Chicagoan Arrested For Using Cell-phone Jammer To Make Subway Commute Tolerable (chicagotribune.com) 518
McGruber writes with this story from the Chicago Tribune: Last Fall, certified public accountant Dennis Nicholl boarded a Chicago subway train while carrying a plastic bag of Old Style beer. Nicholl popped open a beer and looked around the car, scowling as he saw another rider talking on a cellphone. He pulled out a black device from his pocket and switched it on. Commuters who had been talking on their phones went silent, checking their screens for the source of their dropped calls. On Tuesday, undercover officers arrested Nicholl. Cook County prosecutors and Chicago police allege he created his own personal 'quiet car' on the subway by using an illegal device he imported from China. He was charged with unlawful interference with a public utility, a felony. This is not the first time Nicholl has been charged with jamming cell calls. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge in June 2009, according to court records. He was placed under court supervision for a year, and his equipment was confiscated and destroyed.
Nothing like editorializing in the headline of TFS (Score:2, Insightful)
It's a Techdirt headline.
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
He's lucky there wasn't an emergency and that his device did not interfere with a 911 call. This is reckless behavior, and he already knew the seriousness of this crime because of the prior conviction.
By the way, are you allowed to have a beer on the Chicago public transit? If so, that's fantastic!
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
Chicagoan here - technically no booze allowed on the Chicago Transportation Authority (CTA) run vehicles which this guy was on, but I've never seen it enforced. You can drink to your hearts content on the Metra though, which heads out to the Chicago burbs, and is owned by the same parent organization as the CTA.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, I thought New Orleans was about the only place left in the US that didn't have open container laws, where you can drink in public.
Do they in Chicago also have "to go" cups so you can take your drink with you out of the bars? Drive through daiquiri shops?
Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)
I think any place with a tram/train system for mass transit lets you drink (or don't enforce it) on the trains, Vancouver is the same way, so is Tokyo. So long as you're not peeing on the seat or something.
DC is pretty strict - even a candy bar can get you arrested. http://www.washingtonpost.com/... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:3)
It sounds like she was arrested for refusing the lawful orders of a police officer. She was asked to stop and produce identification so the officer could write a ticket (for something that is a ticketable offence) and refused, so she was arrested.
Seems perfectly legitimate to me. You don't get to walk away because you think the offence is silly, it is still an offence.
Re: (Score:3)
In NYC, the Staten Island Ferry actually SELLS tall boys (I think it's ~$4 for a bud).
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
I've been on many public train systems but I have yet to see any signs that indicate that pissing on the seats isn't allowed.
Re:Good (Score:4, Interesting)
Just ask yourself if a prude would approve.
Can I ride my bicycle. YES
Can I own lots of guns. Let me check the bible... YES
Can I drink in public. NO, be glad they let you drink in private. Even private stuff bothers them.
The Bible describes Jesus drinking wine, but not toting a gun. I think your Bible-based analysis is off.
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
He's referring to the new revised Fundamentalist Bible. They just ignore the parts they don't like.
Re: (Score:3)
Have you ever taken the Red Line to a Cubs game?
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, are you allowed to have a beer on the Chicago public transit? If so, that's fantastic!
No, it isn't If we need any fucking "blockers" in public transport, it's beer blockers.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
He's lucky there wasn't an emergency and that his device did not interfere with a 911 call.
I guess I was just lucky to survive the dark ages before mobiles existed and someone would have had to get the train to stop in the next station before calling for help. Yes this guy was being an idiot but lets not blow things out of proportion: life was indeed possible before the cell phone was invented and it was not significantly more dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
I was about to make the exact same post but you beat me to it.
I get annoyed on the train as well. Usually though, most people are pretty reserved in the morning and it is nice and quiet. Any other time I have to listen to music or netcasts to block out the inane jabber.
