Movie theaters may ask to jam cell phones

[stonyc]

I do realize this i'm just saying a person in an "on call" situation knows better than to put themselves in a situation where they cannot be reached. And if it really was life or death and they really had to see the movie, they could simply go to the service desk before hand and say that a call may come through that is life and death and could they please come get you from theatre 3, isle 22.

Nevermind that there are rules in place that dictate how physicians, in this case, are to be contacted (ie. through their pagers or cell phone only)... if a situation is life/death, would you want precious seconds and minutes wasted by a service desk person taking a call, giving that message to an usher/manager, and said usher/manager walking into the theater to find the physician in question?

The simple fact is that some people need access to communications, most people don't. Some people are jerks, most people aren't. Jamming cell phone signals is still not the answer. Establishing and enforcing ejection policies is.

 

[eva01]

I would definitely be pissed at this as i do work for a hospital and would be put on call sometimes in case of emergencies.

And yes sometimes i would go to the movies when i am on call.

Especially since the theatre i live closest too the people picking up the phone at the front desk would not give a crap about a life or death situation because they are all highschool dropouts that work there.

Hell i know at least two of them are drug dealers that work there

 

[840quadra]

Blocking cell phones in a movie theatre is not a safety issue... Theatres generally have these amazing technological machines that use *gasp* land lines...

I am not so sure about that. Radio Dispatch for many law enforcement and emergency management offices are numbered for the most part, and most rely on the use of Cellular phones or pagers to gain the attention of employees or volunteers. Why pay to have a dispatch office with expensive radio equipment, when you can use Cellular equipment at less then half the cost? I like lower taxes!

Also, It is not the duty of the volunteer to notify a dispatcher where they are, or what they are doing at all times. I am not sure about yourself, but I have been involved in emergency calls that every second counts. I don't want to have to hunt down people (calling around to theaters) to find EMTs, First Responders, or Firefighters.

And if it really was life or death and they really had to see the movie, they could simply go to the service desk before hand and say that a call may come through that is life and death and could they please come get you from theatre 3, isle 22.

How can you take yourself seriously? Have you ever been involved in an emergency, or have you been actively involved in an emergency situation?

Volunteers are on call 24/7 and have no "work schedule". They lead normal lives, and interrupt them immediately if there is an emergency situation that requires them to respond. In other words they respond to emergency situations, and in the real world, emergencies do not go by a schedule.

 

[njmac]

I can't believe how dependent we've become on cell phones.

I'm as guilty as the next person. Because I have small children, I always have my cell on (vibrate) and with me "just in case".

I was involved in EMS for 10 years. I sometimes went to a movie while I was on call and hoped that a page wouldn't come through. If the theater in my town were to block signals in the theater, I guess I wouldn't go on my "on call" days. It really isn't that big of a deal. If you are a volunteer ES worker then you shouldn't be constantly on duty. Take a day or two off

 

[Stella]

They shouldn't go to the movies in the first place.

IF your on-call, you should be available. If your in a cinema, your NOT available.

Simple.

Why should one person ruin the experience for many others?

That will be great until the first emergency worker that attends a theater misses an important call.

Most EVERYONE I know in Emergency services has needed to walk out of a theater for an emergency. They (like myself) tend to be the types of people that have their phones on vibrate, and walk out to answer a call. Depending on the type of call or issue, this law (if it was to go into action) could be reversed in a heartbeat.

The other issue is going to be keeping the Jamming signal inside the theater premises. The FCC is not a typical group to like "interference" of other services or signals.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

Some people are jerks, most people aren't.

This is the kicker for me.

Don't revoke my privileges because the kid down the aisle can't ****. Kick his discourteous ass out of the theater. He'll be made an example and it will be the only problem you have for the rest of the movie. Do this enough times and no one will forget to silence their phone before the movie.

Establish, post, and enforce "silent phone" policies in your theaters. It's more effieient, less frustrating (for patrons), and less expensive than a fleet of active jamming devices.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

They shouldn't go to the movies in the first place.

