Washington (DC) - A restaurant owner in Maryland bought a device that causes cell phone conversations to be cut off, only to find himself face-to-face with the Federal Communications Commission.

The New York Times reports that FCC investigators went to the restaurant after receiving reports that the owner bought a "jammer" - a device that kills all cell phone calls within a given radius.

It accomplishes this by sending out ultra powerful radio waves that momentarily overpower cell phone signals in the surrounding area.  But sending out these kinds of waves is illegal.

The owner of the restaurant reportedly bought a $1,000 jammer, an expensive model compared to some of the more consumer-oriented devices available.  Investigators from the FCC scoped out the restaurant for about a week but were unable to find any traces of a jammer.  

The owner told the Times in anonymity that he turned off the device before the investigators' arrival.  A first-time offense for using a jammer could lead to a fine of up to $11,000.

Most of the jammers circulating the US have come from India, which has no such laws regarding radio wave output.  Imported sales to North America have been increasing rapidly over the past year.

Jammers are available in various sizes and power.  A typical consumer model is about the size of a cigarette box and has one button.  Push it and anyone within 30 feet on their cell phone will notice their call has been dropped.

The device combats people who talk too loudly on their phones, an everyday annoyance for some commuters, or in the case of the restaurant owner, insubordination of employees.

The law is in place so that people do not interfere with emergency communications.  An unfortunately located jammer could cut off a link between an ambulance driver and a hospital.

Jeffrey Nelson, a Verizon spokesperson, told the New York Times that he was somewhat baffled by the innovation, saying, "It’s counterintuitive that when the demand is clear and strong from wireless consumers for improved cell coverage, that these kinds of devices are finding a market."

Good for him or not

Nov 06, 2007 14:11     

Private property rights have all but been eliminated. Sometimes it's hard to enjoy a meal at a restaurant, because of some loud mouth on a Cell phone. As long as he posts that wireless devices are not allowed then there should not be a problem. If people don't like it, they can eat elsewhere. If he looses to much business he'll stop the policy. Free-markets work. However "or in the case of the restaurant owner, insubordination of employees" shows that he need to learn to manage and fire some employees. It would be A LOT cheaper than spending $1000 on a jammer. (unless they were all "protected classes")

N report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

.....

Nov 06, 2007 14:47     

I think he feels himself so lucky, that he has to tell the whole world how he got away with it.... smart!!
eeto report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

damn i want one

Nov 06, 2007 15:10     

how about those idiots who are in a college class and are trying to talk on their phone at the expense of everyone around them. Click... No more phone call
rico report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

how?

Nov 06, 2007 15:40     

How does he know to turn off his jammer? someone must have got paid off!
a/m report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Loud and self-absorbed users

Nov 06, 2007 15:46     

"Jeffrey Nelson, a Verizon spokesperson, told the New York Times that he was somewhat baffled by the innovation..." Hmm, maybe because many people that use cell phones are annoying!!! Loud and self-absorbed
anony report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Do they have one for cars? ;)

Nov 06, 2007 15:48     

think how many accidents and idiots that would hault. HANG UP AND DRIVE.
DailyGrind report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Hooray, who wants to pay for a nice meal and hear o...

Nov 06, 2007 16:44     

Hooray, who wants to pay for a nice meal and hear other people's phones ringing as though they are the only ones present!
renee report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Are you serious?

Nov 06, 2007 16:49     

I pay for the service of my cellphone. If my service is being interrupted intentionally, I should be reimbursed for the good that I am paying for and not receiving because of an illegal device.
karson report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

LOL

Nov 06, 2007 17:38     

To be legal he would have at least to post a sign warning about the presence of a jammer otherwise clients who might be expecting a call lets say my girlfriend wants to call me saying she wont make it to dinner with me... so I cant get the call?? Obviously I would not go into such restaurant, the idea of cellphones is that we are available at all times for business or pleasure. Of course in a restaurant people should have enough education to know it is not polite to be talking on the phone for a long time so when I'm at restaurant and the call is not important, I just ask them to call later or I call back. Having to buy a jammer is just a lame excuse for his poor management skills. :) If I owned a restaurant I'd tell warn my clients who speak too loud without any problem. Eliminate the bad elements and keep the good environment. If you go to a luxury restaurant I doubt they will allow you to talk loud and disburd the other clients. ;) Or you can have knockout waitresses so clients will be too speechless to even talk at all!! heheheheh nice solution uh :P

Bruno report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

re: Are you serious?

