Apparently, Wireless 911 Will Kill You

Didn't quite a few people, myself included, drop their landline for cell only service, and don't we pay a monthly charge for 911 access?
The answer to both those questions is YES.
Hypothetically, if someone I knows, dies because I can't get through to 911, AT&T will have a NICE lawsuit on their hands. And I'm NOT one of those who sues everything in sight.

We pay 911 access charge on our cell, I think it is a state thing though.

I thought it was a charge imposed by ALL the cellular carriers.....

It could be, I'm not certain, I quit paying attention to it cause I have always paid it and I have used it before so it's paid for itself.

I think there is a federal 911 service charge I've been trying to look it up but I'm not having very much luck. I think if they are registered as a CLEC (Competitive Local Exchange Carrier) you have to pay it

YES you are required to pay 911 on cellular and landline services and many VoIP services.

For example, I live near a county line and if my neighborhood calls 911, the call comes form the tower in the other county, in which they must residential our county, adding time and confusion, where if I pick up my landline, it goes to the right department. Many people in my neighborhood have found this out.

True that. If I needed to call 911, and couldn't get through, I would sue AT&T for so much money I would use their $20 bills it to light my $100 cigars.

I really believe though if you didn't want the ability to call 911 you could tell them to disable the feature and drop the charge. But, if you are really in need of an extra $12/year, I don't think you should buy a cell phone in the first place!

You're both living in a dream world if you think that you will see some kind of huge payoff for not being able to reach nine one one from your mobile phone. You can file suit -but one of your causes of action better include a death- and secondly, you better have airtight evidence that it was either (1) Not your phone's malfunction that caused the inability to reach nine one one and/or (2) the network was faulty.

In either scenario, I hope you have pockets as deep as the carrier you think you're going to sue because you will need it to pay your attorney's retainer and fees. If not, then you're going to have to wake up and quit dreaming about lighting a cigar with $100.00 bills.

Uhh, then why do you pay an extra fee to use 911? Afaik, 911 calls are NOT routed over the normal GSM network, rather through CDMA which allows better tracking for your position. And most providers will allow a 911 call to go through on a non activated phone, which logically can't go through the normal network because it isn't authorized to make/receive calls, data, or text.

You are making a tone that makes me think you don't think its that reliable, if that is the case, then why don't *you* have it disabled on your phone?

The case is fairly easy to show -
- Show that a call to 911 was placed during the time of the emergency and it should show a duration of 0 seconds if they call was never connected.
- Show that you can make and receive calls now.

I don't understand what other evidence you need?

Nope. If a GSM customer calls 911 it will use the GSM network to route the 911 call, it will be less reliable for locating though because GSM based networks including W-CDMA 3GSM network ONLY use Triangulation for location, unless the 3G network and handset support A-GPS E911 which I am not sure T-Mobile or AT&T support that. Real CDMA1x2000 based networks like Verizon and Sprint use AFLT Triangulation and A-GPS for location.

Not that I am calling you a lier, but can you post a source so I can read more up on it?
I could have sworn that when you dial 911 it does it over a different network and not treat it like a normal voice call.

I don't think what the article said was about misinformation about GPS location, I thought it said the CALLS were being routed incorrectly and not going to 911 at all.

Did I read that wrong?

Well I mean it's just kinda the way it works. A phone will use ANY COMPATIBLE network to dial 911 when there, but a GSM phone Cannot, will not ever use CDMA to make a 911 call. It's just not possible. And I work for a 911 center on their switching equiptment

A cellular telephone, when calling an emergency number, will use the network with the strongest signal level that it can talk to. Most GSM phones only have GSM radios (850/1800/1900), and most CDMA based phones only have CDMA radios (700/825/1700/1800). For a phone to have both, you usually have to give up a lot of battery or functionality. Most phones that can talk to both are labeled as "World Phones" or something similar.

Many GSM based devices are located with sattelite-based GPS location radios. This is used to supplement the GSM triangulation services provided by the towers to give a more accurate location. (GSM trangiluation is usually accurate to about 1800 feet in the city, and about 3500 feet in less dense areas). CDMA is usually accurate within about 150-400 feet in the city, and about 1200 feet in less populus areas.