I'm sympathetic (Score:3)
I am extremely sympathetic to this guy. I'd like to myself have the technology to shut down annoying people doing annoying things. Unfortunately, I am also sympathetic to the fact that this is illegal, and it's illegal for good reason, and he should go to jail. If he'd only done it once, he should just get a warning: but this isn't the first time, and he should go
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess I was just lucky to survive the dark ages before mobiles existed
And more people died back then (unpreventably) due to this, so it is an irrelevent point.
If someone could call for help and get assistance faster (greater chance of surviving), and you interfere with this, then you become liable for their death, and if you did it with knowledge and/or intent, or a legal equivalent (such as reckless negligence), then criminally liable.
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Modern technologies, even comm technologies, have made some dangers (like heart attacks) significantly less dangerous. We've built a better world, and just because people survived the old doesn't mean that we should permit people to recreate those older dangers.
Re: (Score:3)
That's true. The other day I saw someone "jaywalking" diagonally across the street in a motorized wheel chair while texting. That's a danger that didn't exist previously. I'd say they were going diagonally through the intersection, but actually they were just west of the intersection, where a car turning couldn't see or expect them.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm with you. While jammers are not optimal, to equate their use to risking everyone's life because 911 isn't immediately available is a stretch and mostly disingenuous.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
911 calls from cell phones on public transit are relatively rare. But many of us use the data links on our smart phones to check our schedules for connections for other buses or for trains. Many of us in high demand work also respond to text based alerts during lengthy commutes. We're not loud, we're not speaking on the cell phones, and it's much safer to do this on public transit than it is to drive home and have to pull off the road to handle an alert. So it sounds like he's interfering with people who are being responsible and safe, as well as those who are rude.
Re: (Score:3)
For the money he put into that device, he could have just bought a nice set of headphones and a music player. That's what I do. Every morning, weather I catch the tram or bus, I almost always have my headphones in while reading either the news or a book on my phone. It's a great way of tuning out the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:3)
But this is an egotistic asshole that likes to feel in control so that isn't an alternative.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
By the way, are you allowed to have a beer on the Chicago public transit? If so, that's fantastic!
Yes, people drinking as they please, with no bathroom in sight (but plenty of pillars). It's a real treat.
Gotta stop them people on the phone though.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This was maybe true through the 1990's, but now it's just a well-worn joke that's not even relevant anymore.
The explosion of craft beer in the USA in the last 20-30 years has resulted in our beer being the real beer. Go to Canada these days, and you'll find most bars carry only beers from one giant distributor or the other: Anheuser-Busch-InBev (owns Labatt) or SABMiller (owns Molson). This is due to those companies saying "You want our beers? Fine, you just can't carry anyone else's. Including microbrews.
Re: (Score:3)
I can tell you it never happened to me...
Is stating that it never happened to you meaningful in some way? Do you consider anything that doesn't happen to you to be irrelevant or fictional?
Re: (Score:3)
We hit the big button on the sign labeled "EMERGENCY - NOTIFY OPERATOR" which starts an intercom conversation with the operator who also has cameras in cars. Oh looky thar, they still have that button since cell coverage not consistent in subways and at certain places on the elevated tracks!
No good guys. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are no good guys in this story. He's a dick for blocking other people's services. The government are being ridiculous in charging him with felonies and holding hundreds of thousands in fines over his head, and people having loud animated conversations on their cell phones in crowded public spaces are rude.
If he did what he is accused of then he is guilty of disturbing the peace. He should be punished accordingly. He's not guilty of intercepting people's cell calls and recording their conversations with a sting-ray device. He didn't bring down the local power sub-station. He did the equivalent of loudly disrupting a public meeting. Proportionality is an important concept, and we've lost track of it.
Re:No good guys. (Score:5, Funny)
But he was blocking the use of a sting-ray device, so they threw the book at him.
Re:No good guys. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bringing it into plain view ratchets it up a notch to, "I am making a point here. Look at me!"
Re: (Score:2)
This is what I was thinking as well.
Although, it would only have increased the time until he was caught if he used it regularly.
I recall hearing a story about a guy who had one of these devices in his car and kept it on all the time, creating a bubble as he drove down the freeway.
