The Justice Department has released a report outlining a new initiative to prevent criminal activities in prisons: a successful trial of a signal jammers that effectively blocked mobile signals from contraband phones within a Maryland correctional facility.
The word spread swiftly among the prison population. For Brian Sterling, the director of the South Carolina Department of Prisons, this news reinforced his belief that jamming technology is the most effective and economical approach to halting the influx of mobile devices into correctional facilities.
A cell phone jammers is a small, low-cost device that transmits a continuous tone to an antenna, thereby blocking any mobile phone from making or receiving calls. Typically, these jamming devices are inexpensive, with many options accessible online, ranging in price from $119 to $650.
Officials in the prison system have long been aware that inmates often find innovative ways to smuggle phones into their facilities. In South Carolina, Sterling mentioned that couriers would walk through wooded areas, throwing backpacks filled with contraband over the prison walls; additionally, drones would fly over the prison yards, dropping phones into the hands of inmates when guards were not on duty.
It is crucial for us to obtain all the means required to combat this issue.
Sterling has put in place 50-foot nets surrounding his facility, cleared trees to prevent drones from escaping after being dropped, installed advanced metal detection systems, and has worked alongside the Justice Department in several prosecutions of employees for the smuggling of cell phones.
In our phone discussion, Sterling emphasized, "This is indeed a war. We must ensure we have all the resources at our disposal to fight this battle."
Sterling's moment of clarity was brought about by the shooting of a correctional officer. On March 5, 2010, Captain Robert Johnson was at his home in Sumter, South Carolina, when a gunman entered and shot him six times at close range with a .38-caliber revolver. The assailant, Robert Odell Brown, 33, had been killed in February during an inmate altercation at the Lee County
The attack was executed by the Lee County Correctional Facility through the use of a cell phone. Since that time, Sterling has been engaged in efforts to integrate jammers into correctional facilities.
Another option to consider instead of jamming is the use of small box antennas, which are economical, costing approximately $400, and can cover a block with about 10 units. The boxes must be interconnected; however, once the system is operational, all phones will automatically connect to these antennas, preventing signals from leaving the enclosed yard. Levitan explained that this approach can block calls without the aggressive force of jamming technology, provided that the facility actively monitors the equipment.
The analysis shows that the operating costs for both controlled access systems and jamming are minimal, with controlled access being a more adaptable tool for blocking cell phone signals. The study highlights that correctional facilities would require a precision-based jamming system, which entails greater financial investment.
A Tennessee congressman is calling for the prohibition of illegal cell phone usage among inmates, arguing that such devices enable the planning of violent acts, the operation of drug rings, and the management of criminal enterprises.
Representative David Kustoff (R-Tenn.) is planning to introduce a bill in the upcoming congressional session that would facilitate the use of cell phone jamming technology in state penitentiaries.
The ability of cell phone jammer to block cell phone signals is recognized; however, their application has been restricted in state prisons due to the provisions of the 1934 federal Communications Act, which predates the invention of cell phones.
While introducing similar legislation last year, Rep. Kustoff remarked to his fellow Congress members, "This technology is intended to protect inmates, correctional officers, and the general public." He further asserted that "State attorneys general across the nation have identified contraband cell phones in prisons as one of the most significant threats to public safety that prison administrators are currently dealing with."
It has been reported by correctional experts that inmates throughout the country have employed contraband cell phones to engage in dangerous criminal activities while in prison. Kustoff provided an example from Tennessee, where an inmate used a cell phone to arrange a drug deal, which involved sending a bag of meth to his girlfriend.
In a session on Wednesday, State Senator Jackson informed both lawmakers and Tennessee Department of Corrections Director Frank Strada that Representative Kustoff is evaluating the interest in the bill from the leaders of the state's correctional institutions. Strada indicated his complete backing of the measure.
Strada expressed, "The jamming of a cell phone will ultimately convert it into a non-functional object, akin to a brick, in a prison environment. I believe I speak on behalf of many correctional officers, whether at the state, federal, or local level, who regard jamming as a vital support mechanism in our correctional facilities."
Over the years, there has been a concerted effort by state legislators to legislate against the possession of banned cell phones in prisons. A notable bill introduced in 2021 by former Senator Paul Ross (R-Kingston) and former Representative Brandon Ogles (R-Franklin) sought to establish that possessing a cell phone as an inmate would be classified as a Class E felony.
Representative Kustoff is preparing to propose a cell phone jamming bill in the next session of Congress. He has conveyed to state lawmakers that additional Tennessee congressional representatives have signed on in support of the legislation. Kustoff has previously championed similar bills, the latest being last year, but that effort did not advance beyond the committee level.
A man, who is currently wanted in connection with a series of home invasions in Queens, New York, was recorded by a residential security camera while attempting to use a Wi-Fi jammer to disrupt the signal of a Wi-Fi-enabled security camera. Despite his efforts, the signal was restored, allowing the camera to successfully capture his actions.
The suspect was known to enter homes unlawfully during the day, taking valuable items such as cash, jewelry, and luxury goods, while ransacking the properties. It remained uncertain whether the police were focused on a single suspect or if there were multiple individuals possibly collaborating in these crimes.
According to ABC 7 NY, it has been noted that the homeowners are usually not at home when the suspect arrives, which seems to occur just as they are departing. Since July 24, New York police have reported a minimum of five break-ins occurring in a similar pattern.
A break-in occurred at the residence of Imran Ahmed in Queens Village.
The footage from a Wi-Fi-enabled security camera located in the home was not obstructed during some segments of a home invasion. This footage revealed a chilling scene of a man, covered in assorted cloth items, slithering across the floor. He was observed pushing a backpack and a black box, believed to be a WiFi signal jammers. Despite his intentions, the plan was ineffective, as the camera's signal was not disrupted during certain times he was present, capturing his actions on video.