The reason why an "unregistered" phone (a phone with no SIM card, or one that has a canceled account, or one from another company) can still call 911 is because the cell companies are required to allow them to access their networks in the case of emergency calls. COR 0 (used for any unregistered or unreconized phone) is often allowed to dial emergency numbers (911), the operator, and customer service numbers (611).

thank you for revealing you have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't think AT&T is afraid of being sued by someone that writes "true that" and smokes cigars.

If you write perfect, proper English in any of the following:
+ Emails
+ Text messages
+ IMs

You:
+ Are an alien
+ Are a robot
+ Have no friends

No one on planet Earth, speaks or writes perfect English every day of their lives since language rules are really dictated by the society (which change daily) and everyone will have their own slang or way of saying things.

But, we are getting off topic I suppose.

Nice response, I'm sure that statement is true in your circles; but it isn't true in mine.
Have a nice day!

Sorry, but you failed. Nice response is a sentence all by itself. So is the sentence that begins with "I'm sure...". Therefore you should not separate the two with a comma but with either a period or a semicolon. Similarly, the semicolon later on is used incorrectly as well. THAT is where you would correctly use a comma.

It is irrelevant. The comment was regarding language, not punctuation.

[Was that better?]

Punctuation IS a part of language. The Spanish language uses an upside question mark for questions. German language uses 2 funny dots at the top of some of their letters to show how a word should be pronounced.

So, therefore, in your last statement you proved that even you don't write perfect English. So, why criticize other people how they talk, or I guess in this case, type? You understood what I meant, the language I used was a common slang in the English language. I hope outside of this forum you don't laugh at people because they can't speak English well or have an accent...or speak slang.

Personally, I see a *huge* difference between a misplaced comma (or umlaut in your example) vs. Ebonics. Besides, I wasn't criticizing you, I was just making some light humor. You threw the insults.

BTW, the use of the semicolon in my previous post was grammatically correct. I'm not sure what the poster was writing about when he said it was used incorrectly.

I hate to keep posting so terribly OT here, but imagined grammatical superiority in someone who makes a grammatical error in the post where they're making fun of someone else for their grammar irritates me.

Correct Usage of the Semicolon (;)
The semicolon is used when connecting two sentences or independent clauses. Unlike the comma, you do not use coordinating conjunctions, e.g., and, or, but, etc. A semicolon can also be used when connecting two independent clauses with conjunctive adverbs, e.g., however, therefore, thus, otherwise, etc. When beginning the second independent clause after a semicolon, do not use a capital.

Correct Usage of the Comma with Independent Clauses
When linking two independent clauses with coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, for, so, nor, yet), place the comma before the conjunction. Remember: do not use the comma if you do not have two independent clauses.

Therefore, your semicolon before 'but' was not correct; a comma would have been. And when combining two sentences, a semicolon and not a comma. Oh yeah, and the link:

»hubpages.com/hub/Semicol ··· nvscomma

Not that any of this matters. AT ALL.

From another source (Wikipedia), a contradiction to what you just wrote:

Between independent clauses linked with a transitional phrase or a conjunctive adverb: "I like to eat cows; however, I don't like to be eaten by them."

I guess it depends on your source...

Actually read my post above again. You CAN use a semicolon before 'however'. Both sources agree, but for future reference Wikipedia is not a good source as anyone can change it at any time. I have a degree in English by the way.

I agree about Wikipedia, but your source actually says the same thing:

"A semicolon can also be used when connecting two independent clauses with conjunctive adverbs, e.g., however, therefore, thus, otherwise, etc. When beginning the second independent clause after a semicolon, do not use a capital."

I considered my "but" to be a conjunctive adverb since it was a shorter substitute for "however". That may or may not be valid - I'll leave it to the experts

Seriously guys? So OT it isn't even funny. There is no such thing as perfect English. Give it up.

LOL, I'm just hoping to generate enough traffic to hit the ticker. JJ.

