A BART mole?
Obviously there are some people who don’t like it when this blogger questions institutions like The Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART). Take someone who goes by the name “Tiny Tiger.” (Who the heck would make a Yahoo! email address calling themselves “Tiny Tiger?”)
At any rate, “Tiny Tiger” was angry that I even questioned BART’s cell phone blocking action of last night, and was especially upset that I said it was illegal. The email sent reads almost like a BART statement issued by a pissed-off public relations rep.
What was sent seems to say that what BART did was just fine because they didn’t use a cell phone jamming device; that BART deactivated the cell phone antenna system is legal in “Tiny Tiger”‘s view. Wild.
This is what “Tiny Tiger” sent:
Once again you make uninformed comments regarding that which you don’t understand.
In your blog posted titled, “BART Cell Phone – Protest San Francisco Block National News, “ you claim that BART acted illegally.Turning off its cell phone coverage service was not illegal, it was nothing of the sort. While it may have been stupid, irresponsible and a poor PR move, it was by no means illegal.
To support your claim that it was illegal you proved a link to an article on how cell phone jammers work. BART did not incorporate the use of a jammer. BART did not interfere with federally regulated public air waves. What BART did do was turn off what is basically an “antenna.” An “antenna” that it allows cell phone service providers to operate. Federally regulated public radio waves were not disturbed, nor accessed to them denied by some illegal electronic means. All BART did was is shut down a private service that it allows to operate within its system. It is a service that BART is under no obligation to provide, legally or otherwise. While perhaps BART may have breached terms of any contract that exists between it and the cell phone service providers, such action is a civil matter not a criminal one as you so want to believe.
Once again you jump to conclusion before investigating the facts. Instead of turning off comments because of the mean things people post about the erroneous statements you make in your blog, why don’t you try turning on your brain first?
I expect that you being you, no retraction of your erroneous claims will be forthcoming once the FCC proclaims that BART did nothing illegal.
Factsnotopinion
So, in reverse, I’m supposed to approve of BART’s actions and say they’re legal when nothing points to the idea that they were?
The fact is, what BART did does violate Federal law as it’s currently written. I told Tiny Tiger that their view was obviously clouded by their issues with me (note the insults), but should take time to read FCC laws and communications – they are clear as a bell.
Stay tuned.
Bill Carroll