Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-15-2011, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Northern California
3,722 posts, read 14,722,363 times
Reputation: 1962

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isebiel View Post
Other than banning electronic devices -- which would make BART completely useless
Why would BART be useless without electronic devices? Most people use BART to get from one place to another. I'm sure there are many BART passengers who can go the whole 30 minute ride or whatever without using their electronic devices. What a hardship!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-15-2011, 02:53 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
506 posts, read 1,154,494 times
Reputation: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by humboldtrat View Post
Why would BART be useless without electronic devices? Most people use BART to get from one place to another. I'm sure there are many BART passengers who can go the whole 30 minute ride or whatever without using their electronic devices. What a hardship!
Eh. That wasn't what I said, and I really don't want to argue about it. Are you deliberately misreading my point?

That point was: BART has no way to stop people from taking pictures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 03:02 PM
 
Location: A bit further north than before
1,651 posts, read 3,697,189 times
Reputation: 1465
Quote:
Originally Posted by humboldtrat View Post
Why would BART be useless without electronic devices? Most people use BART to get from one place to another. I'm sure there are many BART passengers who can go the whole 30 minute ride or whatever without using their electronic devices. What a hardship!
Did you miss the smilie?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 03:22 PM
 
954 posts, read 1,280,703 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by humboldtrat View Post
Why would BART be useless without electronic devices?
BART doesn't use steam engines, yo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 05:38 PM
 
75 posts, read 257,671 times
Reputation: 84
This is a bit off topic, but once upon a time (yes, I am OLD) we did not have cell phones. We actually moved around the planet without having to communicate with someone every 3 seconds. There were items called pay phones...if we were away from home and HAD to talk to someone, we would put a dime in a slot to make a call, and if we were really far away from home, we would reverse the charges.

Anyway, having a riot on the BART platform is a safety issue. Being pushed and falling under a BART train might ruin someone's day, and remember, there are seniors and children who ride the trains, too. In my opinion, demonstrations should take place outside the BART stations. And yes, BART does provide cell access as a courtesy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 06:48 PM
 
484 posts, read 822,186 times
Reputation: 494
Actually, I think that these facts raise an interesting First Amendment issue. BART is a governmental entity, unlike private businesses such as theaters, etc., to which the First Amendment applies. And it is not unreasonable to argue that BART shut off cellphone service in order to squelch public speech about issues with which BART disagrees. From this perspective it's really no different from China's censoring of internet websites that provide information with which the government disagrees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 07:16 PM
 
Location: South Korea
5,242 posts, read 13,076,984 times
Reputation: 2958
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or prohibiting 24/7 cell phone service on BART; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 09:00 PM
 
954 posts, read 1,280,703 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by legal_eagle View Post
Actually, I think that these facts raise an interesting First Amendment issue. BART is a governmental entity, unlike private businesses such as theaters, etc., to which the First Amendment applies. And it is not unreasonable to argue that BART shut off cellphone service in order to squelch public speech about issues with which BART disagrees. From this perspective it's really no different from China's censoring of internet websites that provide information with which the government disagrees.
You would first have to show that turning off cellular towers restricts freedom of speech. If you could pass that hurdle, you would then have to address time, place, manner restrictions. That is, the government can restrict the time, place, and manner of free speech so long as other avenues are left available, and it serves a reasonable government purpose (safety).

In this case, I suspect BART would have little trouble articulating why it is regulating speech on its transit platforms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 09:32 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,588 posts, read 27,384,877 times
Reputation: 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isebiel View Post
The cameras on phones are still going to work. Someone might have to wait to upload the video, but they probably do anyway, because transfer speeds seemed pretty poor. Other than banning electronic devices -- which would make BART completely useless -- there's no way to prevent people taking pictures or movies.

Unless the city passes a law like Chicago, where photographing police is illegal . But I don't see that happening in SF or CA.
Very true, the phones will still work. Oh well, all out of theories then.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 09:34 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,588 posts, read 27,384,877 times
Reputation: 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by humboldtrat View Post
I wish they could block cell phone use in movie theaters. Place a sign in the lobby telling people that if they can't go 2 hours without using a phone, don't come in!

As for BART, in the first 35 years of its existence, BART didn't have any phone/wi-fi coverage and people seemed to get by.
Hear hear!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:57 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top