There is a fine line between humor and insults.
Really, if you don't have anything constructive to post, then don't post it. You start it, I finish it. Simple as that .

Yes, and intelligent people have a "way of saying things" that doesn't sound like it's being spouted from the maw of an uneducated hillbilly. Christ... you can't even spell "liar", why should I care about anything you have to say?

No, seriously. If you come across as someone who apparently can't even spell, why should anyone care what you have to say? It doesn't matter that you may be intelligent, you come across as an idiot if you don't take the time to type properly.

I have to agree. If we are paying monthly for 911 service then it should work at least as well as a landline, regardless of the technological hurdles involved. Overcome them.

========================================
1st off all, theres NOTHING WRONG with or any problems dialing & talking to 911-1st time I ever had to call them today from outside on a cell phone

WE ARE paying for 911 at last those of us with land lines ( I hav both)
Surcharges and Other Fees

1-05 911 Service Fee .50
1-06 911 Equalization Surcharge .03
=============================================
Cell phone service

and your paying for it on your AT&T CELL PHONE BILL

TOTAL CREDITS, ADJUSTMENTS & OTHER CHARGES $3.23
Government Fees & Taxes
9-1-1 Service Fee 0.50
TX State Sales Tax 2.70
City Sales Tax 0.43
TOTAL GOVERNMENT FEES & TAXES $3.63

911 worked till VZ took over Alltel.

The charge you pay is for Enhanced 911 service. Basically, the Federal government mandated that 911 call centers be able to process the location information provided by handsets where the caller dialed 911. It is no guarantee of emergency service.

Anyone who thinks they're winning some huge lawsuit out of not reaching a 911 call taker from a cell phone hasn't taken the time to read their cell phone contract:

From AT&T Wireless

There are gaps in service within the service areas shown on coverage maps, which, by their nature, are only approximations of actual coverage. WE DO NOT GUARANTEE YOU UNINTERRUPTED SERVICE OR COVERAGE. WE CANNOT ASSURE YOU THAT IF YOU PLACE A 911 CALL YOU WILL BE FOUND. Airtime and other service charges apply to all calls, including involuntarily terminated calls. AT&T MAKES NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, SUITABILITY, OR PERFORMANCE REGARDING ANY SERVICES OR GOODS, AND IN NO EVENT SHALL AT&T BE LIABLE, WHETHER OR NOT DUE TO ITS OWN NEGLIGENCE, for any: (a) act or omission of a third party; (b) mistakes, omissions, interruptions, errors, failures to transmit, delays, or defects in the service provided by or through us; (c) damage or injury caused by the use of service or Device, including use in a vehicle; (d) claims against you by third parties; (e) damage or injury caused by a suspension or termination of service by AT&T; or (f) damage or injury caused by failure or delay in connecting a call to 911 or any other emergency service. Notwithstanding the foregoing...

From Verizon wireless

UNLESS THE LAW FORBIDS IT IN ANY PARTICULAR CASE, WE EACH AGREE TO LIMIT CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OR OTHER MONETARY RELIEF AGAINST EACH OTHER TO DIRECT DAMAGES. THIS LIMITATION AND WAIVER WILL APPLY REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION, BREACH OF CONTRACT, PERSONAL INJURY, PRODUCTS LIABILITY OR ANY OTHER THEORY. THIS MEANS THAT NEITHER OF US WILL SEEK ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, TREBLE OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FROM THE OTHER. THIS LIMITATION AND WAIVER ALSO APPLIES TO ANY CLAIMS YOU MAY BRING AGAINST ONE OF OUR SUPPLIERS, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO INDEMNIFY THE SUPLIER FOR SUCH CLAIM. You agree we aren't liable for problems caused by you or a third party; by buildings, hills, network congestion, tunnels, weather or other things we don't control; or by any act of God. You also agree we aren't liable for missed Voice Mails, or deletions of Voice Mails from your Voice Mailbox (if you have one), even if you've saved them, or for other information that may be lost or deleted if we service your phone. If another wireless carrier is involved in any problem (for example, while you roam), you also agree to any limitations of liability in its favor that it imposes.

