Let me know ahead of time if you are going to post that an argument is a strawman and not even bother to refute it.
Well, it does matter fuck-all if there are assholes abusing cell phones, because a cell-phone jammer isn’t going to be used in a vacuum. Like asking whether it is morall acceptable to fight, it depends: fighting to defend yourself or another, if necessary, is acceptable; but fighting to hurt a person who isn’t a threat is not acceptable.
For example, I’ve generally witness polite use rather than rude. I’ve been places where sitting and talking on a phone would be rude; however, in those same places I’ve heard a ring that was answered quickly, and the recipient of the call got up and left the room, using a wisper to advise the caller to hold during the exodus. In exactly equivalent circumstances, a conversation between two people would be quite rude, but asking another to repeat what a speaker said, asking for a reference, or asking if he left the iron on are all perfectly acceptable.
Under those conditions, using the jammer would be rude—if it’s okay to ask, “Bob, what did she just say?” then it is okay to say, “Bob, wait while I leave the room.” I don’t see how the additon of the cell phone makes one rude and the other not.
I guess that…to me saying that it is rude to politely talk to a cell phone instead of a physcially present individual is the moral equivalent of saying that it is rude for two people to politely talk in a foreign language.
If instead the recipient of the call stays in the room and talks loudly during a presentation, then yeah, the moderator of the conference, for example, could reasonably jam the call.
Honestly, are that many people going to jam a cell-phone call when they hear the person exclaim, “Oh my god! Is she okay?! Which hospital?! In the ER?!”
Wow. What a wreck of a thread.
Guys. most of the chat here is irrelevant. They are illegal. The are illegal because they are indiscriminate radio transmitters on bandwaves that are either controlled or reserved. The are illegal because such devices always tend to leak into neighbouring frequences. They are illegal because their coverage can be erratic and difficult to control. They are illegal because governments, for good reason, try to police the waves so that they don’t become anarchy. They are illegal because usually the phone company is paying good money for a licence to use these frequencies and doesn’t care for others blocking it. They are illegal because they could also be used for other illegal activity. So they are illegal.
So all of you getting hot under the collar about whether it would ok for a jammer to be used in a cinema are missing the point. No, it would not be ok, because they are illegal for all the above reasons, whether in the cinema or not.
The chat isn’t irrelevant because they’re illegal to use Futille. The chat is irrelevant because most posters aren’t answering the OP’s question but instead rambling on about how some people who use cell phones can be rude.
I don’t think the the user of a cell phone jammer waits until they hear a call in progress and then jams it depending on the conversation. The purpose of the jammer is to stop cell phone users from receiving a call in the first place.
Gee, I was part of a transplant team * before* %#&!@ cell phones existed. Yes, we used pagers. Not voice pagers, if it beeped, I headed for the hospital. No distractions on the road.
No one needs to talk to me (or, IMO, anyone else) so badly that lives are at risk, or even that others are inconvienced.
I don’t have one, will never have one, and I try my best, to never call one. I hate 'em, but that is my personal opinion.
I like my privacy too much, I guess. 
There are really two separate issues being discussed here. The first, as proposed in the op, is whether it’s ok for an individual to use a personal cell phone jammer on someone else they feel is been impolite.
It’s been well established that this is illegal. Establishing this is far from the same as establishing that it should be illegal. I’m of the opinion that using a cell phone jammer on someone who doesn’t know that you are using it is just as objectionably an invasion of privacy as those who talk loudly on their cell phones in public. Further, indiscriminate, individual use could potentially, though I think this very unlikely, create a safety problem for those who use cell phones for the purpose of emergency notification. I don’t object to personal, portable cell phone jammers being illegal; I think such laws are reasonable and justified.
There is a second separate issue. Should businesses be allowed to install cell phone jamming devices on their own property? Note, the question here isn’t whether it is legal; it is not. The question is whether it should be legal.
I’m of the opinion that it definitely should be. A movie theater, concert hall, restaurant, or any other business that wants to should be allowed to install jamming devices on their own property, and here is the crux of my argument–so long as they notify patrons that this is going on.