They caught him because a pattern could be established (he took the same route at the same time every day).
Re: (Score:3)
If he didn't want to hear the cellphones, he could have gotten a good pair of noise canceling headphones and put on some music. It would block out the sounds of other people talking on the phone without breaking any laws. As it was, he was upset that people's actions (talking on the phone) were affecting him so he took an action (using a jammer) that affected others (not just the ones talking on the phone, but anyone using a cell phone even in a quiet manner).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's it. It really sounds like he got busted for being a dick.
Re: (Score:2)
and people having loud animated conversations on their cell phones in crowded public spaces are rude.
I never got this. If two people are sat on the bus/train whatever and having a chat, no one gives a shit, remove one of the people and half the conversation and people are suddenly put out by it.
Re:No good guys. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it depends on how loud the chat is.
I get annoyed at loud conversation all the time. Of course, I hate people so...
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, it depends on how loud the chat is.
I get annoyed at loud conversation all the time. Of course, I hate people so...
That's by the by, why is half a conversation more annoying than a full one you're not listening to anyway? (By the way I agree with you, life would be better if everyone else would just fuck off)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if the half conversations via cell-phones are inherently louder due to less than perfect transmission. I witness people communicating effectively in person while whispering, but I can't imagine being able to be heard while whispering over a cell connection.
However, if you want to see what researchers found, I located an article:
http://healthland.time.com/201... [time.com]
Re:No good guys. (Score:5, Interesting)
remove one of the people and half the conversation and people are suddenly put out by it.
Correct. Many people find half a conversation to be very annoying, as their brain is distracted by trying to "fill in" the other half. Psychologists have studied the phenomena, and some comedians exploit it (Bob Newhart [wikipedia.org] was a famous example).
Other people (including me) are not bothered by it. I find it easy to tune out other people, sometimes even when they are talking directly to me. My wife can confirm this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, I've found that people tend to talk louder when they are on the phone. Maybe it's because there is no feedback to adjust their speaking volume. Almost everyone on the phone on the bus is loud while many people having a conversation together speak in a lowered voice.
Secondly, it's harder to ignore half a conversation. http://www.scientificamerican.... [scientificamerican.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Human brains are wired to follow a conversation (hence humans frequently participating in them). When one only hears half a conversation, the absence of a second party is actively noticeable by those listening (or accidentally overhearing) the conversation. Also, phone calls will tend to make people talk louder (than they would to their friend sat next to them), which increases the already-disturbing half-conversation. I can understand why you'd think it would logically be little or no different, but it'
Re: (Score:2)
There are no good guys in this story.
Except the guy blocking the douchebag callers. Oh, and if he carried a baseball bat to break the kneecaps of anyone putting their feet up on the seats, I'd nominate him for a fucking sainthood.
As a regular rail communter, I'm only like 0.5% kidding here.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and if he carried a baseball bat to break the kneecaps of anyone putting their feet up on the seats
What should he do about manspreading [wikipedia.org]?
Re:No good guys. (Score:4, Informative)
The flaw with that argument is there is no way to predict the urgency of the other communications trying to use the frequencies being jammed during the time of the jamming. Pacemakers automatically call 9-1-1 in the event of heart failure; a crime victim could be calling the police. Those people have a licensed device and they have the right to use the airwaves according to the terms of the license.
This is not new, this is not some recent "loss of proportionality". The FCC's stance was published at the advent of radio telecommunications, long before cell phones existed, and has been very, very consistent for at least 80 years: the airwaves are a shared resource, and cooperation is vital to their ongoing utility; you will not deliberately deny others their licensed use of their frequencies, or Uncle Charlie will come down with his Very Big Hammer. And the hammer has always been big: 40 years ago the max fines were in the $10,000 range. Not even the Secret Service has official permission to jam frequencies around the president (although I suspect they have the equipment at the ready.)
Re: (Score:2)
My wife's pacemaker certainly doesn't call 9-1-1 in the event of heart failure. The only "phone home" functionality is via a base station next to her bed where it sends log data to the doctor nightly.
