# Cell Phone Headache



## zepherdude (May 16, 2011)

Amtrak made an unscheduled stop outside Salem. Oregon to kick off a 39 year old lady that had been talking on her cell phone since Oakland, California. The article stated she ignored requests not to use her phone and became confrontational. She calmed down as police escorted her off the train.

It must have been the Coast Starlight on the way to PDX and SEA.

I have observed passengers around me doing the same. On a train from SAS to DFW, a person talked the whole time about her trip, her husband, her sons, her club duties, her dinner party and her friends and did not understand why the train was stopping so much. If she would have shut up long enough to hear the track work announcements, she would have known. I finally went to the bar car to consume heavy drink as I was seated right behind her. I came back with a cane borrowed from a passenger up front only to find she was gone.

I had a sales manager once make a presentation to me once. His phone kept ringing and he kept taking the calls. I stood up finally and said, "when you have time for me, call me and I will listen." I have never owned a cell phone until this year and have managed quite well. I do not know my number.

http://www.kmtr.com/...AQ.cspx?rss=191


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 16, 2011)

I do not feel that the problem is the mobile phone itself. Rather, I believe it is the ignorant and arrogant people who use them inappropriately. I came to this conclusion after several very quiet train rides in Japan. Everyone was communicating with their mobile phone, but not a single person was talking or otherwise disturbing the peace.


----------



## the_traveler (May 16, 2011)

I usually travel coach in the Quiet Car between WAS and KIN. One time I traveled BC, because it was part of an AGR sleeper award. Just after boarding, a large number of people (10-15) began using their cell phones - while we were still at the station! The thing is - this train began in WAS!


----------



## MrJake (May 16, 2011)

It's quite easy to use a cell phone on a train in a quiet and respectful manner. If this person didn't have a cell phone, she would have found another way to be obnoxious. Annoying people are always annoying.


----------



## GlobalistPotato (May 16, 2011)

zepherdude said:


> Amtrak made an unscheduled stop outside Salem. Oregon to kick off a 39 year old lady that had been talking on her cell phone since Oakland, California. The article stated she ignored requests not to use her phone and became confrontational. She calmed down as police escorted her off the train.
> 
> It must have been the Coast Starlight on the way to PDX and SEA.
> 
> ...


That's 16 hours. 16 HOURS!!  And she was on her cell phone all that time? Unbelievable...


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (May 16, 2011)

Hats off to Amtrak for kicking her off. That's just more reason those things should be completely outlawed. And as you can obviously guess, I do not have one.


----------



## HotlantaAl (May 16, 2011)

These are very illegal, but a cell phone jammer would do wonders in such rail cars. And no, I don't have one. Wish I did, but I travel in the sleeper so I don't need one.


----------



## Ryan (May 16, 2011)

daxomni said:


> I do not feel that the problem is the mobile phone itself. Rather, I believe it is the ignorant and arrogant people who use them inappropriately. I came to this conclusion after several very quiet train rides in Japan. Everyone was communicating with their mobile phone, but not a single person was talking or otherwise disturbing the peace.


Exactly this.

And as another poster mentioned, you can take away the cell phone, but you can't take away the annoyance. Rude and inconsiderate is rude an inconsiderate, cell phone or not.


----------



## the_traveler (May 16, 2011)

If someone on the train did have a cell phone jammer, it would disrupt the whole train - including the sleepers, the credit card machines from the cafe and Dining Car, and the Conductor who calls ahead or calls Amtrak to obtain an onboard upgrade!


----------



## HotlantaAl (May 16, 2011)

the_traveler said:


> If someone on the train did have a cell phone jammer, it would disrupt the whole train - including the sleepers, the credit card machines from the cafe and Dining Car, and the Conductor who calls ahead or calls Amtrak to obtain an onboard upgrade!


LOL, you saying an 800MHz phone jammer will wipe out the entire radio spectrum all the way down to the VHF frequencies the railroads use?





I dont think the technology is that powerful. It doesn't take much to over ride a 800MHz cell signal.