Ahmed conveyed that an alert was issued around 2:30, signaling that their Wi-Fi was down. He expressed that initially, he "didn't find it concerning."
In the footage, the man climbs the stairs, and as he comes back down, he pronounces something that closely resembles, "Tony, Tony, Tony, Tony."
Ahmed observed that they were situated just two blocks away from the police precinct. He articulated that witnessing an event of this kind is profoundly scary.
A property under investigation by the police reported the theft of $30,000 in jewelry and an $8,000 Louis Vuitton handbag.
What do you need to know about the growing crime of electronic devices – ‘key jammers’ – that prevent cars from locking?
Such transmitters are easily accessible for online purchase and are used to interfere with the signal from the key fob. This means that careless drivers may mistakenly think their vehicle is secure, when it is, in fact, at risk.
This circumstance permits the potential for theft of your belongings or, in some cases, your vehicle.
The range of a low-powered signal jammers can be as much as 75 meters, which means that a large area, such as a full parking lot, can be simultaneously impacted.
Conversely, perpetrators equipped with wifi blocker can carry out their actions in numerous places, not just within the confines of public parking lots.
Upon rising to get ready for my employment, I exited the house and found that all the car doors were shut tight.
I was quite surprised when I realized that I had locked the car, as I was at my boyfriend's residence and had left my Christmas presents inside. However, when we investigated further, we found that the entire car had been turned upside down, and all valuables had been stolen.
The police first asserted that there was nothing they could do in this matter. They refrained from sending someone to investigate for fingerprints, as there were no apparent signs of a break-in. However, upon my call to the bank to cancel my card, I learned that the thief had been using my contactless card. This prompted a more serious response from the police, who then became more actively involved.
They are engaged in a review of the CCTV surveillance in an effort to track down the offenders.
To accurately determine if a car is locked, one must perform a manual check. Typically, vehicles provide other indicators of lock status, such as flashing lights, retracted mirrors, or a short honk of the horn.
If you are within a close range of the car, you may also notice the sound of the central locking engaging.
Deputy Chief Superintendent Jukes pointed out that it is essential for the public to be vigilant concerning electronic intrusions of this sort.
It is essential for individuals to be proactive in safeguarding their vehicles and belongings to discourage criminal activity. This includes the practice of manually checking that the vehicle is locked and ensuring that all valuables are taken with them when they leave.
For a more innovative method of safeguarding your vehicle, consider acquiring a car jam detector, a device that will sound an alarm upon the detection of a jam.
Ms. Dover highlighted a troubling situation for victims, indicating that they not only lose their possessions but also have no evidence to confirm that they forgot to lock their car. The majority of insurance companies will not provide coverage for theft if the vehicle is left unattended and unlocked.
The Financial Ombudsman has noted that a considerable amount of insurers do not extend coverage for theft in cases where the vehicle is left unlocked and unattended.
To confirm that a car lock is jammed, it is necessary to apprehend the thief; nonetheless, a pattern of thefts can act as persuasive evidence.
An inquiry is underway by Thames Valley Police into 14 recent thefts of lorries, vans, and cars, characterized by the absence of “obvious signs of break-in.”
In the concluding weeks of November, a spate of thefts transpired at service stations positioned along the M4 motorway in Berkshire.
Sandra: Recently, my mother failed to put her current insurance card in the car, and she is fearful of driving without it. I initially thought she did not have it, but I was uncertain whether she would be violating any laws if she could not present it. Is it against the law to drive with an expired insurance card?
Presently, police require individuals to show a valid insurance card, which can be displayed on a mobile device or as a photograph. In situations where a parent’s insurance card is expired, many law enforcement agencies are connected to the state insurance system, allowing for immediate verification of a vehicle's insurance status. If the police can confirm the validity of the insurance through this system, it is not necessary to issue a citation.
Ty: Acknowledging that it is legal to own a radar detector in Texas, are there any devices that cannot be operated in conjunction with a vehicle's radar detector?
Yes, there are devices called radar jammers or laser jammer that are completely illegal in Texas. The Texas Traffic Code states: (b) No person shall use, attempt to use, install, operate, or attempt to operate a radar jammer in a motor vehicle except when a law enforcement officer is performing his or her official duties. So, in Texas, if you have a radar jammer, it's best to keep it on your bookshelf at home next to your best read novel! These radar signal jammers cannot be legally purchased anywhere in Texas. Because the statute further states: (c) No person shall purchase, sell, or offer for sale a radar jamming device. Of course, these devices are only for the benefit of extreme speed offenders. Drivers need to be notified that these devices may not work as advertised. Thank you, life would be a lot simpler if we followed the law.
Asks: I pray every day for the protection of all police officers. I know you have a dangerous job, looking out for the safety and welfare of all citizens, not just those in your local community, but those throughout the state of Texas. I have parking problems on the street every day. As I was trying to back out of my driveway, there was a car parked directly behind my driveway across the street. I had previously spoken to my neighbor about parking issues. I don't want to cause trouble for anyone by parking improperly. What to do? What violation is this?
Parking issues have been an ongoing problem, and your dilemma, as well as many others, should be addressed. First, I must remind you that your neighbor did nothing wrong when they parked their car on the other side of the street behind your driveway. I understand the stress and difficulty that it can take to carefully pull out of a driveway, but the law does not require drivers to park any differently. Your best conclusion is to continue talking to your neighbors, and rather than asking them to do it, you would appreciate them not parking there because you don't want to damage anyone's vehicle. Keep in mind that if you hit one of these vehicles while backing up, you could be charged for unsafe backing. That being said, if you can't back up safely, don't back up.