I can't imagine them building cell functionality in a pacemaker - they want them to be as small as possible, since they're devices implanted in the body.
Re:No good guys. (Score:4, Informative)
Pacemakers automatically call 9-1-1 in the event of heart failure
No, they don't. Stop making shit up.
Re: (Score:3)
See http://www.news-medical.net/ne... [news-medical.net] for the news blurb of a pacemaker under research in India a while ago, and http://www.inderscience.com/of... [inderscience.com] for the abstract of the paper.
For more current news, see the Telepatch: https://www.medicompinc.com/in... [medicompinc.com]
Re: (Score:3)
The one quibble I have with this case is the charge they levied against him: "interfering with a public utility". Cellular service isn't much of a utility if you ask me, because they don't treat it like one. For one thing, there's multiple providers (utilities are usually monopolies), and for another, there's almost no regulation, or else we'd have inexpensive cell service like they have over in Europe where supposedly the cost of living is so much higher.
Personally, I think they should let the guy off an
Re: (Score:2)
Proportionality is an important concept, and we've lost track of it.
And a long long time ago, when all was right in the world we "lost track of it". Jamming of communications has been illegal just about since radio communications existed. And the F.C.C. takes it very very seriously.
As for the proportionality of it, his penalty is just what you get when you get caught jamming with no public harm. Add people harmed, and you end up with a lot more trouble for your jamming.
Proportionality? This doesn't just inconvenience some mass transit riders, it can cut service to ever
Re: (Score:2)
...and people having loud animated conversations on their cell phones in crowded public spaces are rude.
Serious question here: What exactly makes that rude? Are people equally rude if the person they are having the conversation with happens to be present, rather than on the other end of a phone?
I actually don't like phones (although I love having a portable internet connection). However, conversations, up to a certain (very high) volume, seem to be considered perfectly acceptable on public transit, even though I often find them even more distracting. If those are OK, why is it bad when you physically remov
Re: (Score:2)
He is guilty of intentionally causing interference on multiple licensed frequencies. If people were also breaking laws disturbing the beach etc sure get them but I doubt it noise laws are pretty lenient.
Really if they guy can not stand other people he should get out the the cesspools that are cities.
Re: (Score:2)
No, he did this a bunch of times before. Now he gets fines and jail time for repeated dickery. This is how we deal with rich people who go "oh a fine lol ok yeah sure go away."
Re:No good guys. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
First, the government is not "just another actor", and your tit-for-tat ideas are this nonsense, as are the claims of hypocrisy. They're allowed.
Second, plenty of us don't really care if we're being recorded but being blocked actually stops us from having communications we want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I highly doubt it. The power of these jammers is low to start with not to mention he was inside a metal box. Maybe someone on a platform that they passed would have had a momentary signal drop but that's about it.
You seem to know a lot about these jammers. By the way, the windows in that metal box do just fine for letting those UHF signals out for the cell phones, they'll do the same for the jammer signal, which is also making it ot the cell towers, making you remarkably easy to trace.
Beer? (Score:2)
Didn't realize drinking beer in US subways is according to the rules. Wouldn't want a self-styled vigilante grab your beer and pour it all over you or something, now would we?
Re:Beer? (Score:5, Informative)
"Section 1050.7 ...
Disorderly conduct.
No person on or in any facility or conveyance shall:
(g) drink any alcoholic beverage or possess any opened or unsealed container of alcoholic beverage, except on premises duly licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages, such as bars and restaurants;"
Re: (Score:2)
You can however buy and consume alcoholic beverages on the LIRR and Metro North.
Re: (Score:2)
I am assuming the MTA is also an acronym for the chicago or some other subway system. It's also the acronym for the NYC though CT commuter rail that definitely allows drinking, has trains with bar cars and licenced vendors selling booze on the platforms. To the point where I swear the stock brokers buy houses within easy walking distance so they can get lit on the way home.
Re: (Score:2)
It's illegal to drink in the NYC subway system (although the police will usually give you a break if you are quiet and drinking from a paper bag).