----------



## fillyjonk (May 16, 2011)

daxomni said:


> I do not feel that the problem is the mobile phone itself. Rather, I believe it is the ignorant and arrogant people who use them inappropriately. I came to this conclusion after several very quiet train rides in Japan. Everyone was communicating with their mobile phone, but not a single person was talking or otherwise disturbing the peace.


This is partly why I always try to travel in a roomette - at least I can close the door to get away a bit from the cell phone users. I also carry ear plugs with me and would not be at all averse to very OBVIOUSLY and OSTENTATIOUSLY putting them in if I were in coach sitting next to a cell-phone addict. Or other obnoxious people. Back before Amtrak forbade people bringing their own booze on board, I remember a couple guys (this was in coach) emptying a bottle of Southern Comfort between the two of them. They got louder as the bottle got emptier. I kept hoping they'd fall asleep but no such luck.

Seriously, I don't get the constant cell-phone use. I don't have that much stuff I want to say. Even to my family, which I love A LOT.


----------



## bobnabq (May 16, 2011)

zepherdude said:


> Amtrak made an unscheduled stop outside Salem. Oregon to kick off a 39 year old lady that had been talking on her cell phone since Oakland, California.


Surfing the net, among the 6 trillion items suggested you put in your carry on, was a pair of ear plugs.

I think I'll make the investment. 

I should buy a pair for all around me, as I've been told I snore like an old grizzly. :giggle:


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 16, 2011)

bobnabq said:


> zepherdude said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak made an unscheduled stop outside Salem. Oregon to kick off a 39 year old lady that had been talking on her cell phone since Oakland, California.
> ...


I can just mute my hearing aids or take them out. :giggle:


----------



## The Chief (May 16, 2011)

Glad to read this loud, obnoxious person got tossed, and sweet that she was arrested for disorderly conduct. Another "I'm-the-most-important-person-in-the-world syndrome." Society, courtesy and manners continue to disintegrate.

Like others have posted, I, too, always take *Roomette* or *Bedroom*. Once on *Empire Builder* westbound in 2006 from Chicago I had to ask conductor to please get nearby roomette pax to turn down volume on their portable DVR player which was _very_ loud and annoying as heck.


----------



## ch (May 16, 2011)

Yes, I agree - hats off to Amtrak!! I just can't understand why the everyone else had to suffer all the way from Oakland to Salem!! That must have felt like days of unnecessary agony.

I have dreamed of train travel most of my life (now 61) but our first trip was recently. (Portland to Vancouver BC).

I was so pleasantly surprised to hear this rule announced and that people obeyed. If only Amtrak's civility could spread to every public place.

Someone mentioned rude people will be rude with or with cell phones. True. But meanwhile, we only aid and abet the problem by sitting silently and passively on the side.

ch


----------



## fairviewroad (May 16, 2011)

While I have no particular sympathy to someone who acts so rudely, I'm a little surprised at reports that train

personnel reportedly told ALL passengers to cease using their cell phones:



> Police say she had reportedly been on the phone almost continuously since boarding in Oakland, Calif., even though operators had repeatedly asked riders not to use their cell phones.


Sounds like a case of Amtrak personnel making up policy "on the go."

That said....here's a link to the "walk of shame"

http://salem.katu.com/news/crime/police-stop-train-after-complaints-about-passenger-talking-phone/440466


----------



## zepherdude (May 16, 2011)

fairviewroad said:


> While I have no particular sympathy to someone who acts so rudely, I'm a little surprised at reports that train
> 
> personnel reportedly told ALL passengers to cease using their cell phones:
> 
> ...


Cool Clip, Thank You!


----------



## transit54 (May 16, 2011)

HotlantaAl said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > If someone on the train did have a cell phone jammer, it would disrupt the whole train - including the sleepers, the credit card machines from the cafe and Dining Car, and the Conductor who calls ahead or calls Amtrak to obtain an onboard upgrade!
> ...


