guard the prison. -_-

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Not a solution by burtosis · · Score: 2

      At this point, premade UAVs can easily be reprogrammed to be fully autonomous (with minimal skill) and microwave jamming won't do anything to stop it. What's really needed here is for the prison guards to actually... guard the prison. -_-

      With minimal skill, most drones will land or otherwise not function correctly if you jam the gps signal, which is in the microwave range. Inertial and gyroscopic measurements lose accuracy quickly without gps to fuse the data accurately.
      That said I'm certainly not in favor of private prisons just ruining Gps for everyone in a large radius because of thier sloppy practices and cost cutting measures.

    2. Re:Not a solution by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      At this point, premade UAVs can easily be reprogrammed to be fully autonomous (with minimal skill) and microwave jamming won't do anything to stop it. What's really needed here is for the prison guards to actually... guard the prison. -_-

      Go old school- guards on the wire armed with shotguns loaded with bird shot. Then it's just a matter of a little trap shooting if a drone flies over. It's also easy to quickly reload a shotgun to either buckshot or less lethal rounds such as bean bags in the case of a riot(or just use the birdshot, should work fine for crowd control at a distance), assault, or escape attempt. Plus it's a lot cheaper than trying to use a jammer to bring down drones.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:Not a solution by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      A net seems like a much simpler solution.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    4. Re:Not a solution by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Go old school- guards on the wire armed with shotguns loaded with bird shot. Then it's just a matter of a little trap shooting if a drone flies over. It's also easy to quickly reload a shotgun to either buckshot or less lethal rounds such as bean bags in the case of a riot(or just use the birdshot, should work fine for crowd control at a distance), assault, or escape attempt. Plus it's a lot cheaper than trying to use a jammer to bring down drones.

      I'm not convinced that that IS a cheaper solution. How many extra full time employees do you have to hire to stand around the perimeter looking for drones to shoot? What sort of extra liability are you opening yourself up for having that many extra guards armed 24/7?

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:Not a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At this point, premade UAVs can easily be reprogrammed to be fully autonomous (with minimal skill) and microwave jamming won't do anything to stop it. What's really needed here is for the prison guards to actually... guard the prison. -_-

      Go old school- guards on the wire armed with shotguns loaded with bird shot. Then it's just a matter of a little trap shooting if a drone flies over. It's also easy to quickly reload a shotgun to either buckshot or less lethal rounds such as bean bags in the case of a riot(or just use the birdshot, should work fine for crowd control at a distance), assault, or escape attempt. Plus it's a lot cheaper than trying to use a jammer to bring down drones.

      To hell with buck shot.. 30-06 with with night vision scopes.

    6. Re:Not a solution by Doke · · Score: 1

      The guards aren't paid enough, so they're easily bribed.

    7. Re:Not a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microwave jamming is the stupidest thing ever. Run the drone on a different freq. You can't jam them all.

    8. Re:Not a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not convinced that that IS a cheaper solution. How many extra full time employees do you have to hire to stand around the perimeter looking for drones to shoot?

      None. There's already guards with rifles in the towers. They tend to get pretty bored having nothing to shoot.

      Give them a $100 shotgun and tell them they can shoot drones coming over the wall and there will be a betting pool by noon.

    9. Re:Not a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dead reckoning is more than good enough, aviation went a long time w/out GPS using simpler gyros than are available today.. a few mile flight and return would be no problem.

    10. Re:Not a solution by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 1

      In the Feds many of the Pens (Maximum Security prisons) are putting netting over the Recreation Yards

  10. Nets and mesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the short term, drone-assisted escapes could surely be prevented by covering the entire prison with wire mesh so that drones couldn't get in. Add a few vibration sensors to detect attempts to cut in using really sophisticated drones. And for new prisons, while you might not be able to actively block cellphone signals, you could always just add enough steel mesh or shot-loaded concrete into the design so that the entire thing acts as a Faraday cage. Or at least deploy cellphone triangulators so that they can detect where and when a phone is used and the staff can go in and confiscate it.