Nov 06, 2007 17:56     

"I pay for the service of my cellphone. If my service is being interrupted intentionally, I should be reimbursed for the good that I am paying for and not receiving because of an illegal device." man if you dont have the common sense to turn off your cell phone when its disturbing other people, then maybe you DESERVE to have your phone intentionally blocked...asshole
jumpman report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Send me one

Nov 06, 2007 17:59     

Sounds like a great way to combat the growing number of obnoxious people who decide that they need to have their phones with them at all times and be engaging in loud conversations in public areas. $1000 is a small price to pay to be able to restore a bit of sanity to our public spaces. Almost nobody needs to have their phone with them 24/7 anyways (valid exceptions being doctors/emergency service people/etc.), so I'm glad that somebody has finally come up with a way to put the rest of the people who decide to take their phone with them everywhere in their place. Sign me up for one!

some1ne report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

jammers are illegal, but shielding isn't

Nov 06, 2007 18:49     

I'm not to sure about using a jammer, because they are illegal. Sure it seems nice to be able to click and poof that anoying caller is gone, but while expensive shielding is a better idea. This would be ideal in movie theaters; of course you can't turn off shilding. Where I work there are shielded buildings. Sometimes when the door is open the cell phones can get a signal, but once the door closes, nothing works, not pagers, radios, or cell phones.

stan report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +1

Come on

Nov 06, 2007 19:01     

I would use one if I could have a few minutes of peace without hearing someone trying to talk in an elecator or say " Oh My GOD! NO WAY!!" I'd let it happen. I pay my bill but with the amount of people always talking loudly into their phones its finally driven quite a few people insane
Bill report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Grow up

Nov 06, 2007 19:19     

karson grow up......if I am eating in a restaurant and your cell phone rings and interrupts my life then I want you to pay me for a peaceful moment I will never get back. You can get your dang minutes back but I can never get that moment in my life back so get bent!
unclesharkey report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

why not remodel instead?

Nov 06, 2007 20:40     

When it's time to gut the rooms, simply integrate a wire mesh above the ceiling, beneath the floors, and behind the wallpaper. Certainly not a perfect Faraday box with the doorway and windows to contend with, but done well, it could be more than enough to disable cellphones and pagers. So far as I know there's no law about making a building unreachable by wireless transmissions for peace and privacy's sake, just active interference.

Tom report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

It doesn't matter if you post a sign...

Nov 06, 2007 22:29     

...saying that cell phones aren't allowed. The statute is that you can own land, you can't own the air. It's federal property, and "tampering" with it is a federal offense. So... it most certainly ISN'T up to the restaurant owner to decide what to do with the airwaves. Reading the comments, I can see what the point of frustration is, and I certainly agree that I prefer to dine or watch movies in silence. I don't think that everyone is thinking about all of the problems with this, though (aside from the legal aspect). Devices like these interfere with pagers as well - you know, the kind doctors wear. Law enforcement officers frequently use cell phones to augment their radios. Also, the shape of the coverage area and the range of these devices can't be set. What if the purchaser of one of these devices knock out calls for the store owner next door? What if someone carries one of these devices into a public area? Hell, what if during the next school shooting a kid brings one of these things into a school? Aside from those concerns, who is to say these devices are well made - they certianly aren't regulated or certified? Do we know that one of these things won't interfere with an internal (or external) pacemaker? They can be affected by EMI in the 1.2~2.7Ghz range.

Chris O. report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

You people are ridiculous.

Nov 07, 2007 00:14     

Seriously. The fact that people talking on their cell phone, no matter how loud, bothers you is ridiculous. If you want peace and quiet, go home. When you're in the public, you have to deal with "self-absorbed" people (undoubtedly, all of you are hypocrites; you're all self-absorbed and that's not a bad thing). Get over it. I've never once been to a restaurant and heard someone talking really loud on a cell phone. The only loud instances I've had at a restaurant is when it's a group of about 4 people talking and laughing really loud. Know what I do? Tune them out and socialize with whomever my company is. The concept of a jammer is just retarded no matter how you look at it. He should've just enforced a rule prohibiting them while working.

Olson report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Jammers from Israel

Nov 07, 2007 01:35     

Most of the jammers come from Israel or are based on Israeli technology, assembled in India. The reason that jammers are illegal is because big brother is no longer able to track you....it is not for the sake of the providers.
Sledgehammer report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

A few bad apples...

