Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Jamming Cellular Signals Not The Answer

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 01:33:33 -0400

Jamming Cellular Signals Not The Answer
BY RHONDA WICKHAM, EDITOR IN CHIEF

MAY 15, 2004

WIRELESS WEEK

"Public safety is more important than public convenience." These are the
words of L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca from a story in the Oakland
Tribune and picked up nationwide. He is exploring the use of jamming
equipment to interrupt wireless service if a terrorist attack was
expected in Los Angeles. The idea is to black-out wireless service at
major venues such as LAX and Universal Studios, or frankly wherever
necessary. Apparently, this idea surfaced because the train bomb in
Spain was allegedly detonated by a cell phone. Frankly, this idea only
has merit if it is the terrorists' sole modus operandi. However, anyone
who watches the evening news knows that is only one of many possible
ways evil-doers can disrupt the normal.

I find the idea of using jamming equipment as reprehensible and
irresponsible on many levels. First, I fail to see how interrupting
wireless service promotes public safety. Baca of all people should know
that emergency personnel and first responders use a variety of
communications technologies to aid public service pursuits. To block
signals of wireless subscribers is also blocking the signals of his
personnel, not to mention the people who need them.

In a terrorist situation, or any life-and-death event for that matter,
all agencies –law enforcement, fire emergency, HAZMAT, bomb squads,
first responders –must be able to communicate among themselves as well
as with those in need.  If every time we fear a terrorist attack we jam
cell phone signals within a certain radius, we impede the ability of
first responders to do their jobs effectively.

Second, such action undermines the very intent of the E911 initiative.
Carriers and state and local communities have spent considerable time
and money trying to implement a fool-proof wireless 911 system for
wireless networks. If embraced, this blackout concept jeopardizes the
public trust placed in E911 and discourages any of the administering
parties to push the initiative forward any further. What good is E911 if
the service will be blocked during crises?

Third, a major component of public safety is public information. Denying
citizens basic communications in an emergency only encourages panic. Two
recent events revealed the necessity and value of wireless technology
for public awareness.  During the 2001 New York Trade Center bombings
and the 2003 East Coast blackouts, the public relied heavily on wireless
to obtain information and communicate with family and friends. That
reliance in the latter example specifically allowed masses of thousands,
notably in Manhattan, to calmly leave the city. What would have happened
if wireless service was blacked out until officials ruled out terrorist
activity as the root cause? People would have been running
helter-skelter desperately trying to get information. That panic would
have created a different sort of public safety issue entirely. We have
to think no further than some recent soccer matches and nightclub fires
to know what happens when large crowds panic and start running for exits
or safety.

The FCC has declared jammers as illegal, unless officially sanctioned.
There are some approved locations for signal blockage; hospitals and
casinos come to mind. However, by lifting the bans for special
circumstances without tight controls from the FCC and regulators, we run
the risk of the black-and-white bleeding to gray. For instance, some
schools have banned cell phone use. What if all educational facilities
"for safety's sake" go one step further and simply black-out coverage?
Where does it stop after that? Restaurants, movie theaters, shopping
malls, highways?

Finally, how paranoid will we become and at what price? The
insidiousness of terrorism preys upon paranoia. Is this just the first
step toward such a society?  First, we will jam cell phone signals
because of terrorist threats. Then will we shut down the Internet
because terrorists might use it to release some destructive virus?
Because terrorists gravitate to large gatherings, will we discontinue
sporting events, concerts, parades and major public events?

Despite all of my misgivings at hearing this news, I believe we must be
responsible where terrorist threats are concerned, but I do not believe
this approach is the answer.

I am a child of the Cold War Age where we lived with the implied threat
that Communists could attack us at any moment. If you are like me, you
can still recite the words from the TV programming interruption. "This
is a test and only a test. If this were an actual emergency, you would
be instructed …" Perhaps some people see this jamming of cellular
signals quite similar to that – used only in the instance of dire
emergency. In fact, it is not the same at all. Wireless service has
become much more than a convenience.

To Mr. Baca, I agree that public safety is more important than public
convenience. However, wireless phone service is not cross-town bus
service; it is a vital lifeline and a key component of public safety.

http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA417712?spacedesc=Departments&stt=000

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

-- 
    "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL"
  Note The New address 
Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1

  "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS"
Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2

  "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP"
     The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security.
Subscribe to WFHSG:  http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEXTEL-1/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     [email-masked]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

---

From: "Bill Smith" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 17:00:45 -0400

So I place my device and hook a cheap 2-way with no antenna to it. It's
programmed to the police tactical freq or the repeater input. It sits there
doing nothing until an on-freq signal strong enough to break squelch. Or I
connect a pager. Or a simple timer. Or a photocell...

There are so many ways to activate any sort of device that to single out
cellular as the activating means is ludicrous. I can sit here and come up
with a list of a hundred ideas. For every way I come up with, others will
come up with two or three more.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 1:34
To: [email-masked]; WFHSG
Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Jamming Cellular Signals Not The Answer

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 
Yahoo! Groups Links