It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cellphones blocked in SF to hinder transit protest

page: 6
43
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
It's only evil and controlling if dirty brown people do it in Iran, didn't you know?

It's perfectly fine to disrupt public communications in Amerika if it pleases the corrupt government.




posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


Howdy Tex.

Yeah, I realize that the platform is considered a public forum and not private.

Did you actually read the link that I quoted from? Go back and check it. You will figure out where it came from. Laws in localities differ. The link I quoted from is a "general" guideline (written by an attorney for the ACLU who knows about protesting legally).

I think that if you read and use common sense, it is really easy to understand. The localities have the right and responsiblities regarding "reasonable time, place and manner restrictions and as long as they apply the law equally and not on the basis of the speaker message" they can enforce those laws which have been upheld as not being unconstitutional.

The protesters could have protested legally at the designated locations. Protesting on the platform is illegal. No doubt in my mind that it is illegal due to the safety factor amongst other possible reasons.

Can you admit, had they let the protest take place on the platform during rush hour, there was a possibility of unneccessary injury or death which could have been avoided? Would you rather have seen that? In this economy, would you rather have seen protesters ticketed,arrested or taken to jail? Would you pony up the dough for that?

Another question. Where in the constitution does it say anything about my "right" to a "cell phone"? I can answer that for ya. NOWHERE.

BART owns the infrastructure that allows them to give added service to their clients. They didn't do anything illegal. Immoral, in my opinion, yes.

respectfully,
p



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by hypr2011
 


This is not new, it was tested in Texas, one service provieder shut down half the state, just shut down the main server, but heres the catch, cell phones are satille based you need the state AG, or the DOJ the shut service down, just ask the right question on this.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
If I recall it's against the law to disrupt communications. The FCC might have a say in this but they could be in big trouble.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by mikellmikell
 
your right , they the FCC are on it!!! SF is going to get a spanking from Big Bro over this news.search.yahoo.com... one of the links

Cell service stays on during BART protest in SF
The busy evening commute out of downtown San Francisco gave way Monday to a chaotic cat-and-mouse game between police officers and roving protesters who lashed out at the transit agency for temporarily shutting down...
San Francisco Chronicle - Aug 16 12:35am

FCC reviewing SF subway cell shut down - CNET
Hackers attack SF transit website in protest - CBS News
'Anonymous' Stages Real Life Denial-of- Service Attack on BART - Techland
nothing like up setting the ol' apple cart



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
You can see the result of Mondays protests here www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics
 
43
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join