It is legal to drink on the LIRR and Metro-North.
RF leakage (Score:2, Interesting)
Well he is probably blocking calls not just in the subway but allround, at least in the NYC there are not that many basestations in the subways. There is data about this on RF spotting site: http://subspotting.nyc/ [subspotting.nyc]
In Japan (Score:5, Interesting)
People just don't talk on their phones in the trains excepting the actual emergency call. It's considered rude and people respect that. Too bad people in the USA can't think of others before their own selfish needs. This would be a non-issue if people were actually polite. Hell, people who kill themselves in Japan actually have the courtesy to take their shoes off before jumping in front of a train so others will know it's intentional and not an accident. Thinking of others until the end.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hell, people who kill themselves in Japan actually have the courtesy to take their shoes off before jumping in front of a train so others will know it's intentional and not an accident. Thinking of others until the end.
People in the US are more likely to have the courtesy of not suiciding at all.
Re: (Score:2)
"Being miserable and treating other people like dirt is every New Yorker's God given right"
- Mayor Lenny
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Population density of Japan: 336 people per sq km. Population density of the USA: 33 people per sq km.
Quite literally, in Japan you can't easily get away from other people and must put up with them, and thus they must put up with you.
Misleading. That takes into account total country area of which USA has a shit ton more and a lot of it is empty. Look at the cities. Tokyo has a pop density of 6,200/km2 and New York has 10,756.0/km2. Chicago has 4,447.4/km2. All numbers from wiki.
Re: (Score:3)
Misleading.
It's complicated.
That takes into account total country area of which USA has a shit ton more and a lot of it is empty.
Large swaths of Japan are mountains that have not been developed, and most of Japan (by land area) has a population density under 100/km2. Hokkaido is to Japan as Alaska is to the USA. Japan isn't one massive Tokyo.
Look at the cities. Tokyo has a pop density of 6,200/km2 and New York has 10,756.0/km2. Chicago has 4,447.4/km2. All numbers from wiki.
Tokyo is a metropolitan prefecture and consists of 23 smaller municipalities or special wards, as New York City is a collection of 5 boroughs, though London is more analogous. Anyway, much like NYC contains both Manhattan and Staten Island, Tokyo also has Toshima and Chiyoda (tho
Re: (Score:2)
Those population density numbers are basically BS and not useful for comparison. Much of the US is uninhabited space, especially if you count Alaska. How much does that number change if you leave out Alaska? How much does it change if you restrict it to states east of the Mississippi? This happened in Chicago, one of the largest cities in the US; a fair comparison would show the top 5 cities in the US and their density and the top 5 in Japan. Japan's still probably denser, but not 10 times as much.
Re:In Japan (Score:4, Insightful)
dipshit (Score:5, Funny)
....for taking it out to flip a stupid switch.
Smart would have been to be on a call himself, and meanwhile in his pocket flip the switch, then act all annoyed and pissed like everyone else.
BTW where could I buy one?
Re: (Score:2)
you have a low uid, you should know better [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
BTW where could I buy one?
In just about any electronics bazaar in SE Asia.
I got an 1800/2100 MHz jammer in a store near MBK in Bangkok. Illegal to even posses in Oz, but I wasn't an idiot with it so I never had to worry.
The thing about jammers is that they actually take a minute or two to start working.
He either wants attention or does this often. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've also caught employees taking calls from recruiters on their morning commute, to avoid using the phone in their offices where they may be overheard by colleagues. I've only had to take someone like that aside for a personal chat once, when I was involved in consulting work with their employer and they were flat-out lying to the recruiter. But there's a real risk of being overheard when you do this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know how long these devices need to be on to be effective as disrupting cell phones, but the descriptions of their use implies that you flip the switch and it pretty much instantly disrupts calls.