Nov 07, 2007 01:48     

...makes the legitimate use of cell phones near impossible. Frankly, I'm not so much disturbed by loud people on a cellphone so much as some smokers pretending to "comply" with outdoor regulations by smoking upwind of restaurants or business entrances, taking that last hit, holding it while flicking the butt into the bushes, and exhaling all the way while walking back inside (and then getting that extra satisfaction from the disgusted look on people's faces when the smell of the carcinogen-laced clothing starts airing out).

ElBrujo report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Sheesh

Nov 07, 2007 02:22     

Yeah, Karson, turn OFF your cell phone when you're in a restaurant, if I owned one, which I do not from being so poor, I would turn it off when entering a nice place, if you don't have the common decency to turn it off, you deserve to be jammed! As for this man, he obviously needs to stop being passive aggressive, put up a sign "If you speak on your cellphone you will be banned from the establishment" above that? "TURN OFF CELLPHONES", Bam, problem solved.

Revrant report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

I want one with less power for the bus trips

Nov 07, 2007 06:21     

I trip by bus everyday and people is incredibly annoying and I wanted to built such a device a year ago, obviously a low power one that can jam everyone in the bus but doesn't give anyone cancer with a 1 Watt 1GHz signal outputing from my backpak
Creedence report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Pacemakers?

Nov 07, 2007 06:22     

Imagine a person with a pacemaker goes to eat in that restaurant. [That sounds like the beginning of bad joke... "A man with a pacemaker walks into a restaurant..." -Rick]
Lennart report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

$heilding?

Nov 07, 2007 06:57     

It's expensive to put in during construction. But its VERY expensive to do afterwards, if you want it to work and not look awful. Even a $1000 jammer is cheaper. How does a restaurant owner keep the jamming signal from 'leaking' out past his restaurant? It could mess with communications of people who aren't even in the restaurant. Just adjusting the power of a central jammer isn't the solution. Some police radar guns have an indicator to show interference (not just jamming); if the radar gun is working fine, then suddenly for a particular speeder it acts strange and shows heavy interference, it is a hint to a sharp officer to try a quick check for a (probably hidden) jammer. A cell phone's radio set is pretty sophisticated, how tough would it be to include some code on a cellphone so it can indicate possible jamming?

Jon report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Illegal to protect customers?

Nov 07, 2007 09:22     

Is it illegal to protect costmers? One pays for the ambience and fine food not to have the atmosphere ruined because some one is talking loudly on the cell phone. One post said it was legal if it is posted that there is a jammer in use(?). In movie theatres, they tell everyone to either shut off their electric device (cell phone, pager, etc) or put it on vibrate. This might be a cheaper alternative assuming evey one co-operates (there will always be someone who thinks they have a right not to co-operate).

TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

It's just too big a risk

Nov 07, 2007 10:23     

Unfortunately you have to weigh the benefits vs the downfalls of using this. If it blocks a 911 call, or some ambulance of police officer can't communicate on their radios, then it becomes dangerous. What if someone robbed the restaurant and nobody could call for help. I can't stand obnoxious cell phone users, but we can't risk putting lives in danger just for a little ambient peace. Quite simply, people need to make rules and enforce them. I work in a library with a no cell phone rule, but the manager doesn't have the guts to enforce the rule, or to back up employees who try to enforce it. The manager of this restaurant needs to do that. If he doesn't want cell phones, he needs to actively stop them from being used in his establishment.

Task report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Our safety often depends on cell phones

Nov 07, 2007 15:46     

e.g., you are at this restaurant and your teen age daughter's car breaks down but she can't reach you by cell phone as you expect.
afriend report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

@ JUMPMAN

Nov 08, 2007 14:35     

Its pretty big of you to attack someone else and called them “asshole” when they don’t agree with your point of view. Seems the only asshole here is use for using such flaming language. I agree with karson, if I am paying for service, then I wouldn’t want it interrupted by some illegal device with out my knowledge or CONSENT. Last time I check I still lived in the land of the free. And by the way if I am not having a conversation on the phone, then I am having a conversation with the person next to me or the person across from me. Either way I’m still talking. So what difference does it make to you who it is that I am talking to.

JACKASS report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Well...