No...he's saying that if the conductor calls Amtrak regarding an on board upgrade (i.e. uses a cell phone) that will be disrupted. The credit card terminals operate over a cellular connection, too. Obviously the power the jammer would affect it's range, but the point is that it could disrupt other services on the train. Additionally, as trains become equipped with WiFi, it would have the possibility to knock out internet for the train, which is delivered over a cellular connection (except in particular NEC stations, where Amtrak's system uses the station's WiFi for backhaul of data).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 16, 2011)

ch said:


> Someone mentioned rude people will be rude with or with cell phones. True. But meanwhile, we only aid and abet the problem by sitting silently and passively on the side.


I don't support the passive aggressive stuff like jamming transmissions, but neither do I think anyone should simply sit back and take it. It's up to all of us to speak up if our rights are being infringed upon. If the offending person or group looks too threatening to you then go get a car attendant or conductor to do the talking for you. If the perpetrator(s) still won't stop then find some other passengers who will back you up and ask the conductor to kick them off. There are lots of things you can to do to turn this tide without having to ban or jam every phone and without having to suffer in silence. The OP story itself would appear to be proof of that. If anyone *chooses* to suffer in silence that's *their* decision and nobody else's.


----------



## the_traveler (May 16, 2011)

transit54 said:


> HotlantaAl said:
> 
> 
> > the_traveler said:
> ...


Thank you!



That's exactly what I meant, not the railroad frequencies!


----------



## TacoMan (May 16, 2011)

Doesn't sound like the real issue here was the cell phone it sounds like the issue is the way it was used. If someone uses a cell phone and talks in a quiet voice it doesn't bother me at all. I rode on Greyhound beside a lady who used her cellphone most of the trip and I barely noticed. I will have my phone with me when I leave tomorrow but will use it discretely and talk in a respectable tone so not to bother other passengers.


----------



## Ispolkom (May 16, 2011)

fairviewroad said:


> While I have no particular sympathy to someone who acts so rudely, I'm a little surprised at reports that train
> 
> personnel reportedly told ALL passengers to cease using their cell phones:
> 
> ...


This was an overnight trip (the Coast Starlight leaves Oakland at 9:42 p.m.). On the Empire Builder the coach attendant generally reminds passengers not to use cellphones in the coaches after 10 p.m. Perhaps the Coast Starlight has a similar policy. Seems reasonable to me, since passengers who want to make calls can go to the Sightseer Lounge, where they won't bother sleepers. Well, except for the lounge lizards.

It seems odd, though, that they let her talk all night, and then threw her off the train the next afternoon.


----------



## George B (May 16, 2011)

fairviewroad said:


> While I have no particular sympathy to someone who acts so rudely, I'm a little surprised at reports that train
> 
> personnel reportedly told ALL passengers to cease using their cell phones:
> 
> ...


Awesome! It warms my heart to see this! Notice that they didn't even bother to put out the portable step for her, as it can still be seen hanging on the wall behind her in the vestibule. I wonder if she gave the car attendant a decent tip despite that...............


----------



## Grandpa D (May 16, 2011)

fairviewroad said:


> ....here's a link to the "walk of shame"
> http://salem.katu.co...ng-phone/440466


Just saw that video on Fox News. It was the kicker (humorous final story) of a newscast. :giggle:


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (May 16, 2011)

daxomni said:


> It's up to all of us to speak up if our rights are being infringed upon.


Except for possibly in the designated Quiet Car, I don't think we have a right to silence from all our fellow passengers.


----------



## leemell (May 16, 2011)

transit54 said:


> HotlantaAl said:
> 
> 
> > the_traveler said:
> ...


The portable jammers that I have seen only reach about 10M at most and many times only 3M. That is not even half the length of the coach cars. I saw a couple tested in an RF anechoic chamber with a spectrograph. Very low power.


----------



## HotlantaAl (May 16, 2011)

leemell said:


> The portable jammers that I have seen only reach about 10M at most and many times only 3M. That is not even half the length of the coach cars. I saw a couple tested in an RF anechoic chamber with a spectrograph. Very low power.



Thank you!



That's exactly what I meant, very low power!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 16, 2011)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> daxomni said:
> 
> 
> > It's up to all of us to speak up if our rights are being infringed upon.
> ...