    1. Re:Nets and mesh by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The mesh is a good idea; I suspect you might be able to drop things "in parts" through the mesh though unless it was very fine mesh. Parts to assemble a rudimentary wire cutter dropped one at a time through the mesh.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  11. Blocking the signal won't stop this. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

    Drone flights can be automated so that once released, they fly the predetermined route and drop the payload.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:Blocking the signal won't stop this. by Doke · · Score: 1

      That depends on GPS, which can also be jammed.

    2. Re:Blocking the signal won't stop this. by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      In the absence of reliable GPS, a drone can also be programmed to follow a route using inertial guidance and/or a ground-facing camera, neither of which can be jammed.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    3. Re:Blocking the signal won't stop this. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Ground facing cameras and points of reference would be enough to get a drone to follow a simple route and deliver its package.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  12. "Blame" by sqorbit · · Score: 3, Informative

    Notice the title says "Blame". I think that is the perfect word. Rather than accepting responsibility, they are blaming technology. If an escape happens it's the people securing the facilities fault, whether they use a pitchfork or a drone.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
  13. It is 21st century by Max_W · · Score: 1

    Certainly, it is possible to ban flying RC models say eight miles around prisons, but it would not help as criminals would not observe it.

    The correctional officers should definitively learn to pilot an electric RC FPV glider, and soar above the prison, watching for drones, pilots on the ground, and other suspect activity. A glider can be in the air for hours with one battery.

    I can built such a glider at home from readily available components. Surely the mighty US state is capable to do it too and stop crying constantly "drones, drones,..."

    1. Re:It is 21st century by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      You're right. Criminals would be the ones to ignore any such ban; however, right now the police have no way of going after anyone trying to smuggle stuff into a prison, unless they actually succeed.

      "I'm just flying my drone around officer, I'm doing nothing wrong- show me where in the law book it says you can't fly a drone with wire cutters taped to the bottom? I put them there for ballast."

      The person on the outside operates with almost no risk. A law preventing operation around the jail might stop a few people (probably not many); but it would give the police the right to go after anyone one the outside trying to smuggle stuff in, if they catch them. Right now, the guy on the outside helping was untouchable until the moment his drone actually released it's cargo.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:It is 21st century by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Or you know just place a net over the prison so drones can't land/drop stuff into the yard.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:It is 21st century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certainly, it is possible to ban flying RC models say eight miles around prisons, but it would not help as criminals would not observe it.

      The correctional officers should definitively learn to pilot an electric RC FPV glider, and soar above the prison, watching for drones, pilots on the ground, and other suspect activity. A glider can be in the air for hours with one battery.

      I can built such a glider at home from readily available components. Surely the mighty US state is capable to do it too and stop crying constantly "drones, drones,..."

      Jesus Christ, this is stupid. First of all, the best way to find/track/hunt drones isn't with other drones. The very notion is so retarded it should be wearing a helmet. Typical Slashdot response - distill the issue to an irrelevant microdiscussion of some technical issue and get lost in the forest while telling everyone how much you know about one species of tree.

      And even if drones were a good anti-drone measure, it's not the cost of the drones that is the lion's share of the expense. It's the cost of hiring, training, and paying 5-10 people a salary, health benefits, pension, insurance. Because you'd need multiple people on the payroll to fly the drones and monitor them every day, including weekends and holidays. One basement-dwelling good-idea-fairy Slashdotter isn't going to do it free of charge.

    4. Re:It is 21st century by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      That net won't stop a very small walking robot from carrying wire cutters up to the edge of the fence. Maybe even through several fences. The wire cutters could be part of the robot's frame.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    5. Re:It is 21st century by Doke · · Score: 1

      When a lightning bolt or storm knocks down the net, it becomes a ladder to help the inmates climb the wall.

    6. Re:It is 21st century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A balloon could be up even longer.

    7. Re:It is 21st century by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Right now, the guy on the outside helping was untouchable until the moment his drone actually released it's cargo.

      What's wrong with waiting for the drone to drop the cargo and nab both the outsider and the inmate?