Sprint

911 Or Other Emergency Calls
Public Safety Officials advise that when making 911 or other emergency calls, you should always be prepared to provide your location information. Unlike traditional wireline phones, depending on a number of factors (e.g., whether your Device is GPS enabled, where you are, whether local emergency service providers have upgraded their equipment, etc.), 911 operators may not know your phone number, your location or the location of your Device. In certain circumstances, an emergency call may be routed to a state patrol dispatcher or alternative location set by local emergency service providers. Enhanced 911 service ("E911"), where enabled by local emergency authorities, uses GPS technology to provide location information. Even when available, however, E911 does not always provide accurate location information. If your Device is indoors or for some other reason cannot acquire a satellite signal, you may not be located. Some Devices have a safety feature that prevents use of the keypad after dialing 911 – you should follow voice prompts when interacting with emergency service providers employing IVR systems to screen calls.

All capitalization added by the service provider, and not myself.

The bottom line is your cell phone is not a replacement for a 911 land line, and never was meant to be. I've maintained a land line since a debacle trying to reach a 911 operator back in 2004 with Vonage. Quite often, folks around here have beat me up for not being "self sufficient" and "relying" on 911 when I have an emergency.

But, being single and living alone, I sure as shit don't want to add minuets to the medic's response time when I nick a femoral artery working with a circular saw in my basement.

"Oh yeah, Bill was a great guy. Saved a lot of money having just a cell phone. Too bad he bled to death in his basement because the GPS in his cell phone sent the medics to a a house 300 yards away."

Sorry, I'm just not that guy

The concept is simple and people need to understand that this isn't the movies. When you call 911 it is harder to get your location pinpointed for the 911 service to dispatch personel to your position.

Don't believe me type your address in Google Maps... just the way the system is sometimes it is off sometimes it is right on. OnStar continues to calculate your position in the onboard computer so ti knows exactly where you are. Phones it's not a good enough device yet for 911 to find you.

Eventually we will get it right and will be the best thing since bread but for right now people need to understand that this is still trial and error and not every location will be the same. After we perfect it then there has to be adoption and for a government agency to adopt we all have to wait until they get the money.

With the massive profit margins from land-line service the "legacy" phone companies failed to realize the competitive threat of VoIP and once they did, they failed to properly react to it by lowering the price. They did not want to fight that price war so they defaulted and lost it before it even started. It's a little to late to save that business and by fear-mongering they will certainly fail once again to retain it.

It is really a shame since the core of their argument is valid. Land-line systems are far more reliable than any type of new generation wireless as they were build with nuclear holocaust, cold war in mind.

Traveled out of town about a month ago.

Was on a highway between two towns and my friend was driving. A truck towing a trailer was swerving like crazy and then lost control, skidded across the road, and flipped over, trailer and all. Horrible thing to witness...
His girlfriend called 911 almost instantly. We were right behind the vehicle when this happened, so of course we pulled over, along with the other nearby cars.

Emergency personnel were there in less than 5 minutes as we were right between two towns that were close to each other. We were able to give a good description of where we were, as I'm sure the other callers did (I'm 99.99999% sure the other drivers called too...). I'd also be willing to bet that they verified our locations right away, even if the dispatchers understood where we were.

All phones sold after, I think it was '02, MUST include AGPS (assisted GPS) chips (»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As ··· sted_GPS). These work in tandem w/the towers to locate you when calling 911, or can work without GPS at all and get your location very quickly (compared to the "old fashioned" way of needing to manually triangulate) and can happen in literally seconds. It can't be turned off, and it can even be remotely activated without your knowledge or consent, even if set to "911 only" on the phone... Privacy is already pretty much an illusion when it comes to these things...

We were roaming, and 911 worked. Not only did it work, the people who responded were there in a flash, and the people who were in the accident survived (AFIK - one did for sure, the other was injured, though how much I don't know... they were pulling her out though, and she was definitely not dead).