Nobody said anything about demanding "silence," but thanks for yet another of your pointless straw man arguments.


----------



## Cristobal (May 16, 2011)

GlobalistPotato said:


> zepherdude said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak made an unscheduled stop outside Salem. Oregon to kick off a 39 year old lady that had been talking on her cell phone since Oakland, California. The article stated she ignored requests not to use her phone and became confrontational. She calmed down as police escorted her off the train.
> ...


That's not even possible. There are many cell phone 'dead zones' through that region as the CS winds through the mountains of northern CA/southern OR. Of course, she looks like the type that would become even louder and more enraged every time she dropped a call. I'd be willing to bet that it was one too many middle-of-the-night tirades that actually got her tossed off the train.


----------



## lthanlon (May 16, 2011)

Click through to that video's YouTube page to see shocking racism in its full glory. Must be laundry day for so many white sheets to be flapping in the wind. Very distressing.


----------



## The Chief (May 16, 2011)

There are some great and hilarious readers' comments on this ^ story about this aggressive, threatening and loud phone-using pax from Portland Oregonlive.

This story is getting bigger, one may say it's blowin' up the phone,,,

edit adding destination location / mileage,,,

Some posters wondered why toss her near Salem instead of earlier,,,stories indicate she was going to Tigard, Oregon, a Portland suburb town, only about 40 miles from Salem. So it was to her benefit, as stories say she was picked up at the PD by a family member.


----------



## Rider (May 16, 2011)

Yeah - once again going with consensus - not a thing wrong in the world with cell phones - what is the problem is idiots with them. Kinda like idiots behind the wheel of cars - nothing wrong with cars (except gas guzzling). It's the idiots.

Here's my political platform: "It's the idiots, stupid."

Cell phone jammers? Gimme a break. Silly idea. I use my phone on the train, but softly. And would quickly desist, or move to the cafe, if asked.

We do all (including me) have to learn to speak up and tell people to shut up. Or, if we feel intimidated, we have to go find an attendant or a conductor (always one or two in the cafe) and complain.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 17, 2011)

I had a issue on the	CS last year with a A Very cranky	DCA . she barked at me for having my phone on me ..

"no electronics in the dining car" .....

I told her " I guess your watch is first "

My US Airforce Aux ( CAP ) work while on duty is	way more important then some ladys wishful thinkings on a bloddy train .

""Mam My job is to take calls from FEMA CALEMA US Air Force and other GOV entity's and then dispatch CAP assets to save lives .

I would call my job when on duty to be vital to the state of CA and her people .

If I do not take My phone calls while on duty people in CA could die ! .

And Interfering with my job in any way is on par by law as interfering with a LEO investigation . I looked it up .. not	good .""""

She was not pleased with my response .

Peter .....


----------



## The Crazy Vacationer (May 17, 2011)

This story made the evening news in Minneapolis-St. Paul.

I applaud Amtrak from removing annoying cell phone users. Apparently, she became verbally abusive to nearby passengers when they asked her to talk a little less loudly. What is it about cell phones that makes people think they need to yell? I see this all the time.


----------



## George B (May 17, 2011)

Peter KG6LSE said:


> I had a issue on the	CS last year with a A Very cranky	DCA . she barked at me for having my phone on me ..
> 
> "no electronics in the dining car" .....
> 
> ...


Just because you are associated with a non-profit corporation that has a charter with the United States Congress (which is all that CAP is) does not in any way give you Law Enforcement powers. Nor are you UCMJ, so you do not have military powers. Be careful about presenting yourself as having either of those. Neither the military or law enforcement have a sense of humor about presenting yourself as being sworn, or trying to give the impression that you have those powers.

A MAJOR component of CAP is public relations, and you did a disservice to that by reacting the way you did. I am on-call 24/7, even during vacations, and there are many ways to be compliant with rules and requests of the crew and still be reachable via cellphone. Just put the thing on vibrate and stick it in your pocket. If the phone vibrates and you need to take a call, then excuse yourself to an area where you can take the call and not bother anybody. If you are on alert and have to answer a phone immediately, then let the conductor and the crew know ahead of time. Just because you might be called for an emergency doesn’t mean you have to act like you are in an emergency all of the time.

