Most of the “freedoms” people speak of are really freedoms from government interference. For example, “freedom of speech” doesn’t apply to a symphony hall that requires its patrons to be silent during performances, but it may restrict a government’s ability to enact anti-hate crime legislation.
In this case the more interesting issue is that a private entity disrupted telecommunications on its property without notice or warning. In addition to making it difficult for protesters to coördinate their actions, it also made it difficult for people to make unrelated calls, to report crimes, call 911, and so forth.
It might be legal, but I admit I find the idea very unsettling.
Is BART a private entity, or are they state funded/run?
I've never been clear on this in most places I've been; I don't know if New York's MTA is part of the city, or if it's a private corporation entrusted with a public utility - and if it is, what are the ramifications?
Most subway systems are actually privately owned/operated, yet state funded entities. Or at least that's my understanding of many of them. The MTA and MBTA are this way I believe.
If the BART police go around calling themselves "police", carrying side-arms and shooting people, they better be under the state. Plus, they have a ".gov" domain name.
Despite the Republicans wet dreams, we aren't at the stage (yet) where private companies shoot people who don't obey orders or resist.
I've only lived in SF for 2 weeks, so I wasn't sure if the BART/Muni stuff was public or privately owned.
Good point though about unrelated calls, 911, crimes, etc. Had something bad happened during that time I imagine they'd be in some (more) hot water right now.
Paid areas of BART stations are reserved for ticketed passengers who are boarding, exiting or waiting for BART cars and trains, or for authorized BART personnel. No person shall conduct or participate in assemblies or demonstrations or engage in other expressive activities in the paid areas of BART stations, including BART cars and trains and BART station platforms.
The notion that BART areas are not public and subject to the First Amendment ("right to peaceably assemble...") is absurd on its face and in detail.
Of course it's public space. That's where the public is!
And, BART is financed by public money and operated by an agency that reports directly to regional government.
What qualifies as an expressive activity? Saying "I love my friends!" is an expressive activity, and so is saying "BART police shouldn't shoot people who don't deserve to be shot!"
You should definitely be able to "assemble" peaceably and say whatever you want to say.
BART should be within its rights to remove people who actively disrupt the service by blocking platforms or cars or ticket booths, but going beyond that (i.e. removing someone from a train because they were critical of BART or its policies) is too far. If that's what this release is indeed implying...
The justification being that the area isn't "public" so the right to public assembly doesn't apply? I find it really interesting that they have that sort of macro-control on the cell broadcast antennas in the BART stations in order to turn service on and off...that implies a system to control or coordinate wireless broadcast access throughout the system...
They don't, I don't think. They contacted the providers directly and asked them to do it. They don't just have a magical pull-switch - they just have phones, and apparently a lot of pull.
Yup and at the same time the trains did not roll for 3 hours earlier in the week because of a 'routing problem' with their system that is from the 1970s.
Good job BART. BART and you're there....if the trains can make it!
And pavel, if you read the article you'll see that BART pulled the plug, not ATT or anyone else.
Most of the “freedoms” people speak of are really freedoms from government interference. For example, “freedom of speech” doesn’t apply to a symphony hall that requires its patrons to be silent during performances, but it may restrict a government’s ability to enact anti-hate crime legislation.
In this case the more interesting issue is that a private entity disrupted telecommunications on its property without notice or warning. In addition to making it difficult for protesters to coördinate their actions, it also made it difficult for people to make unrelated calls, to report crimes, call 911, and so forth.
It might be legal, but I admit I find the idea very unsettling.
BART isn't a private entity, though, it's a government agency.
ETA a link to BART's discussion of its formation: http://bart.gov/about/history/index.aspx
Is BART a private entity, or are they state funded/run?
I've never been clear on this in most places I've been; I don't know if New York's MTA is part of the city, or if it's a private corporation entrusted with a public utility - and if it is, what are the ramifications?
Most subway systems are actually privately owned/operated, yet state funded entities. Or at least that's my understanding of many of them. The MTA and MBTA are this way I believe.
They're state funded/run given that their officials are voted into office.
If the BART police go around calling themselves "police", carrying side-arms and shooting people, they better be under the state. Plus, they have a ".gov" domain name.
Despite the Republicans wet dreams, we aren't at the stage (yet) where private companies shoot people who don't obey orders or resist.
I've only lived in SF for 2 weeks, so I wasn't sure if the BART/Muni stuff was public or privately owned.
Good point though about unrelated calls, 911, crimes, etc. Had something bad happened during that time I imagine they'd be in some (more) hot water right now.
BART's initial statement includes the following:
Paid areas of BART stations are reserved for ticketed passengers who are boarding, exiting or waiting for BART cars and trains, or for authorized BART personnel. No person shall conduct or participate in assemblies or demonstrations or engage in other expressive activities in the paid areas of BART stations, including BART cars and trains and BART station platforms.
Source: http://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2011/news20110812.aspx
The notion that BART areas are not public and subject to the First Amendment ("right to peaceably assemble...") is absurd on its face and in detail.
Of course it's public space. That's where the public is!
And, BART is financed by public money and operated by an agency that reports directly to regional government.
What qualifies as an expressive activity? Saying "I love my friends!" is an expressive activity, and so is saying "BART police shouldn't shoot people who don't deserve to be shot!"
You should definitely be able to "assemble" peaceably and say whatever you want to say.
BART should be within its rights to remove people who actively disrupt the service by blocking platforms or cars or ticket booths, but going beyond that (i.e. removing someone from a train because they were critical of BART or its policies) is too far. If that's what this release is indeed implying...
There is no "the public". There are people with rights going places, which may be publicly or privately owned.
The justification being that the area isn't "public" so the right to public assembly doesn't apply? I find it really interesting that they have that sort of macro-control on the cell broadcast antennas in the BART stations in order to turn service on and off...that implies a system to control or coordinate wireless broadcast access throughout the system...
"Macro-control" being the power switch?
Yeah, BART probably knows where the power switches are.
it sounds like BART just powered down cell towers in their underground stations. then notified the service providers afterwards.
ability-to-disable seems like a pretty basic provision for allowing others' services into one's facilities.
They don't, I don't think. They contacted the providers directly and asked them to do it. They don't just have a magical pull-switch - they just have phones, and apparently a lot of pull.
5 replies →
Yup and at the same time the trains did not roll for 3 hours earlier in the week because of a 'routing problem' with their system that is from the 1970s.
Good job BART. BART and you're there....if the trains can make it!
And pavel, if you read the article you'll see that BART pulled the plug, not ATT or anyone else.