    8. Re:It is 21st century by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Right now, the guy on the outside helping was untouchable until the moment his drone actually released it's cargo.

      What's wrong with waiting for the drone to drop the cargo and nab both the outsider and the inmate?

      If police stumble upon a drone operator outside the prison, they won't necessarily know how close to drop off it is. The drone operator may panic, disappear and not come back for a few weeks and carry out the execution when the police can't find him.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  14. Why blame a drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A surgical tube slingshot can shoot wirecuters over the fence too. Or a homemade, easy set up, catapult. Another sensationalized witch hunt against new and not comprehended tech.

    1. Re:Why blame a drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they shoved wirecutters down a mortar tube they could deliver it from miles away. I hope they try this soon.

    2. Re:Why blame a drone? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      A surgical tube slingshot can shoot wirecuters over the fence too. Or a homemade, easy set up, catapult. Another sensationalized witch hunt against new and not comprehended tech.

      Perhaps they can but a slingshot or catapult can't get the wire cutters to the right place. Especially since there are multiple fences spaced apart. the person operating the catapult would probably not be able to see who they are delivering the goods too.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Why blame a drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the price of a drone, you can afford to try the catapult a few times.
      Before you tell me someone would notice wirecutters falling from the sky, let me remind all that nobody noticed a drone dropping them off.

      Someone who knows better can correct me, but any drone that can carry even something as small as a pair of wire cutters has to be a relatively decent size.

  15. Technology clearly to blame for this. by MiniMike · · Score: 1

    Jimmy Causey, 46, fled the Lieber Correctional Institution in Ridgeville, S.C., on the evening of July 4th after leaving a paper mache doll in his bed to fool guards into thinking he was asleep. He was not discovered missing until Wednesday afternoon.

    Recent advances in paper mache technology have moved beyond the limits where society can control them, and are clearly to blame for this escape. Paper mache obviously must be banned from all prisons and areas near them, as well as public parks, schools, and tattoo parlors. Paper mache has no legitimate uses that I can imagine, therefore only criminals use paper mache.

  16. Cell phones? by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    Nobody ever heard of cellphone jammers? You can make smart ones that auto switch on when a local transmitting device is detected. Or why isn't every "cell tower" in range of that prison actually a Stingray(like) device, and all conversations are listened in to, being recorded and used in court. Encrypted data connections that cannot be decrypted (via backdoor or otherwise) are of course being denied/dropped/messed with.

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    1. Re:Cell phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody ever heard of cellphone jammers? You can make smart ones that auto switch on when a local transmitting device is detected. Or why isn't every "cell tower" in range of that prison actually a Stingray(like) device, and all conversations are listened in to, being recorded and used in court. Encrypted data connections that cannot be decrypted (via backdoor or otherwise) are of course being denied/dropped/messed with.

      your tongue is sore from excessively licking big brother's anus

    2. Re:Cell phones? by Misagon · · Score: 0

      Something that is long overdue when it comes to cell phone standards is protocols to force phones to switch off where they are not wanted.
      If something like that had existed and been in widespread use, it could have been used here to prevent calls and/or detect phones within the protected area.

      Other places where such a system is warranted would be in movie theatres and near MRI machines at hospitals.

      But of course, if cell phones did not work inmates would just switch to walkie talkies.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    3. Re:Cell phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody ever heard of cellphone jammers?

      Nobody ever heard that cellphone jammers were illegal unless specifically authorized?

        You can make smart ones that auto switch on when a local transmitting device is detected.

      Or why isn't every "cell tower" in range of that prison actually a Stingray(like) device, and all conversations are listened in to, being recorded and used in court.

      The Fourth Amendment, most likely. The town of Ridgeville is within Cell distance of the Prison after all.

  17. No jamming allowed. Deal with contraband phones. by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

    Jamming will jam the surrounding neighborhood, and might well interfere with emergency communication from security staff. If the problem is that someone had a cellphone when they're not supposed to, fix THAT problem, just like they would deal with someone having a knife when they're not supposed to.