Do you think that the attendant, or anybody else that might have heard you, has a favorable impression of CAP after that? I’ve been on-call for 16 years, and it isn’t hard to be courteous to others about your cell phone use, yet make sure you are available.


----------



## MrJake (May 17, 2011)

Lots of dog-whistle racism in the comments on this story from the various news sites. Makes me sad.


----------



## fairviewroad (May 17, 2011)

George B said:


> Do you think that the attendant, or anybody else that might have heard you, has a favorable impression of CAP after that?


No worries. If the conversation actually took place as reported, I don't think anyone who overheard will have the slightest

clue what CAP is.


----------



## George B (May 17, 2011)

fairviewroad said:


> George B said:
> 
> 
> > Do you think that the attendant, or anybody else that might have heard you, has a favorable impression of CAP after that?
> ...


Very true!


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 17, 2011)

Lets see I NEVER said I was a cop . I have NO arrest powers . But Like a Post man or a EMS or a Cop while on duty any assult or hiderince is not takeing lightly .

Second I had My phone IN my pocket ON vibrate . and I GOT a call ffrom CALEMA . I took the call and was walkimg to the lounge car to get My duty binder out to take down Mission notes and other data..

On the way That is when she gave me her undeeded opinion .. and taht is when I gave her a the speech .

I see no need to tell the conductor that iam On duty . normaly I never have a issue with others second guessing why iam on a cell phone .

In fact interifering with ANYONE during a lifesaving operation is a crime . ANY call I get is assumed to me to be a pritty critiacal call

This really applyes to anyone

if you stop a Md on a train from him doing his job after HE or She has decided to take on the case of a person who is sick and taht person dies as a DIRECT result of a nothers persons actions . that person can be charged witha crime .

this is all I was reminng her off . While I was on the phone .

EDIT: My policy is to take the call while leaving or getting up so IT do not risk it dropping to voice mail .

had I waited to take it in the lounge I would have missed it and teh CALEMA number isnot caller ID on my phone SO I have no way to call them back ..

NOW the USAFRCC I Do have the direct line with and I do with them refuse teh call and call back in a few seconds if I need to .

Perhaps I gave her a hard time but i am SO sick of anyone bothering me .

people are way to nosy and I hate it SO much .

..........................

Now On the flip side ALL my teachers and friends are aware what I do and know if its a call I need to take that itrs for work not fun

I deal with them on a day to day basis and are FAR more likely to be involved with me being called .

and lets face it

A) most conducotrs would not know CAP from a fly on the wall and would not care ...

B) they are super busy . Esp the dude I had to deal with on teh CS that day .

he was teh same cranky dude who was VERY rude to 2 Chinese sudents with a 2 Inch to large cary on bag In Eugene . ( the handle poked out too far )

I all readdy knew He was not approchable .....

Perhaps I need to make a form to hand to people to let it do the taking ...

peter...


----------



## SP&S (May 17, 2011)

The Crazy Vacationer said:


> This story made the evening news in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
> 
> I applaud Amtrak from removing annoying cell phone users. Apparently, she became verbally abusive to nearby passengers when they asked her to talk a little less loudly. What is it about cell phones that makes people think they need to yell? I see this all the time.


When you speak into a regular landline phone, you hear yourself thru the earpiece. In most cell phones, you don't hear yourself at all. This causes people to, unconsciously, raise their voice to compensate. It's still irritating as anything. I applaud the crew for their actions, but if she'd been loudly yammering all the way from Oakland I'm surprised she didn't get the boot earlier, say in Dunsmuir.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 17, 2011)

SP&S said:


> The Crazy Vacationer said:
> 
> 
> > This story made the evening news in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
> ...


 Maybe they needed to wait till they could get the news cameras in place.


