SF transit blocks cellphones to disrupt protest

Why don't they turn off the service at prisons as well as the wifi? Oh wait, that would fix the cell phone problem in Caifornia's State Penitentiary...

I wonder if they can do the same for movie theaters.

There are a lot of people here who seem to have any idea how anything was ever done pre-cellphone.

Wow so you're telling me that these people actually had a quiet ride for once?

Just a quick question that requires a simple "yes" or "no": Could the protestors still protest despite not having cell phone service?

I wonder if they can block cell phone calls at movie theaters too!

It is obvious that the cell towers used in the subway system are provided by the BART for customer convenience giving the BART the right to control these towers if they feel that using them in the manner in which the protestors had planned posed a threat to other passengers safety. Maybe BART should start charging people to use them like airports charge to use their Wifi. These spoiled ignorant people whining about this need to learn what it was like before cell phones and internet.

in NYC there has never been good cell coverage if there is any service at all in the subway. I can really care less. I can be without my phone for the 20-30 minutes of commute i have on the subway.

"BART" is an acronym for Bay Area Rapid Transit. If they built one in Fresno, what would they call it?

If the cell towers or cell boosters are the property of BART or if BART is supplying the electricity to these towers as a convenience to it's customers but not receiving direct compensation for this service, then BART is not required to supply this service if they don't want to.

Im not from SF but the article implies that BART owns the communication towers it shut down. If they are a private for profit company then the issue has nothing to do with civil rights. The issue would then be whether cell phone service is advertised as included with the standard service received in exchange for the fares paid. In that case customers may be due a refund or partial refund. Even if they are Govt subsidized this is still NOT a civil rights issue. I think WAY too many people are lumping access to modern technological conveniences with civil rights. I am sorry to inform you that "I couldn't use my cellphone" is absolutely NOT a civil rights violation.

There is a simple solution to all of this....if you dont like what BART did with their cell phone towers, then dont ride BART. Cell phones are not a right they are a privelege and to actually have service underground is a bonus that BART provides to its passengers. If BART feels that they need to turn off THEIR towers then they have every right to do so. Same as ATT, Verizon, Sprint has the right to turn off your phone when you dont pay your bill. You dont pay for these towers inside the BART tunnels so you have no say on whether they work or not.

These cellphones are out of control. I have literally been in the restroom and seen people talking on the cellphone in the stalls OR urinal...HOW LONELY do you have to be to not even be able to take a #$%$ without chatting..

I’m not from San Francisco so I don’t know anything about the “free speech area” that some are commenting about, that said, it doesn’t matter. The question was whether or not there was a REAL threat to public safety or whether the authorities just didn’t want to have to deal with a protest. Freedom of speech isn’t something that can be thrown aside because someone doesn’t like what is said, (as we can obviously see here), it is a check on those in power.
If we are not to have the freedom to express all ideas then who gets to decide whose opinion IS valid? I know that I have NO trust in you people to decide that for me. If we start shutting down certain modes of communication for ALL people because of a FEW people, without an honest threat to A LOT of people, when do we stop?
It’s YOUR job to keep all our rights safe from those with the power to take them away. It’s much easier to deal with a large number of people when you can shoot/imprison/shut down those that “create a problem” for you and your group of followers.
And don’t forget that that same Bill of Rights that gives you the RIGHT of freedom of speech also gives THEM the right of assembly and peaceful protest. I read nowhere in the article that the protesters intended to “commit a crime” or cause an imminent threat to the public safety.
And what the hell do the liberals have to do with it anyway? It was the founding fathers of this country that created these rights for us to avoid the totalitarianism in our country that they faced. It’s not a “liberal” or “left-wing enemies” thing it’s the basis for our whole country. If that’s being a liberal then what the heck do the conservatives stand for, martial law?

Since when cell service is a right ?

Was this a planned protest or was it a riot. Protest bring attention to problems that need to be changed. Riots happen when things get violent. If your rights to Protest are taken away, it makes everyone just a bunch of sheep.

And ... this was really very irresponsible. Just shutting down the power to the cell sites? That means any emergency calls would be shut off as well. At the very least, they could have gone with a court mandate to the providers to shut off regular customers, but keep the network active for emergency services. I hope that there will be a federal investigation into this, some people really went way beyond their powers. My opinion.

Seriously, the original poster doesn't even mention what they were protesting about?

Since BART has to provide public transit first and foremost, I believe the temporary shut down of cell service on the trains based on the information that a large demonstration that had a high probability of becoming violent just like London was an immeadiate threat, they were well with in their rights to do so. To those who wonder what if an emergency had happened, all of the trains have radios with which they are in contact with the load dispatchers to summon EMTs where and when needed. Lets us look at it from the perspective of if they did not provide for safety of the pasengers, what would all of the critics say then?

I would consider them shutting down the towers on their property to be a nonlethal way of diffusing this situation, in which many more people could have died or been injured, including passengers who were just trying to commute and not be held hostage to this protest. Your right to swing your arm ends at my face. You do not have the right to organize a riot and call it free speech.