This absolutley eliminates any objections based on those rare, but potentially disastrous emergencies. Dr. Jones who is on call can avoid premium theaters (and you better believe theaters that had this would advertise it heavily and charge extra for it) with cell phone jamming, and patronize only those without this feature, or just stay out when on call. Or they could do what my SIL, who is an ER nurse, does, and what on-call personel did for decades before cell phones existed, and leave the number of the theater with the call desk.
I don’t know about Dr. Jones, but all on-call personnel at the hospital where my SIL works are required to have a cell phone or pager with them at all times, and must leave a land line number for where they will be, either at home or where ever they will be when out. There’s hell to pay if the nurse supervisor finds out you went out to dinner and didn’t leave the restaurant’s number at the call desk. The reason for the redundancy is that cell phones get lost, damaged, their batteries die, they’re forgotten, or they end up someplace where they can’t get a signal.
I disagree, unless they can find a way that won’t interfere with emergency communications (NOT on cell phones, but on EMS/fire/police radios in the 800MHz range).
The heck with a cell phone jammer, when is someone going to invent a WAY TOO LOUD bass in vehicles jamming system???
I directly addressed and refuted this argument in my post.
Of course, you will run into the problem of people looking down at their cell phones saying, “what’s the matter with this” when the signal suddenly gets fuzzy/drops off and you’ll likely have more accidents.
Radio waves do not respect the boundaries of a business’ property. Jammers are illegal because their coverage is very difficult to control. It is near impossible for anyone to guarantee that they are not also jamming communications, and in neighbouring frequences, out in the front street as well.
I want to thank everyone for your comments, very interesting discussion going on here.
I’d like to hear from anyone who actually purchased and used a device like this. Did it work? What were the circumstances? Did you get a heady rush of justice when used? 
I guess I’m missing that. Could you point out where?
Post #86.
Okay, I just read post #86 and I can’t find where you addressed a way where jammers won’t interfere with emergency communications.
Likewise.
In case I haven’t been clear, here’s what I’m trying to say. Most emergency services agencies (EMS/Fire/Police) have radio frequencies in the 800MHz band. The rest of the band is taken up by cell phone providers. Also, the frequencies are interspersed. So… (hypothetically) you’ll have Nextel at 801, EMS dispatch at 802, EMS-Hospital at 803, Verizon at 804, and Fire Dept. Tactical channel at 804. There is absolutely no way to jam the cell phone frequencies without also jamming the emergency radio channels. This is unacceptable. We would be unable to communicate with each other on scene, unable to be dispatched, and unable to contact the hospital to give patient reports. It would compromise responder and patient safety. That’s why I feel that they shouldn’t be legal, even if notice is posted.
St. Urho
EMT-P
I understand now. Your objection is based on the ability of emergency personnel responding to an emergency on the premesis to be able to communicate, not with emergency personnel who might happen to be patrons of the theater. My post addressed only the former issue.
You object because these devices would make your job more difficult. A theater owner might object to jammers being illegal for exactly the same reason, that it makes thier job–providing patrons with a quiet environment in which to watch their movie, play, concert, etc–more difficult. These two benefits must be weighed against each other. A movie theater with a dozen screens has something like 15,000 movies screened in a single year, while the chance of even one incident requiring the response of emergency personnel to the theater is likely relatively small.
There are, however, incidents that require emergency medical care or a police response to such venues. I assume you would argue, and the law certainly agrees, that no matter how small the chance of such an incident the mere possibility outweighs the potential benefits to the owner of the theater, restaurant, or other business.
If there were a way to accommodate both sides, that would be the ideal situation. Fortunately, there is. When emergency responders are on site, turn the jammers off.
O.K. but what about when we get a call in the general vicinity, but outside the building? What if we’re driving by and miss a call? Also, I highly doubt that jammers would be turned off in an emergency. Who would be responsible? How would they know that someone has called 911?
I think what Number six is saying is that if anyone who resonds to emergencies is on the site, the site could turn off their jammers.
“Hi, I am an EMT volunteer. Can I have a large popcorn, some Junior mints, a jumbo coke and oh yeah, can you turn off your your signal jammers until Alien vs. Predator is over. Thanks.”