Nov 08, 2007 23:55     

A simple sign that says, "Turn your friggin cell phone off or put it in silent mode...thank you" would have been enough.
Darkk report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

You guys are idiots

Nov 09, 2007 01:56     

Do people talking on cell phones bother you that much? Usually, the other customers nearby are louder in their conversations than anyone on a phone...and usually, I thought people were polite enough to excuse themselves from the table to answer any calls outside.
Ed report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Subrogator

Nov 09, 2007 14:49     

What really gets me is people talking on phones in an above conversational voice distracting you from whatever your doing.Like somone (generally yammering about crap) is talking in a louder voice than the other people there and is regularly raising their voice "oh my god it was like" etc etc.I will answer my phone most places but ill lower my voice when I do just to A)Not distract people from what they are doing. and B)Its none of their business what I'm saying...Pity the other goons wouldn't practice this

Ross report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Do people not use normal phones for emergencies?

Nov 09, 2007 17:17     

I understand that near by communications would be disrupted (eg outside the place like said ambulance theoretically could be disrupted). But really if someone inside the building was to have a heart attack, a chef or the guys that take your order could easily use a landline and probably despite the time it takes to walk TO the land line phone, still connect quicker. As a safety, i doubt there would be any problem if it was incredibly localised to only inside the building from a purely safety oriented view.

skythra report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

This needs to stop

Nov 11, 2007 04:46     

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to have access to calls. I am a doctor and lots of times I will go to dinner and get a call about a patient. Would all of you that are saying good for him for stopping people talking on there cell phones if I was out to dinner and one of your family members need help and the hospital or E.R. And can’t get a hold of me because some company decides to block cell signals because a few people talk on theirs? Something like this if allowed could cause dead zones were cell signals can’t get through. Put it on the other shoe what if your parent or child is in an accident and the hospital calls you to let you know that you should come down and see them because their not expected to live much longer. Companies can ask that person to leave the place of business. I have not used a pager in years and if this blocks cell signal would it not also block pager signals? If anything I would like there to be a way were a company can send out a signal that would cause a cell to go in to vibrate or silent mode and then when you leave goes back to normal mode. Places like a restaurant are private businesses but are public places. Every one that went in to this restaurant could possibly sue the owner for this for restricting there rights. What might have made this not so much of a big deal maybe is if they put up a sign stating that they employ cell jamming devices. There are many other means that companies can employ that could make people more considerate about talking and answering their cell phones. Is it rude to have someone next to you talking on their cell phone? Yes, but what if that same person was talking to some one else at the table? There are and always will be rude and insensitive people in this world.

TFrost report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Cell phones are ridiculous.

Nov 11, 2007 22:10     

I doubt most people here really *need* a cell phone. I'll bet most of you can recall ever having a truly important/urgent cell phone call that could not have waited until you got to a land line. Sure, it may be convenient, but we lived just fine for a half century with land lines. 99% of cell phone usage (conservatively) is strictly convenience, if not an outright waste of time. Get a life. Yours just isn't that important.

TheHorta report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Let's get these in Movie Theatres

Nov 18, 2007 11:10     

lulz [Agreed. No need for the movie theatre to do it either. Where do I buy the transmitter? I'll shut them down myself. :) -Rick]
steve report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Re: Are you serious?

Nov 18, 2007 15:22     

Restaurants are a private establishment, much like your own home. If an owner decides to disallow cell calls from HIS/HER restaurantnt, then that is his choice. If you don't like it, don't eat there. The free-market will take care of this, one way or another; it could go several ways, but diners might actually be inspired to dine in restaurants that done involved lots of noise pollution. Turn the fucking thing off for God's sake, you're there to eat, not yammer like an idiot into your phone the entire time you're there. How did the human race survive so long without being in constant contact with each other....?

freedom report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Re: This needs to stop

Nov 18, 2007 15:26     

Doctor? What kind of doctor? Clearly didn't major in English. If you are a doctor, I'll eat my hat.
freedom report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Grow up

Nov 20, 2007 16:02     

Interfering with anyone's ability to communicate is wrong. Period. If my daughter were trying to call me in an emergency, and some joker cut me off with his black box, I would cut off something of his. An annoying person on a cell phone is just that -- an annoying person! The fact that they're talking on a phone or to the person next to them makes NO DIFFERENCE. You're just annoyed because you can't hear the other party. Get used to it, and grow up. Cell phones are here to stay.

John report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

TFrost

Nov 21, 2007 13:00     

I you are a doctor, I'm the King of America. It takes an education far superior to yours(full of grammatical errors and some of the most idiotic mis-spellings I have ever seen in my life) to even approach the notion of thinking about the possibility of being a doctor. Nice try Di**Licker!!
Guy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0