From the article:

"About 93% of the nation's 911 centers have technology that lets the dispatcher immediately see the caller's phone number and the location of the cell tower that picks up the call. But the dispatcher must request the caller's GPS coordinates from the wireless carrier that operates the tower. This process can take several seconds and may yield a location as far as 300 meters from the caller, not much help in a high-rise apartment."

And that request that takes "seconds" wasn't done for the poor woman who couldn't be located?! If I were the family, I would sue the daylights out of that operator and their boss(es) for being inept and negligent in their duties.

Glad they're spending 3.5 million on a new center, but what happened is inexcusable. Especially in light of having all phones being required to have AGPS abilities. I find that disgusting that they couldn't track her down better than this with all the technology we have today.

It's plainly obvious landlines are "tied" into the system so 911 works. It should also be obvious that we've spent BILLIONS of dollars on AGPS and compatible handsets.

Now they want to do this:
"Last week, NENA announced the formation of a consortium of emergency response organizations and wireless experts to secure federal stimulus funds to upgrade 911 operations by using broadband technology. Patrick Halley, director of government affairs for NENA, says the goal is to allow callers to send video and text messages to 911 centers. "

Great, but Fix your damn tracking system first you jerks. All that crap should come secondary to the technology you already promised would work in an emergency anyway.

When a spectacular accident happens on the freeway, everyone thinks they have the only cell phone for miles. So, everyone calls and the lines light up. If they spent any time on the line with your friend's girlfriend, then she was one of the first callers. Otherwise, they probably just confirmed she's reporting the same thing as everyone else and had nothing to add.

AGPS is brilliant, but klunky -- it has several points of possible failure. GPS is more direct. The article said something to the effect of the particular 9-1-1 center she reached didn't have the ability to trigger AGPS and that the local center is in the process of modernizing now in the victim's honor.

One problem is testability. How can I, Joe Public, test that my phone works without unduly taxing the call center? The system has no redundancies except for you being able to give your location.

Still seems sad they went nearly 30 miles in the wrong direction ..and that they couldn't have tried for a more precise location and then re-directed emergency responders while in route or something...

Didn't see that their call center was without the ability to "trigger AGPS" but I guess having them modernize is not a bad thing. All I saw in the article is:

"According to NENA, 7% of the nation's 911 centers are able to obtain only the location of the tower that picks up the wireless call and are not equipped to request GPS coordinates for the caller's location. More than 100 counties still have only this so-called Basic 911 service. Cellphone callers in these counties are unlikely to summon emergency services unless they can orally tell the operator where they are."

Do digital cell towers even broadcast in a 30 mile range? I'd have to say no, they don't. Analog ones might, in extremely lucky conditions, but digital ones have far less range.

Surely with the ability to have ONLY that info, they could've provided a better response if they'd bothered (or been able) to double check...

Just sad...

Go to the USAToday article and read the comments at the bottom »content.usatoday.com/com ··· tory&p=3 There is a series of posts that keep appearing over and over that say crazy things about cell phones and how they have "illegal jammers" and drive around blocking cell signals for no apparent reason - just because they love land lines as best I can tell.

Is this telcos tying up the comments so that dissenting opinions won't be seen?

Here's one of the posts I'm referring to :


Never owned a cell phone and never will.Those that have them keep them and have a good time.And it is true that cell phone users are rude and insensitive as to when and where they answer their little masters.Kinda reminds me of training a dog to react to certain stimulus when I see cell phone owners summoned by the things.Fetch boy good boy.

------------------Do what I did. I bought a cell phone jammer for 65.00. It's highly illegle but great for assured quiet dining and movie theatres. There also lots of fun at the mall or grocery store for that inconsiderate person at the checkout counter. This one will knock out those who like to drive and text or talk on the way to work if their near you. I call it my commuting safe zone
========
I want one. How does one go about getting one??

--------Google "cell phone jammer" cell phone blocker" you'll find many websites. Go to the one that has the portable ones for about 30.00. I have one of those also and it comes with a wall and car charger. I just bought another I'm mounting in my trunk and running off an inverter. It will knock out anyone within 200 feet!!! I use one in my classroom to keep students off their phones during exams.

