Gov. Brown Veto
I haven't read the bill. Did he veto it on principle or because of pork or some other bizarre add-on?
In the interest of public safety, I favor law enforcement taking actions AFTER sufficient judicial review and approval. Just like any other matter, one branch of government should not be empowered without dancing the check and balance waltz. If I have an emergency and a cell phone is my fastest option I don't want the network down because law enforcement thinks there might be a protest. If there is a protest and I'm injured, I still want to the call to work.
If this was truly a significant protest barrier (i.e. being foiled by disabled cell networks), there are alternatives. In the case of wide-area coordinated protest, key folks could be placed near public hot spots with walkie talkies for the last few hundred yards.
Appears he needs the police vote. I have little doubt that the state will turn off mobile phone capability in an area and then be sued. I suspect they will lose as I can't think of any preccident to allow them to do something like that. Also, what if someone needs to call 911 (i.e. the police)? Yes, they are already there but I'm betting turning off cell towers is going to be more widespread than just the small area of the riot. It would also affect people not in the riot.
Mullica Hill, NJ
|reply to rradina |
you also have the factor of is shutting it off even possible, unless a judge orders it the cell companies could just laugh at the police chief when he tells them to shut off the towers in Hollywood.
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports