Yet another cell jamming story

Durst writes "I know there was an earlier posting on cell phone jamming. This article from E-Week at,1759,1678426, p talks about vendors and which countries have adopted the use of jammers in which venues."


"Canada had considered allowing blocking in similar situations. But Industry Canada, which regulates the country's telecommunications, decided against it, saying the devices could infringe on personal freedom and affect public safety by crippling communication with law enforcement and security agencies." I definitely follow Industry Canada's conclusion with respect to such devices. To me, having jammers in place is just overkill. The nice thing is that if Industry Canada will not go along with this, the FCC probably won't either. Why? Simple. Suppose you are sitting at University of Windsor's library by the Ambassador Bridge that links Detroit and Windsor. A jammer is fired up at the University of Windsor but the jamming signal carries across the river to Detroit. What then? There are radio coordination treaties between the US & Canada for very, very, very good reasons.

To the best of my knowledge, jammers are already illegal in the U.S.--and for good reason. (The ones given by Industry Canada.)

Actually, it didn't take much looking to confirm the specific illegality of cell phone jammers in the U.S.

Apparently, people still buy them, and nobody's been prosecuted under the law, but they're both illegal and a really awful idea. (I say that as someone who doesn't carry a cell phone. Spectrum interference is bad enough without deliberate acts to screw it up.)

Subscribe to Comments for "Yet another cell jamming story"