Have Fun!!!!

... and therefore they share the blame for screw-ups that happen with 911 and their wireless customers.

IMHO rather then use this as a marketing tool to encourage landline sales, they should be doing their utmost to correct problems with the 911 system. IE Quit being part of the problem and be part of the solution, instead.

In this modern age there's really not much excuse for major screwups with critical systems like 911, E911, etc. I think when companies drop the ball in this arena they *deserve* to be sued and the punitive damages should be *severe* to the point they will dedicate the resources needed to fixing the problems---- rather then hyping them as a marketing campaign.

Granted, it's a smartphone, but all new CDMA phones I know of have GPS enabled. I can get a fix to ~5 feet in accuracy in about 20 seconds, so as long as I have my wits about me I can hand that off to the 911 folks.

Though everyone's right that E911 needs to be rolled out significantly more than what it is right now. Especially since nobody is going to pay $20 for a landline just to call 911 on.

Additionally, if you know where the landline phone for the house is, you probably know the address of the house as well. Problem solved there, no landline required.

Here at home we have an emergency sheet that includes out address, directions to our house from town, phone numbers of all family members, etc. The kicker here is that all our phones are cordless, however my parents and brother are on different cell carriers using different frequencies on different phone brands with car chargers, so chances are we're going to get through if we need to call somewhere.

WHat's really interesting is the cell service around here has been just as reliable, if not more so, than a landline. A few years ago we had significant noise on our line after it rained rather heavily. Cells have never had that. Our power is pretty reliable here so it's probably not saying much, but I've never lost a cell signal due to the tower being offline.

YMMV, but Verizon's value proposition for landlines around here is getting slimmer every minute.

Hello,

According to this AP News Article, some states have raided their 911 Funds collected for purposes other than its intended purpose, including balancing State Budgets. Making sure a Cell Phone User is helped after dialing 911 is not a priority for State 911 Centers, just balanced budgets.

Seriously. Make landlines cheap as candy and people will hold on to them "just in case" of an emergency. The problem is a dial tone and taxes costs $25. Want caller id or any other feature? Add $10.

AT&T and all wireless companies make a killling off of wireless phones.

Dial 9-1-1

Operator - "Operator [000], what is your emergency?"
Complainant - "I need help, my son's leg is broken."
Operator - "What is your address?"
Complainant - "Intersection of A Street and B street."
Operator - "EMS is en route, stay on the line."

OR

Operator - "Operator [000], what is your emergency?"
Complainant - "I need help, my son's leg is broken."
Operator - "What is your address?"
Complainant - "I'm not sure, I'm near a Home Depot parking lot, I can see the interstate where I'm at, there is an Exxon gas station nearby."
Operator - "Do you see anything else like a street sign or something with a number?"
Complainant - "Um, yes. I can see a sign on the interstate that says 'Exit 234'."
Operator - "Stay on the line while I contact EMS."

Its not that friggin hard. I mean, people used 9-1-1 BEFORE GPS was available to the public.

No, Darwin says they were supposed to die. Lots of people each year are SAVED by the 911 system. 911 mishaps themselves aren't killing people.

I can see the first emergency text message now:

"In my house, torn apart by pack of wolves. Ur EMT folks can find my body in the lower level in the ut....

As the message exceeds 160 characters, the sender exsanguinates clutching his cell phone....
If you had a land line, this would not have happened....

Lol !!

Addendum: unfortunately, the signal from your cordless phone was squelched by your wireless router and the cord for the landline was too short!!

Thats why you need the nuclear holocaust phone.

Sorry but I don't see it.

Wireless 911 is used every day on our highways & byways with no more issues than we see with landline service.

The wireless bit of it isn't the problem.

I'd actually say that wireless with GPS active could actually be more accurate than a landline call ID type of process.

According to my local E911 board, they can't reliably locate you when you call from a cell phone. I'll take their word for it over a bunch of BBR users. According to them, cell phone 911 calls often get routed to a regional 911 center for cell phones... I assume in Des Moines. Then they would have to route the call back up to Ames. And who knows if they would have the right address.