Being on-call means that you live your life normally while maintaining easy contact and the ability to show up in your office relatively quickly.

If your kid has a soccer game, go to a soccer game. If your brother is having a small dinner party, go for it. If you need to mow the lawn, feel free. If you want to go to a movie, why should it be any different?

There's nothing inherent to being on-call that precludes you from enjoying a movie at a local theater. Going to a rock concert might be difficult, since you're several minutes from contact (to move from the auditorium into a quieter hallway), but movies shouldn't be a problem in this case.

Why should one person ruin the experience for many others?

Why should a disruptive minority in the userbase result in revoking these privileges for everyone else?

 

[840quadra]

They shouldn't go to the movies in the first place.

IF your on-call, you should be available. If your in a cinema, your NOT available.

Simple.

Why should one person ruin the experience for many others?

Just remember what you wrote later in life if (or when) someone you know is in dire need of help and emergency services cannot be reached. I am not sure how it works in Canada (most likely differently) but in the US, most emergency work for rural areas, and some cities is all done via volunteer systems comprised of people offering their own time 24/7 365 days a year. Most sane human beings can deal with a minor interruption when it comes to a true emergency situation. If they can't they need to buy some land on Alaska and build their own movie theater.

Besides, most emergency service workers have good phone manners in the fist place, and don't tend to be the people with loud ringers during quiet public events. I am not against quiet phones, or keeping interruptions to a minimum, I am against jamming signals.

 

[Jaffa Cake]

The problem isn't with the phones – it's with the ignorance of those who use them in the cinema. If their phone is jammed then they'll most likely find other ways to disturb their fellow cinema-goers, such as talking loudly, messing about in the isles, or taking a noisy child into a film completely unsuitable for it.

I'm in total agreement with throwing out anyone who repeatedly causes a disturbance and spoils the film for others. Put posters up in the foyer asking people to turn their phones off, and put an ad up before the film as a reminder. There's no excuse then – although if people really need their phone on, as 840quadra rightly says they can pop it on vibrate and take the call discretely outside. Simple good manners and a bit of consideration – that's all it takes.

Bet you wouldn't have guessed I've had a few films spoilt for me in the past!

 

[emw]

Found the link about the paint:

Here. (Note - you need a login)

One quote of interest:

NaturalNano will combine this signal-blocking paint scheme with a radio-filtering device that collects phone signals from outside a shielded space, allowing certain transmissions to proceed while blocking others.

I wonder if this would lead to registering your phone before entry, so emergency workers or parents or whoever had a legitimate reason to receive a call would be able to do so.

 

[jsw]

I find it amazing that so much of this thread centers around whether or not emergency workers need cell phone access when no one has yet effectively argued for any reason to deny access to a convenience to anyone in the first place. Disruptive individuals need to be escorted out of theaters. It is irrelevant how they are being disruptive. Blocking cell phones will lead to use of 5-mile two-way radios. It won't stop the problem.

Those who simply cannot handle the occasional disruption at a public venue - assuming theater owners perform their duty of ejecting disruptive customers - should stay home in their cocoons. Anyone arguing that no one should be able to access cell phones because they - the poster - has been bothered by someone on a call is saying "my interests are more important that yours." Movie going is a public experience. It will never be perfect. If you require perfection, earn a few million, build your own theater, and rent the movies yourself. Otherwise, deal with it.

I wonder if this would lead to registering your phone before entry, so emergency workers or parents or whoever had a legitimate reason to receive a call would be able to do so.

My understanding from the site is that it is an on/off deal - either it forwards all calls, or it forwards none. Of course, even if they can filter, it begs the question of who should be allowed access, and that's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

A far simpler solution would be to impose fines on those whose cell phones ring. Of course, I think even that is ridiculous.

The problem isn't with the phones – it's with the ignorance of those who use them in the cinema. If their phone is jammed then they'll most likely find other ways to disturb their fellow cinema-goers, such as talking loudly, messing about in the isles, or taking a noisy child into a film completely unsuitable for it.