----------



## leemell (May 17, 2011)

SP&S said:


> The Crazy Vacationer said:
> 
> 
> > This story made the evening news in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
> ...


Hearing yourself in the earpiece is referred to as sidetone. With regard to cell phones, most have some sidetone, a few have none. A fairly decent article on telephone sidetone is here.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 17, 2011)

Side tone is a HUGE help with phones . I use it witth My ham HTs and Skype . Why its not a option on all phones is beyond me . Its a software re route for the audio Bit stream .

Anyone here Know some C?

I do NOT use bluetooth ear plug I use a Modded motorrola Pro Headset I added BT too ( soon a david clark headset some day soon ) for My gear . I added a Small Class D Amp to run a sidetone but I need to replace the batts ..... I wantted to tap in to the BT batt but its 3V not 5 so Its not going to run ..

Peter


----------



## John Bredin (May 17, 2011)

George B said:


> Just because you are associated with a non-profit corporation that has a charter with the United States Congress (which is all that CAP is) does not in any way give you Law Enforcement powers. Nor are you UCMJ, so you do not have military powers. Be careful about presenting yourself as having either of those. Neither the military or law enforcement have a sense of humor about presenting yourself as being sworn, or trying to give the impression that you have those powers.
> A MAJOR component of CAP is public relations, and you did a disservice to that by reacting the way you did. I am on-call 24/7, even during vacations, and there are many ways to be compliant with rules and requests of the crew and still be reachable via cellphone. Just put the thing on vibrate and stick it in your pocket. If the phone vibrates and you need to take a call, then excuse yourself to an area where you can take the call and not bother anybody. If you are on alert and have to answer a phone immediately, then let the conductor and the crew know ahead of time. Just because you might be called for an emergency doesn’t mean you have to act like you are in an emergency all of the time.
> 
> Do you think that the attendant, or anybody else that might have heard you, has a favorable impression of CAP after that? I’ve been on-call for 16 years, and it isn’t hard to be courteous to others about your cell phone use, yet make sure you are available.


While I agree with most of this, I have to ask with regards to:



> If the phone vibrates and you need to take a call, then excuse yourself to an area where you can take the call and not bother anybody.


If I'm on the train and I run into someone I know, do we have to go "to an area where [we will] not bother anybody" before having a live conversation? :blink: :wacko:

IMHO, the touchstone for cell phone usage is live conversation. If you're in a time or place where having a live conversation would be rude -- theater, church, quiet car, middle of the night in a coach or sleeper -- then having a cell phone conversation would also be rude. Conversely, however, if you're in a time and place where having a live conversation is normal and acceptable, then taking or making a phone call is also acceptable so long as you're not louder than normal conversation.

Being courteous to others is a two-way street, and a train car is neither a cocktail party on one hand nor a monk's cell on the other. Unless it's the middle of the night or I'm in a quiet car, I shouldn't have to retreat to a vestibule because my phone rings.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 17, 2011)

John Bredin said:


> If I'm on the train and I run into someone I know, do we have to go "to an area where [we will] not bother anybody" before having a live conversation?


It's not quite the same though. The human ear can pick out words at a much softer level when spoken live than when played through a tiny cell phone speaker. As mentioned there is also the sidetone level issue that can inadvertently promote louder than normal speaking and louder than the phone actually requires to function. There are also visual cues and body language that can help fill in the blanks where a softly spoken word is missed that simply don't work over the phone. In some cases the person on the other end is in a much noisier location and so the person in the quiet area will shout in order to be heard, and some people just shout everything all the time in order to avoid repeating themselves. Unlike a live conversation, the person on the phone is unlikely to notice anyone getting annoyed with their unnecessarily loud voice before it has already become a major problem. In the end these differences can conspire to make for a far more annoying experience than two folks having a conversation in person. Mobile phones require us to pay more attention to the sound of our own voice and how it's impacting those who are around us. Unfortunately that's a message that seems to be lost on many and even the folks who witness this often choose to suffer in silence rather than speak up and help perpetuate the problem through inaction. Or at least that's the way I see it.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 17, 2011)

John Bredin said:


> George B said:
> 
> 
> > Just because you are associated with a non-profit corporation that has a charter with the United States Congress (which is all that CAP is) does not in any way give you Law Enforcement powers. Nor are you UCMJ, so you do not have military powers. Be careful about presenting yourself as having either of those. Neither the military or law enforcement have a sense of humor about presenting yourself as being sworn, or trying to give the impression that you have those powers.
> ...