I would think the "safer" method of using a jammer would not be to turn the thing on and leave it on (thus leaving you exposed to detection), but to have some kind of pulse mode where it comes on for the minimum amount of time necessary to disrupt calls. Of course, people will think it's just a normal drop
Headphones (Score:5, Interesting)
A pair of Quiet Comfort noise cancelling headphones would have been a better idea, especially since he had been caught with a jammer before.
Must not have been paying attention in kindergarten when they discussed making good choices.
How can anyone talk on the El? (Score:5, Informative)
The El in Chicago is LOUD. The Red Line and Blue Line especially, at least the parts underground. Maybe the Red gets quieter up North—I know the stop where he got on.
Outside the train, an over-passing El will stop conversation for a good 20 seconds or more. The Loop is quite loud, but the loudest stop is the Brown Line at Diversey. It's overhead, most of the support is painted steel, and there are brick buildings directly adjacent to the track on all four sides. It's a deafening echo-chamber.
The cell phone situation in London is much better, at least on the tube. Compared to Chicago's, that thing is VERY LOUD. The Regional trains, well, it's a mixed bag. But they do have a "Quiet Car" on many of the lines (no cell phones allowed).
Try again. (Score:4, Informative)
Highly unlikely.
More likely, confiscated and given away during the monthly employee empound raffle.
Am I the only one... (Score:3, Insightful)
life in the city (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless you've ever lived in a big city and commuted regularly by train, you wouldn't be aware of how silent riders are in rush hour, especially morning rush hour when the trains and stations are most crowded. A single person making small talk on their phone annoys everyone.
The mistake this guy made was running his jammer continuously. If you have jammer and want to target one person on a cell phone, you only have to momentarily switch on the jammer when the other end of the call is talking. When the rider is chatting, you leave the jammer off, when the other end is talking, you turn it on. Within 30 seconds, the caller will give up. Using this approach, your jammer is only on for a few seconds at a time.
Step #1 is to always have a plan,,,, (Score:3)
I am making a mental note of this incident tho: if I am somewhere similar and my phone (and everyone else's) appears to be dead, then Imma going to pull out my phone, pretend to call somebody and just keep on talking like normal.
market opportunity? (Score:3, Interesting)
Headline should read: (Score:3)
Chicagoan Arrested For Using Cell-phone Jammer To Make Subway Commute Tolerable For Himself at the Expense of Everyone Around Him
Re: (Score:2)
He's a hero. Please jam cell phones everywhere.
How about he follows you around with it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They hit the passenger assistance alarm?
Re: (Score:2)
And also start prosecuting texting while driving, because this is actually causing 9 deaths a day on average in 2014 [huffingtonpost.com], some places say its as much as 16 a day and causes 1.6 million accidents a year [donttextdrive.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Get over yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, you do have every right to talk on your cellphone. Being rude and being against the law are two different things. The reaction to the former shouldn't be to do the latter. If you don't like hearing people talking on their cellphones, invest in some noise cancelling headphones. What's next? You don't like the smell of people when shoved together into the tiny metal box of a subway car so you bring a super-soaker filled with perfume and spray them all down?
Re: (Score:2)
I think one of the reasons Harris Stingrays and other IMSI catchers have been sold under very restrictive non-disclosure agreements is that they have always been in clear violation of the FCC's rules, and every user is guilty of frequency jamming, regardless of the warrants. If even one case goes before the FCC, the whole IMSI catching business could be shut down if the judge is sufficiently pissed off.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Don't you know that police don't have to obey the law? I thought everyone knew this. Why else does one become a cop?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I mean, if it was me I would leave it concealed and only use it if people were being really bad. But only long enough to disrupt the call. Then repeat if they dial back.
People are used to dropped calls on their mobile phones so just repeat like 3 times and they will give up and try their call when they are off the subway.
Re: (Score:3)
I work alongside someone who has permission to keep his mobile phone on his desk in an office which is otherwise meant to be a no-mobile zone. He's waiting for a transplant and if an organ match comes available he needs to know right away so he can get to the hospital and start getting prepped for the operation immediately. Someone using a jammer for their convenience could result in him dying before he can get treated.
Re: (Score:2)
Call me Mabey?