Agreed. The proposed jamming would do nothing to stop that, and I'm bothered far more often by such occurrences than by cell phones.

They shouldn't go to the movies in the first place.

I'm glad to see how much you appreciate those who'd risk their lives to save yours.

IF your on-call, you should be available. If your in a cinema, your NOT available.

First, you might gather more respect with your comments if you'd at least attempt proper use of "you're" - I tend not to be a grammar snob but three times in two sentences is a bit much. Second, you are available if you're in a cinema and might even be closer than if you were at home.

Why should one person ruin the experience for many others?

Exactly. Why should your selfish interests and desire to be controlling ruin my experience at the theater, which includes the peace of mind of knowing I'm reachable if need be without ever being disruptive to my fellow moviegoers?

 

[emw]

Anyone arguing that no one should be able to access cell phones because they - the poster - has been bothered by someone on a call is saying "my interests are more important that yours."

I'm bothered far more often by such occurrences than by cell phones.

So does that mean your interests are more important than theirs?

I'm not advocating jamming, merely pointing to a technology that would allow it. Hell, I've been to about two movies since cell phones were invented, so I'm not an expert in this. I'd much rather put up with the distraction of a large bouncer dragging an offending patron out of the theatre.

 

[jsw]

So does that mean your interests are more important than theirs?

I'm bothered (I'd say mad™, but that's trademarked)... but not to the point of preventing anyone else from entering the theater because, due to an ability to speak or move their bodies, they could conceivably disrupt my experience.

I'd much rather put up with the distraction of a large bouncer dragging an offending patron out of the theatre.

Distraction? I'd say that's entertainment of a type often unrivaled by the movies themselves!

 

[i.Feature]

I have to apologize i seem to be guilty of making this more about emergancy personal than the general public. I should have just wondered out loud how many live would actually be put in danger by this kind of blocking. I'd wager very few. I also am willing to bet that most people in the situation of being on call take the precautions to avoid not being available. If i were on call and i went to the movie and i missed the call it would be my fault not the movie place who blocks cell phones. I would know going in that this is a possibility.

Should malls have signal apllifyers to assist emergancy personal? I know quite a few shopping centres where i can't get any signal?

 

[Counterfit]

People don't go to the movies as much because it costs $10/person before snacks, and the movies are mostly sequels, remakes, and the same old tired plotlines with the same old tired actors. Blaming it on cell phones is a silly cop-out, and if they do actually get the phones jammed, they'll soon see that the low attendance persists. This is just like the RIAA blaming napster for falling record sales.

Hey morons - look at the product you're putting out and what you're charging for it. Stop paying no-talent hacks $10-20 million/movie, cut your prices drastically, and maybe we'll come back.

Theater owners aren't the ones making the movies.

 

[840quadra]

Should malls have signal apllifyers to assist emergancy personal? I know quite a few shopping centres where i can't get any signal?

It depends on the state, and town the mall is located in. If the sate or town has a primary base of volunteer emergency service workers, they will have amplifiers in such locations.

 

[Stella]

Unfortunately it is the minority that give the rest a bad name, your correct.

However, when you go into a cinema you should turn off your phone. If you cannot do that you should not go in. Simple.

If you need to speak on the phone, then you leave your seat and go outside into the hall and speak, you don't speak inside the theatre.

Its called courtesy.

Why should a disruptive minority in the userbase result in revoking these privileges for everyone else?

 

[Stella]

Are you bored?

( personally, on these boards, I really don't care about grammar ( unless the grammar is so bad, the language is difficult to read. To point it otherwise, is petty ) )

First, you might gather more respect with your comments if you'd at least attempt proper use of "you're" - I tend not to be a grammar snob but three times in two sentences is a bit much.