Exactly . and this is why I was to be honist ticked off !

and that is also why i was in teh longe car til after my shift was over so i would not disturbe anyone taht night

whats also is a factor was It was not My day to be on call till the next day after I was off the train . But My CO needed some one to fill in for a few hours and Well I got a call at dinner .

I would Never go in a thetre or a place like that while On duty call . Its seting up a disaster !!. but to any NORMAL person a dining carr is not a theatre .

This was HER problem not mine .


----------



## George B (May 17, 2011)

John Bredin said:


> George B said:
> 
> 
> > Just because you are associated with a non-profit corporation that has a charter with the United States Congress (which is all that CAP is) does not in any way give you Law Enforcement powers. Nor are you UCMJ, so you do not have military powers. Be careful about presenting yourself as having either of those. Neither the military or law enforcement have a sense of humor about presenting yourself as being sworn, or trying to give the impression that you have those powers.
> ...


You make a good point…..there are people who can chat for hours on their cell phone while they are sitting next to people and not bother a soul. There are people who can talk for three minutes to the person next to them and drive everybody nuts. I was referring to compliance with requests from crew members. If an attendant or a conductor states that phone calls are not to be taken in particular cars, as has been announced on most trains I have been on, then I will try my best to comply with that. I have to keep my phone with me at all times, but when it is on vibrate and out of site on my person, nobody is really going to notice it. And, if they do, as long as I don’t use it (including not using data services), then nobody bothers me about it.

When I travel by train, the entity I work for that requires I be on-call knows in advance that cell coverage on trains can be very spotty. If it is during a period of time where I have to be able to answer or return a call within seconds or minutes, then I cannot travel by train. Often, I cannot travel at all. So, if you are “on-duty” and are required to answer an incoming call immediately, I don’t know why you would be on a train anyway.

The only cars where cell phone usage has been discouraged or not allowed by the crew has been in the Dining Car and in some Coach Cars. Sleepers have never been mentioned. But, common courtesy should tell people that on a train, your phone should be on vibrate most of the time, or a combination of low-volume ring and vibrate. That doesn’t always work for some people for a variety of reasons. But, most people could get by with vibrate during the daytime.


----------



## henryj (May 18, 2011)

Glad she got kicked off, but Amtrak should have done it sooner. I was on a city bus(an express bus) going home to Katy from downtown Houston and experienced the same thing. This women was talking on her phone before the bus arrive, continued to talk all the way out to Katy, a 45 min trip, and when I left the park and ride in my car I noticed she was sitting on the bench still talking. The bus driver got so rattled that he missed his exit and had to circle back. They don't say in the article what language she was using, but the one I experienced was dropping the F and MF bomb with every other word and talking all about her sexual relations and who had what std and on and on. To experience that for 16 hours non stop would be excruciating to say the least. Probably the best solution would be to accidently just spill your drink on her as you made your way down the aisle. :lol:


----------



## busboy (May 18, 2011)

Peter KG6LSE said:


> Lets see I NEVER said I was a cop . I have NO arrest powers . But Like a Post man or a EMS or a Cop while on duty any assult or hiderince is not takeing lightly .
> 
> Second I had My phone IN my pocket ON vibrate . and I GOT a call ffrom CALEMA . I took the call and was walkimg to the lounge car to get My duty binder out to take down Mission notes and other data..
> 
> ...



If your role is so vital, and you need to be in constant telephonic contact with your underlings who await your orders to launch the fleet, then why in the world would you be on a train. A train which travels thru mountainous rural areas where cell phone signals are not available. If your function is that important, you should be at home or in your office where there's no chance of missing one of those important calls. After all, as you indicated, lives are on the line.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 18, 2011)

If your role is so vital, and you need to be in constant telephonic contact with your underlings who await your orders to launch the fleet, then why in the world would you be on a train

Once again I was not scheduled to be on call till after I got off !!!! .

