Cell Phone Jammers invade theaters.. (1 Viewer)

[Michael Ballack]

This thread is turning into the same old argument like many before i.e. "what about the poor doctors?", if I had the money and knew what website to buy these illegal jammers, I would buy them in a heartbeat. It's not just the teenagers or young adults who are the problem, the other day an older woman sitting with her husband got a call in the middle of The Aviator. Either she couldn't figure out how to use it(which sounded like the case) or someone called and hung up. Did she receive the ring and pickup as she was leaving the theater? No, she sat right on her wrinkeled arse. Was she whispering? No, in the loudest voice she went "Hello, anyone there? Who is this?". Finally she shut up, I thought it was over. She either got another call from the same person, or figured out how to use the wonderful modern invention of caller id, because she once again had another interesting conversation that everyone had to hear. I was so shocked, that I couldn't say anything to her. I couldn't believe it. Maybe it was dark and I couldn't notice, but the rest of the people in the theater seemed to be oblivous or were trying to ignore her. Finally, just as I was about to confront the old twat, she hung up. I made up my mind I was going to take the cell phone and smash it into a thousand pieces if it happened again during The Aviator. Of course it didn't. This didn't stop me however from missing parts of the movie while waiting for the phone to ring again. I truly hate all people, young and old. Got to go, bye.

 

[Llappin]

A woman started a nice business conversation on her cell phone during Constantine. I didn’t refrain I turned around and said “are you stupid?” To my utmost surprise that worked, she actually cut the conversation short and for the rest of the movie kept her mouth shut. I’m a rather smallish woman, so I know every time I do this I take a big chance on getting hurt, but what can one do to see a movie without a disturbance.

 

[Seth Paxton]

We also "survived" without penicillin, but isn't nice how we incorporate new technologies into our lives and alter how we live.

Kinda like how people in 1850 survived without, gasp, movies.

With every technological/social/artistic advancement or change humanity has to learn how to incorporate it. That's what is going on with wireless technology, just as it is also going on with copyright issues in the digital age.


So its not as simple as "you lived without it before" because we also lived without heat, lights, and as I understand it, fire. We need to establish the new social order for this technology, just as we did with cars/traffic, regular telephones, etc.

That doesn't mean that your view can't be, "well I think jamming should be allowed". It's just one theory on how to handle the issue. It's the defense of that view that is meaningless. It could be that in the end the agreed upon solution is to forfeit wireless ability for peace and quiet, but to be honest I don't think it will be.

Why? Simply because it is a drastic solution for a problem better solved by social politeness. We don't have laws or techs that force someone to hold the elevator for you or to be pleasant to you at the store, it's individual choice which in turn creates a social reaction to that person. When people get the wrong reaction, they tend to stop doing those things. (yes, some people consider a negative reaction to be a "good" one, but we call those people assholes ).


Wireless usage is just like talkers at the theater. Same attitude. We lived without the technology to make the guy behind you STFU all these years, why do we need it now?

 

[Patrick_S]

Wow this topic has come again!

From one of the pervious threads on this topic it is well documented that I wouldn't have a problem with theaters actively jamming signals if it were legal.

Since the wireless industry has a lot of pull in Washington there probably isn't a chance in hell of this ever becoming legal. Perhaps what theater chains need to do is just build their new complexes with passive jamming. Since that isn't illegal no one could cry foul.In this day and age the idea that this problem will be solved by "social politeness" is rather naive. Far too many people have been raised with the notion that they are "special" or "entitled". These types simply just don't understand the concept of "social politeness".

One thing is for certain, this issue won't go away anytime soon and there is bound to be another thread on this subject in the future.

 

[Jim Dalton]

Damn straight!

 

[Pat Frank]

I want to know how people in 1850 survived without movies too.

I don't think I could do that. :frowning:

 

[Jim_C]

I am a person who detests when people talk during movies but I cannot believe the level of irresponsibility that has been shown in this thread WRT a phone going off.

Any person whos phone goes off for a non-emergency should be tossed out of the theater. People pay a lot of money and desereve an environment that allows them to enjoy the movie.

That said...

It is the responsibility of the person who CANNOT be out of contact, ie doctors, network engineers, people with children who have medical conditions, to put their phone on vibrate. People who have to live under these conditions are typically responsible enough to read the incoming message/number and leave the theater immediately to take the call.

My phone is always on vibrate.

It is not the responsibility of some person to jam the signal just because a phone may go off. If I ever missed a call concerning my son and his medical issues, I wouldn't sue the person jamming the signal, I'd put him in the hospital. Vigilante justice works both ways.


I suspect that most of those saying "JAM AWAY" don't have a clue what it's like to have a child or loved one with medical issues or are doctors who have to respond in life or death situations.

 

[George See]

Call me naive but using a cell phone in a theater is a tad different then the invention of penicillin. A portable phone is a luxery item you can't compare it to food/shelter/medicine. Apparantly our lives didn't have room for courtesy anymore after we incorporated all these new technologies.

 

[Patrick_S]

Here's a question for all the anti-jamming people. What if theaters started to be constructed that passively jammed signals, (no law against that) or lets say jamming became legal so theaters started to actively jam and they clearly posted that cell phones and pagers wouldn't work in their buildings, would you stop going to movies and other live performances all together?