  18. Fake News! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drones don't free people, people free people! If you outlaw drones, only outlaws will have drones! Drone free zones will never work, as outlaws don't care about laws.

  19. yeah drones.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your guards are the ones getting contraband inside, now they are so incompetent prisoners are getting out

    just quit, you cant do your job just quit, and quit crying too

    im tired of victimism

  20. Why? by Comboman · · Score: 1

    So what I'd like to know is why prisons can't block cell phones.

    So a guard at the prison (or an elderly grandma nearby) has a heart attack and calls 911. Opps! Sorry, no cellular coverage. You're life is not as important as maintaining America's record as the world's largest incarcerater.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    1. Re:Why? by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If only there was a way to put a small cell tower inside a prison and watch what calls were being made.

      Some sort of triangulation device might be useful, too.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Why? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Something named after some type of fish that the gov't may have used to put some of them in there in the first place?

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    3. Re:Why? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of hammerhead shark phone tracker.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Why? by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      No? That's the cell-site simulator that uses friggin lasers.

    5. Re:Why? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I think it was some type of ray? Maybe a Manta ray?

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    6. Re:Why? by sabbede · · Score: 1
      Well, that's kinda silly and I'll tell you why. Prisons have both landlines and infirmaries! If a guard needs to make an emergency call, they have landlines. If someone needs to make an emergency call to a guard, they call the prison.

      And you make sure your jammer (if that's the option they choose) doesn't broadcast far enough to cut off grandma next door.

      I know it's easy to forget now, but cell phones aren't the only way to communicate. Worst case, people next to prisons get landlines because they aren't getting cell service at home.

  21. CONVICTS ARE LIKE SOFTWARE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They want to be FREE!

    To do it or die!

  22. Instead of blocking cell phones... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of blocking cell phones, each prison should use a Stingray device to tap cell phones inside the prison. Then they could catch whoever helps them on the outside, and staff could still use their cell phones. The only minor downside is that staff would have to register their cell phones with the prison so it won't be recorded.

    1. Re:Instead of blocking cell phones... by Doke · · Score: 1

      A stingray is much more complex, and expensive, than a jammer. It's hard to get good numbers on what they cost, but it's tens of thousands of dollars, whereas a short range jammer is a couple hundred.

  23. What about drug smuggling? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Is there any hope US will be able to control the flow of narcotics? Drones can come over the border and drop drugs and prearranged locations. There is no way to stop them.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  24. Re:No jamming allowed. Deal with contraband phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jamming will jam the surrounding neighborhood, and might well interfere with emergency communication from security staff. If the problem is that someone had a cellphone when they're not supposed to, fix THAT problem, just like they would deal with someone having a knife when they're not supposed to.

    Simple fix that also solves another problem... just paint all the inside of the prison with lead based paint. Not only would it block the cell signals, it would get rid of all the stock piled lead paint.

  25. If... by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Informative

    If a drone can fly over the fence and drop tools to a prisoner, how intrinsically different is that than basically THROWING the tools over the fence?

    Sure the drone is a lot more accurate, but heck of a lot noisier too.

    I smell excuse-hunting here; this guy already escaped them once (how is it that every jackass with a DWI can get an ankle monitor, yet a prisoner IDENTIFIED as a successful escapee doesn't have one?). On the second escape, they're looking harder to CYA than to find him.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:If... by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 1

      If a drone can fly over the fence and drop tools to a prisoner, how intrinsically different is that than basically THROWING the tools over the fence?

      There's another news article that stated that the fence was 50ft tall, which would have made it very difficult to throw tools over it. Also most prisons have multiple layers of fencing, you not only have to clear a tall fence but all the layers. That's how intrinsically different it is.

      --
      Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
    2. Re:If... by sls1j · · Score: 1

      I agree this is excuse-hunting. I mean the guy made a life sized paper mache doll to put in his bed. Do they have craft time in prison? And wouldn't that be kind of a suspicious art project? Or did they think he wanted to cuddle with it? How in the world could he hide that without lax security or inside help.