As regards to your other comments, I see can see your the type of person who lets their phone ring inside the cinema and don't really care about spoiling the show for others. If you need to be contacted you shouldn't put yourself in a position where you are unavailable. In the cinema you should make yourself unavailable. As I said, its common courtesy to not use your cell phone at all inside a theatre.

Some people cannot just see past their own percieved self importance.

 

[jsw]

Are you bored?

Yes. But it's still "you're." It stands for "you are." "Your" is the possessive form of "you." I don't mind typos and mistakes. But repeatedly using the same wrong form of a word is neither.

To point it otherwise, is petty

No more so than advocating the inability to use cell phones because your local theater can't control disruptive individuals.

As regards to your other comments, I see can see your the type of person who lets their phone ring inside the cinema and don't really care about spoiling the show for others.

No. I'm the kind of person who is able to master the intricacies of the "Silent" setting. I'm pretty sure others can do so as well.

If you need to be contacted you shouldn't put yourself in a position where you are unavailable. In the cinema you should make yourself unavailable. As I said, its common courtesy to not use your cell phone at all inside a theatre.

Why? My phone, set to be silent, is not a disturbance to anyone. My reception or sending of brief text messages? Likewise.

Some people cannot just see past their own percieved self importance.

On this point, we agree.

 

[dornoforpyros]

Where have I ever said give those 99% a free pass? If someone is being a disruption, eject them. Like 840 wrote earlier, if you need to be available for calls just put the phone on vibrate mode... that goes for everyone be they a physician or not. Jamming cell phones is not the best solution here... theaters need to establish rules for enjoying a movie in their establishment and actually enforce those rules.

I'm up for any thing that will limit rude cell phone users. If cell phone jamming is the way to go, then so be it.

 

[Chundles]

So, mobile phones aside, are they going to come up with some sort of device to stop old people jabbering on during the film?

I was thinking one of those boxing gloves on a long spring - you hear a senior citizen flapping their gums, point, pull the trigger and THUMP that's shut em up eh?

 

[26139]

I like the idea..

...but I am not sure if it will work.

When I was younger I seldom if ever had phone calls disturb my movie watching experience. In the last five or so years, however, I have NEVER been to a movie (I go about twice a month and that number is dwindling) where I have not been bothered by some idiot on their cell phone or a baby crying.

What is with these distracting people? Why is it SO IMPORTANT to be reach 24/7? What makes my admission ticket worth less than the person who decides to disturb my movie?

On another note, I have never seen anyone kicked out of a theatre for disturbing everyone else, either. I imagine that would be as big of a distraction as them talking on their phone, though.

 

[xsedrinam]

Best "turn off cell phone" feature I've seen was in Orlando. An ejection seat activates and flings the violator up, over the crowd, and splats him on the screen for all to see. The audience applauded. (It was on film, unfortunately.)

 

[Counterfit]

So, mobile phones aside, are they going to come up with some sort of device to stop old people jabbering on during the film?

I was thinking one of those boxing gloves on a long spring - you hear a senior citizen flapping their gums, point, pull the trigger and THUMP that's shut em up eh?

That would be awesome at concerts.

 

[bousozoku]

...but I am not sure if it will work.

When I was younger I seldom if ever had phone calls disturb my movie watching experience. In the last five or so years, however, I have NEVER been to a movie (I go about twice a month and that number is dwindling) where I have not been bothered by some idiot on their cell phone or a baby crying.

What is with these distracting people? Why is it SO IMPORTANT to be reach 24/7? What makes my admission ticket worth less than the person who decides to disturb my movie?

On another note, I have never seen anyone kicked out of a theatre for disturbing everyone else, either. I imagine that would be as big of a distraction as them talking on their phone, though.

I used to see people regularly thrown out but the last time was in the 1970s. Since then, I've noticed more weapons checks than anything else.

I think jamming phones is an idea that can't work for emergency workers. They'll end up with special, more expensive phones and pagers to compensate. Someone just needs to deal with the individuals not having respect for the rest of us. Of course, that probably means 70 % of the Orlando area cinema goers.