# Illegal to block cell traffic in your own home? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 23, 2011, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815 "2011-08-23T20:15:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2011, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/21 "2011-08-30T05:21:03Z")
To summarize: Fear of lawsuits is what corporations have instead of a sense of morality. ---
**Author:** ![busterpickle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@busterpickle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/busterpickle)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2011, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/22 "2011-08-30T05:44:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Federal law prohibits the operation, marketing, or sale of any type of jamming equipment, including devices that interfere with cellular and Personal Communication Services (PCS), police radar, Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and wireless networking services (Wi-Fi). So, they are quite clear. Calling them up yields the result of “NO” but if you dig you will end up with someone who can answer your calls and it depends on the application. I know its possible to have them as when I was in the military I had access to a wide variety of equipment that could not only jam of eavesdrop as the security implementation is known and if you are an authorized entity you can have the equipment. Or, go to a place like Dubai or somewhere and buy it. Getting caught is quite severe as the FCC is no longer fooling around. [If you go this page](http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/) and scroll down to **Recent Enforcement Actions** you will see a list of FCC actions against people, etc. Even if you cooperate you are going to not enjoy it. ---
**Author:** ![TruCelt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trucelt/32/523_2.png) [@TruCelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TruCelt)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2011, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/23 "2011-08-30T20:24:07Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > To summarize: Fear of lawsuits is what corporations have instead of a sense of morality. Exactly. It’s also the last resort of a citizenry whose Government fails to hold corporations responsible for their actions. For whatever reason, The citizens of the USA have yet to resort to demanding that our politicians serve us instead of the corporations. [/Palin Voice] Because we’re not socialists! ! ! [\palin voice]. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/24 "2011-08-30T21:20:23Z")
> [@TruCelt](#): > > And you can demonstrate their cost-benefit analysis showing that they totted up the danger to their customers and decided that the savings of $.03 or so per pot by using hotter water and therefore slightly less coffee grounds would outweigh the likely losses in lawsuits by the injured customers. That report also considered that super-heated coffee allowed more take-away sales by virtue of still being at a good serving temperature fifteen minutes after purchase. [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![jnglmassiv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f07891/32.png) [@jnglmassiv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jnglmassiv)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2011, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/25 "2011-08-30T22:09:18Z")
> [@electronbee](#): > > Getting caught is quite severe as the FCC is no longer fooling around. [If you go this page](http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/) and scroll down to **Recent Enforcement Actions** you will see a list of FCC actions against people, etc. Even if you cooperate you are going to not enjoy it. To be honest, that cite does more to show that the FCC IS fooling around. From [the latest entry](http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-308002A1.html): > [@](#): > > You were previously warned by notice on January 5, 2011, and letter dated January 6, 2011, concerning the operation of this device. You were again warned verbally on January 14, 2011. > . > . > UNAUTHORIZED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO TRANSMITTING DEVICE MUST NOT RESUME. > SUBSEQUENT OPERATION WILL NOT BE TOLERATED AND WILL RESULT IN SANCTIONS OF > $16,000.00 PER DAY PER VIOLATION. Four warnings?!? Looks like fooling around to me. From the [second most recent enforcement action](http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-307485A1.html): > [@](#): > > Warning for UnAUTHORIZED Radio Operation > AND INTERFERENCE TO LICENSED RADIO STATIONS > . > . > UNAUTHORIZED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO TRANSMITTING DEVICE MUST NOT RESUME. Warning! No more! Ok, two more warnings. Pretty weak, don’t you think? Certainly not severe. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/26 "2011-08-31T02:15:54Z")
> [@TruCelt](#): > > > [@Derleth](#): > > > > To summarize: Fear of lawsuits is what corporations have instead of a sense of morality. > > Exactly. It’s also the last resort of a citizenry whose Government fails to hold corporations responsible for their actions. Exactly right, **TruCelt**. Mainly because it’s exactly the way the laws have to be written and enforced for corporate structures to even work. The term “Corporation” comes from a latin root for “bodies” (as in “dead or alive”). If you don’t treat them as “legal persons”, no “actual person” will invest in one. The legal concept of “Joint and Several Liability” really fucks with the model. I’ve seen companies go under because of “Joint and Several Liability”. Look it up. It pretty much puts paid to the idea of multiple people putting money into a venture. It makes you personally liable for _ **all** _ the actions of a company you only invested 1 buck into. Would you invest a buck in a company if you might wind up liable for 1 million times your net worth for that investment? Which gets back to your original point. Hold “Corporations” liable for their actions. How do you hold a “Corporation” liable for murder? How do you execute it? Fine it a large enough amount to ensure the corporation dies is about all you can do. How do you set the fine, to ensure it’s death? That would depend entirely on the resources that the company has. 3M or IBM can afford a million buck fine, and consider that a cost of doing business. A rounding error in their bottom line. But… I have a friend who runs a motel. Charge him 10 thousand, and you’ve put him out of business. How do you set the method of “Punishing Corporations” so it doesn’t kill off small businesses like my friend owns (in partnership with several other small investors)? Preferably without killing off investment in small corporations, generally? ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/27 "2011-08-31T02:30:27Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > I have a friend who runs a motel. Charge him 10 thousand, and you’ve put him out of business. How do you set the method of “Punishing Corporations” so it doesn’t kill off small businesses like my friend owns (in partnership with several other small investors)? Preferably without killing off investment in small corporations, generally? Percentage or total worth would be a good start. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/28 "2011-08-31T03:32:04Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Percentage or total worth would be a good start. That is related to one of the things that grabbed headlines in the coffee case. To oversimplify, the plaintiff asked for the equivalent of two days coffee sales (?) as a punishment/deterant. That gigantic number sparked popular (and generally uninformed) outrage. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/29 "2011-09-01T19:26:34Z")
> [@TruCelt](#): > > The OP in that thread absoltuely did not want to jam the sgnals around her dinner table to foil her children’s texting tricks. > > What I want to know is, is it phycially possible to jam just a small area, and also is it legal? I know service is jammed inside our local hospital, but it’s big enough to leave room for doubt. Is the service actually _jammed_ there, or could it just be an artifact of the building construction? I’ve been in quite a few office buildings where cells worked intermittently at best. BTW - does the hospital still have that “turn off your cell phone or it’ll kill everyone inside” sign? The one nearest us (the Healthplex) doesn’t any more, I think. Since it’s pretty much been debunked, that is. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815/30 "2011-09-01T19:39:46Z")
> [@TruCelt](#): > > And you can demonstrate their cost-benefit analysis showing that they totted up the danger to their customers and decided that the savings of $.03 or so per pot by using hotter water and therefore slightly less coffee grounds would outweigh the likely losses in lawsuits by the injured customers. > > I get so sick of hearing that one brought up as an example of absurd lawsuits. What McDonald’s corporation did there was horrible, and people should have gone to jail for it. The best we could hope for was that the courts would award enough damages to make other companies take heed and rank customer safety a bit higher in the scale. Given that you have to ask for an extra hot cup at Starbucks, I’d say it worked. I suggest you start a new thread on the subject. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegal-to-block-cell-traffic-in-your-own-home/593815.md?page=1)