    3. Re:If... by mentil · · Score: 1

      Given that he had a wirecutter, he could've cut off the ankle monitor once he thought it likely he was safely away or after he thought that he would've been noticed missing. Assuming some alarm goes off in the monitoring facility when you cut it.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    4. Re:If... by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Potato cannon?

    5. Re:If... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Can you throw that far and accurate? The drone can drop tools 1m inside the fence. You can't throw it there.
      2) They can shoot the drone down and you are out some money. If you throw the tools they can shoot you or arrest you. And you are far larger and easier to spot.
      3) Why is everyone talking / using about flying drones? Why is nobody using walking/driving robots? Hell, you could even make one to cut the fence for you.

  26. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The prisoners in all prisons get contraband from the guards and have for hundreds of years. Now they can bypass the guards and get it via drone. Nothing new here, other than the guards are pissed off that they aren't getting some extra income from the prisoners any more.

  27. Re:No jamming allowed. Deal with contraband phones by Doke · · Score: 1

    I keep hearing suggestions like this for blocking signals. Why do people confuse lead with a faraday cage? Lead is good for blocking particle radiation, ie alpha or beta. A faraday cage is good for blocking radio. Lead is a big heavy atom that gets in the way of the particles. It will even help block some electromagnetic radiation, especially high frequencies, if thick enough. However, it's a poor conductor. Electromagnetic radiation is more easily blocked with a faraday cage, ie a conductive shell. The more conductive, the better. So a superconductor would be best, followed by silver, or copper. Lead is far down the list. Also, lead is poisonous, and exposure is cumulative.

  28. FCC might ban Jamming of cell phones, by mt2mb4me · · Score: 1

    But what about wrapping the building in grounded wire mesh, not only would it keep the drones out, you will have created a Faraday cage, you aren't jamming anything, just blocking transmission to and from.

  29. old news by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    This is old old news. I remember when "Howling mad" Murdock built a drone out of hair dryers and garbage bags which carried him out of the prison, and that was something like forty years ago.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  30. "it's very simple let us block the signal" by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    I can't believe nobody will let you do that!
      Some shitbag company that sells grossly overpriced 5ghz jammers is probably sending him sales literature.

  31. Why is the FCC jamming ban a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the employees want to be able to have cell phones.

    If there were supposed to be NO cell phones anywhere near the prison,
    then finding the ones that are there would not be hard.

  32. Umm... by Timothy2.0 · · Score: 1

    The drone/wire cutter aspect isn't the staggering part...How the hell did he build a convincing papier-maché doll of himself to fool the guards is what I'm curious about. Never underestimate the resourcefulness of a man whose liberty has been denied...

  33. prison tv systems is paid for with the funds from by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    prison tv systems is paid for with the funds from commissar commissary and you do need some thing to keep the lifers with nothing to lose in line.

  34. Bird nets by Solandri · · Score: 1

    They sell bird nets for keeping birds out (or in) to cover things like fish farms to prevent birds from eating all the fish. They're relatively inexpensive and I'm sure you could get them in a finer mesh if you wanted (so drones can't drop stabbing implements, though I suspect prisoners can already make a shiv with stuff they find in the prison).

    Just because it's a high-tech problem doesn't mean it needs a high-tech solution. Although prison guards might get a sense of satisfaction actively watching for drones, then commanding a Phalanx to take it out, it's unnecessary and profligate.

  35. some people us prisons are there doctory by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    some people us prisons are there doctor for the stuff that the ER does not cover.

  36. Drones are the new default blame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Well we don't know how they got the wire cutters... must have been drones."

    The airlines have got the 'make shit up about drones' down to a science. There is no need to spread more FUD.

  37. Still not a solution by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    With minimal skill, most drones will land or otherwise not function correctly if you jam the gps signal,

    It would be easy today to build a custom tasked drone that relied on visual navigation only along with accelerometers.

    Remember the drone needs only to fly in a straight line over a wall, drop something, then come back along that same path. You could probably accomplish this even with just accelerometers...