If I call from my landline, it goes a couple of miles down the street to Qwest, then less than a block to the 911 center.

I had a cell only for a few years. I'm not a moron so I don't use it while driving, and I have phone at work... I basically just used the cell as a home phone anyway. I don't have a need to have it constantly at my ear. So I went to a pay by the minute cell phone service that costs about $3 per month and got a home phone and I'm happy with it. It's nice that it "just works" and doesn't require reboots like my cell phone, and I don't worry about minutes and all that other B.S. I think this is the best of both worlds.

"AT&T just launched a massive new PR campaign aimed at scaring people away from dropping their landline"

I can't be certain this is the case nationwide but in my area, even if you have your landline service terminated, the phone still has a dialtone and you can still call 911.

If that's the case, I don't see how their PR campaign has any relevance to concerns over 911.

Just so you know, I work for a 911 Dispatch Center in South Florida, and in South Florida, Not sure about anywhere else, you can simply plug a phone into any wall outlet and it will call 911. This is just as a cell phone. It doesn't matter if the service is active or not, but you can still call 911.

I believe this should work anywhere there is a phone outlet, and no service. So in essence, these phone companies, through a PR Company, are trying to scare people from cutting their landlines, and not educating them on the fact that simply having a phone hooked up, with no service, should in fact call 911. This will give the 911 operator your address, the last name that was on the account (or the phone company that services that address) and the phone number that used to be assigned there, unless its been given out. If that's the case, it will use a fake number, or sometimes a 911 areacoded number (doesn't exist in the US).

I am not in anyway advocating everyone testing this, but if you do be sure not to hang up. and just let the dispatcher know your testing your line. They will thank you, and won't send the Police to your door asking what the problem is.

EDIT Sorry about double posting, was working on this inbetween transmissions, at work!

That only works if the dial tone is still there. If the line has been dead for an long extended period the connection may have been physically disconnected for some reason. They are left connected as long as possible so you can call 911 for emergencies and 611 to reactivate service by computer.

In some areas the local governments all want a piece of the 911 pie. There will be a county dispatch center and a small town will have their own instead of combining the funds and having a single better center. You guys can blame the telcos all you want but most of the problems are because of some government decision on how to spend the money. The cell towers in an area can have the best equipment but if the 911 center it goes too does not have the equipment to use it you are out of luck.

Unless you have been in big and small 911 centers and know what equipment they have installed and the people manning it your cell phone and tower may be the least of you problem.
They save a lot of people but sometimes things fall through the cracks and someone dies.

I like the way they have 911 configured. I do have to tell them what township i am in. But it doesnt seem to add any time to the response. one time i called from in the mountains and didnt know where i was. They just said leave the phone on and they would track it. I dont know how they do it but a ambulance showed up in the middle of a field out in nowhere.

You can dial 911 on a cellphone without a sim card. How does that work (call routing, positioning etc.) ?

In my county (Flathead County, MT), when I had to call 911 about a road condition that could have became very serious (dead animal in the road blocking one lane with fog causing visibility under 1/4 mile in a 55 mph zone), I learned that - at least at the time - my cell phone provider (MTPCS Cellular One - www.cellonenation.com ) does not route calls to the actual 911 line, instead they show up as being on the business line. Thus instead of being answered as "911 what is your emergency?" they're answered as "Flathead County Sheriff's Office, how can I help you?"

I don't know if this is Cellular One or the Sheriff's Office's problem. Just proof it isn't always at all the same from a cell phone...

I would start by asking your cellular provider about that incident. they would be able to track down the error the best.

I asked a friend who is a 911 dispatcher. He told me it is that way with every call in my county from my cell carrier, has been for a long time, and they are aware of it and haven't fixed it. That was many months ago, maybe it's fixed now.

my cell has gps on it (t-mobile g1). would it not take much for them to create some way of turning on that gps when a call would be placed to 911 and some how send that information to the operator?

regardless i always try to figure out where I am when I call 911.