Free Speech VS. Safety. First Amendment Attorney Lawrence Walters answers the burning question: Is San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) within its rights to shut off cell service? Or are they overreaching?
I am sick and tired of all these activists and the government protect illegals these people do not obey the law of the land and they demand rights that they are not entitled to, they burn our flags and our goverment gives in to them and protects them. If anyone does not respect our laws and way of life our customs then go back where you came from, this also includes American who don't like it you all can leave our country.
This all sounds well and good in the abstract but when are you rich elitists going to realize that most of us working people just want to get to and from work as quickly, peacefully and safely as possible. We don't want to be delayed an hour by people jamming train doors with their protests. We don't want to have to deal with thugs who have been arrested dozens of times acting up, etc. I say good riddance to Oscar Grant!
I'm not sure you can mix two societies like Russia or China as both on the same level as a secure society that I wont go into here being the History Buff..Coff...... Cutting off cell service, is the same thing.... we been just fighting humanitarian effort, speaking out against Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iran to name a few on such thing as Free Speech, then Bat do the same thing. One word .........(Hypocritical) FCC Need to step in
They banned the use of cell phones while inflight which in most cases is a longer trip than that on BART. I agree with the ban put in place by BART, is it any different than the ban on smoking? Can't your call wait until you reach your destination? BART could set aside a car for the use of cell phones and limit the time a person can use it, it should be fee based so the additional cost of operation isn't passed along to people that aren't using cell phones.
It's a poor judgement call on behalf of the BART to disable underground cell sites for commuters. There is nothing illegal or wrong about peaceful dissent, and the government's efforts to stifle protests stems from their desire to avoid negative attention and not the more legitimate goal of protecting commuters. Disabling cell phones on the subway is essentially just a way to prevent people from spreading unfavorable ideas, and that's just the sort of thing the first amendment should be protecting. Perhaps we should work towards a government that protects our rights and not one that protects itself.
It may have been a mistake for BART to shut down service but is it really blocking freedom of speech? I just reread the first ammendment and I didn't see anything about cellphones, facebook, or texting. When did privileges become equated to rights? Cellphones should be seen as a privilege not a right. BART probably did violate the Communications Act of 1934, but saying there was a violation of the constitution is overreaching and, to be quite honest, downplays true constitutional issues.
My best guess would be to take Amtrak to Sacramento, and then take public tsoprnortatian to Elk Grove from there, if it exists. From San Francisco, take BART to Richmond, then transfer to Amtrak. It's all in the same station. I've done this many times from SF to Sacramento (takes about two and a half hours), but from Sacramento to Elk Grove I wouldn't know what to do.You might be best off renting a car, unfortunately. Take a look at the below links for more info.
Click here to access transcripts from recent shows.