    Also what about drones controlled remotely entirely over cell phone data from a phone strapped to the drone? Can a prison legally have a strong enough signal blocker for a drone 500+ft in the air?? That would swamp signal in a huge area around the prison...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  38. Block the signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Easy fix. Block the signals anyway. If you get caught, apologize. Then do it again anyway. What are they gonna do? Fine the prison? The state prison simply doesn't pay the federal fine.

  39. trebuchet master race reporting in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely a well-organized gang would be using trebuchets.

  40. Not enough planning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He escapes Tuesday evening and is found Friday morning. Let's call that 48 hours plus some, maybe 60 hours total time. He was caught 1200 miles away. That's a mean speed of 20 miles per hour (40 MPH if you assume a 50% duty cycle of 12 hours driving / 12 hours rest). Probably didn't change cars. Probably didn't have a second driver to assist. Probably was caught on camera at highway gas stations when he stopped to refill the tank, so was easy to trace. Probably used a credit card to pay for lodging. Not enough planning.

    3 additional people, 3 additional cars at strategically arranged points for swaps where there are no cameras (i.e., not on a highway or a parking lot). 8 hours driving / 8 hours sleeping in the back of the car, no stops except for gas or relieving oneself by the side of a country road. Additional drivers bring food. Stick to secondary roads whenever possible. Drop the escapee off to hide while the assistant refills the car. He'd have made it much, much farther, and undetected.

    Given that it's clear he already has a knack for planning that goes above and beyond the normal inmate, I'd expect him to get farther next time. And a B-grade movie to come out of it, too.

  41. We're Engineers, We can solve this! by dschnur · · Score: 1

    This is a topic that has no simple answer and really covers two completely different subjects...

    Let me start by saying that IMHO the prison system in the United States is broken.
    It's often more about making a profit and/or punishing people rather than actually correcting behavior.

    That said, I'll move on to the problem.

    For blocking drones, just umm.. order a cheap baby monitor from... Alibaba.
    Actually, that one I don't have a real solution to. SDR would make it next to impossible to block signals from a really determined bad guy.

    As for phones:

    This is really a "What's the best worst option."

    Here's one bad option:

    1: Cell Phones have GPS's in them. Many have several different kinds of GPS receivers.
    2: Using GPS, Carriers and cell phones are quite capable of determining when a phone is in the exact footprint of a correctional facility.
    3: We could fund carriers to pay folks like us so we can develop a method where cell phone calls are restricted within certain geographical areas.
              - Commercial Drones already do that by themselves.
    4: Instead of blocking calls within that footprint, we could allow emergency calls and not impede the safety of legitimate cell phone users.
    5: If done right, this is the kind of thing that can be implemented without violating the privacy or security of legitimate cell phone users.

    Worst of the best? Nope. Best of the worst? There are probably better ideas.

      -Dan

  42. I love this by strikethree · · Score: 1

    I absolutely LOVE this. They have people locked in little rooms and supervised 24 hours a day and they can't prevent someone from using a fucking phone without blocking all EM transmissions?

    These fuckers (authorities in general) want to turn the entire country into a police state so that they can control every aspect of our lives, and then prove that once they have full control, they can't prevent the behavior that prompted them to seek full control to begin with.

    What. The. Fuck.

    Meh. Whatever. As long as they can send the Jews on long train rides, everyone is happy. Right?

    --
    "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  43. Faraday cage by p51d007 · · Score: 2

    Make prison/jail cells faraday cages. No electronic signal gets in, none gets out. Oh! But they won't be able to watch TV or listen to the radio. SO WHAT! It's not a bed & breakfast! IT'S A PRISON!

  44. And let's *BLOCK* radio frequencies, too by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    > they could just put a mesh net over the prison yard. maybe take it out of the
    > budget they use for locking up non-violent offenders for decades at a time.

    While we're at it, use metallic mesh, e.g. chicken wire. In addition to blocking dropped objects, it would also block radio waves. Note that *BLOCKING* radio transmissions is perfectly legal, as opposed to *JAMMING* radio signals.

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user