To those who just can't be out of touch for even a couple of hours I'll barrow a line from Katharine Hepburn "you are the reason they invented television." As others have mentioned before at least with today's technology those who can't be out of touch can enjoy a movie via a home theater. The doctor comments used in this thread are ridiculous as everyone who knows anything about the medical profession knows that a very small percentage of medical professionals are ever on call every day of the year. Doctors as a routine have back ups who cover for them when they are off call. Thank God for that practice since I would rather have a doctor who does take the time to recharge his or her batteries from time to time instead of one who carries on has if they are burdened by their career choice.

As far as having a family member who is ill, I can comment from first hand experience on that one. I've been there and realized that choices had to be made and I sure as hell didn’t wallow in self pity that personal sacrifices had to be made because of my choices. After all when it is all said and done what could possibly be more important then being there for a family member when they are in their hour of need? For me at least it certainly isn’t the idea that by being there for them I would miss a movie while it is in the theaters.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Cellphones drive me nuts in a lot of places, but I've never seen it happen in the movie theaters here. Maybe it's just luck, i dunno.

In any case, yes doctors do have backups, there are usually multiple physicians on-call for this reason, but it is *completely* unreasonable to allow frequency jammers to actively obstruct reception, be them vigilante of theater-controlled. Strictness can be enforced with ushers very easily, because blocking cellphones doesn't solve crying babies, talking, coughing, etc. It is the completely wrong way to go about it.

 

[Jim_C]

>>Here's a question for all the anti-jamming people. What if theaters started to be constructed that passively jammed signals, (no law against that) or lets say jamming became legal so theaters started to actively jam and they clearly posted that cell phones and pagers wouldn't work in their buildings, would you stop going to movies and other live performances all together?

 

[Llappin]

Where I live the ushers are sometimes part of the problem rather than the solution. Usually during matinee hours when the theatre is supposed to be empty and quiet they let their friends and family in. I’ve seen numerous times teenagers with cell phones coming and going during a movie. Add to that mix the adults who feel they are so important that their business must be conducted regardless of where they are, then you get no time out to watch a movie in peace.

 

[Patrick Sun]

The use of jamming gear alleviates confrontations by patrons and ushers, and the theater wouldn't have to hire more ushers to patrol the theaters for cell phone use inside the theater, or incur the ire of people who don't understand why they shouldn't be using their cell phones while the movie is playing. When ushers have to handle these situations, the disturbance to the film-viewing experience has already been done. By jamming the cell phone signals, that's one less form of disturbance inside a movie theater, which is good for the vast majority of the patrons inside.

As long as the movie theater is upfront with their use of jamming gear (like putting a sign up at the teller window), the would-be patron has a choice to make, and if they decide to buy a ticket and accept the risk of missing a call, so be it. Otherwise, that would-be patron needs to find alternative entertainment if they value their ability to receive cell phone calls.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Not at all. I barely use my cell phone (heck, my apartment pretty much clobbers reception for it), but just because I wouldn't be terribly inconvenienced by something doesn't mean I have to like the idea. It's a draconian solution to a minor problem that inconveniences responsible people (and potentially drives them away as customers).

Honestly, my personal feelings are that very few people really need to be on-call 24/7, and being unreachable for a couple of hours isn't something to get upset about. I've passed on applying for jobs in the past because I don't want to live my life on an electric leash.

But some people do. Maybe they're doctors, maybe they're network administrators, maybe they've got a sick child. The people this sort of action would hurt or inconvenience are generally responsible people, while the jackass who talks on his mobile phone during a movie - well, I sort of suspect he wouldn't have a problem talking during a movie even without his phone.

We've all got inappropriate-mobile-phone-usage stories. They draw attention to themselves much more than the person who sits in an aisle seat and quietly excuses himself when he's paged or the person who is better able to enjoy their night out knowing that the sitter can contact them if there's an emergency. Those guys are good customers and good folks to see a movie with, and if you drive them away, the theaters will just fill with more rude people, who will simply find another way of being rude.

 

[Shawn_McD]

Jammers are stupid.

Just enforce a rule with an usher at the door that makes sure everyone puts phones on vibrate. Anyone that talks on the phone during the movie gets kicked out.

Bloody easy solution.

Plus, those jammers can interfer with Cop's phone, what if a cop is in a halway calling for help, or if the phones lines go down during a storm.

Think of all the possiblities.

The Solution IS NOT JAMMING!!!

 

[Patrick Sun]

Anyone see the lines at security checkpoints at airports? I doubt theaters will pay for more ushers to check that each and every patron has their phone on silent/vibrate for each showing of a film, especially at a multi-plex.

 

[todbnla]

We just came back from seeing Million Dollar Baby, 3/4 of the way thru, in one of those quiet scenes in the hospital an elderly woman's phone rang 6 times before she figured out how to turn it off. Hooray for vigilante jammers.

 

[Shawn_McD]

If you think a cell phone ring bothers you, I suggest you move to an island away from society. If its not cell phones in the theater's, its something else.

 

[Brett_B]

Shawn,

I recommend searching for the thread titled "Pepper sprayed at the movies", and then try to tell me that your suggestion is the "Bloody Easy Solution."

 

[Eric Peterson]

That's an ignorant statement. People pay good money to go see a movie without interruptions. If a cellphone doesn't bother you, then I would say you are the odd man out. I'm not promoting blockers, but to pretend that there isn't a problem or that the problem is the person who is annoyed is absolutely idiotic.