I was asked to Fill in for some one else as they got sick.

I told My CO	that I was on a train and I was not the best pick to fill In . He said he had no one else who would fill in . would YOU	back talk YOUR boss . No .

""""""with your underlings who await your orders to launch the fleet,""""

I am not a high up person . People under me are a few cadets and new Coms Ops .

what I do is a EXACTLY what a 911 operator does .. I take down mission info and find Who can take the mission I Am basically a dispatcher . :help:

the Incident commanders	are the people who Run the missions .

I call the ICs a to see who can take the Mission . and I have only 30 min to find one .

once a IC has the ball ..Its out of my hands . Till I get another call .

EDIT spelling .

Peter


----------



## DET63 (May 18, 2011)

From the KATU report:



> Lakeysha Beard of Tigard was charged with disorderly conduct after police said she got into a “verbal altercation” with passengers on the train. The other passengers complained she refused to put down her cell phone, even after train staff made repeated announcements for passengers to not use cell phones, according to police.
> ...
> 
> Beard was taken into custody until a family member could come and pick her up.
> ...


While she was in custody, was she allowed to make a phone call?

When KATU tried to contact her, did they get a busy signal (or get re-routed to her voice mail)?


----------



## busboy (May 18, 2011)

Peter KG6LSE said:


> Once again I was not scheduled to be on call till after I got off !!!! .
> 
> I was asked to Fill in for some one else as they got sick.
> 
> I told My CO	that I was on a train and I was not the best pick to fill In . He said he had no one else who would fill in . would YOU	back talk YOUR boss . No .


I wouldn't "talk back" to my boss, but I would politely say something like... "Currently I'm on a train which is traveling thru many areas with limited or no cell signal. Any other time I would be happy to take your shift, but right now it simply isn't possible. To accept such an assignment would be irresponsible on my part because I may not be able to fulfill my duty."

something like that.

Or, if it's really that important to have constant cell phone connectivity, and lives were at stake, and you simply cannot say no to your boss, I'd get off at the next stop and sit there with my phone, ready to take the next call, and figure out how to reach my destination after my critical shift was over.

Anyway, lets just drop this, it really doesn't have anything to do with Amtrak or trains.


----------



## tp49 (May 18, 2011)

henryj said:


> Glad she got kicked off, but Amtrak should have done it sooner. I was on a city bus(an express bus) going home to Katy from downtown Houston and experienced the same thing. This women was talking on her phone before the bus arrive, continued to talk all the way out to Katy, a 45 min trip, and when I left the park and ride in my car I noticed she was sitting on the bench still talking. The bus driver got so rattled that he missed his exit and had to circle back. They don't say in the article what language she was using, but the one I experienced was dropping the F and MF bomb with every other word and talking all about her sexual relations and who had what std and on and on. To experience that for 16 hours non stop would be excruciating to say the least. Probably the best solution would be to accidently just spill your drink on her as you made your way down the aisle. :lol:


In most places that would be grounds for justifiable homicide :lol:


----------



## singwith (May 18, 2011)

News reported she was on "quiet car". Is there "quiet car" on Coast Starlight?


----------



## zepherdude (May 18, 2011)

singwith said:


> News reported she was on "quiet car". Is there "quiet car" on Coast Starlight?


No Quiet Car on CS

I have wondered about the request for all passengers to shut off phones. Maybe this was announced just for her benefit. Someone above mentioned no use of cell phones in the dining car. While a courtesy not to use them at dinner, I have never seen a hard fast rule not to use them that location. Just wondering.


----------



## frugalist (May 18, 2011)

Isn't there a quiet-time rule during the overnight hours? Starting at something like 10pm?


----------



## chandj (May 18, 2011)

daxomni said:


> ch said:
> 
> 
> > Someone mentioned rude people will be rude with or with cell phones. True. But meanwhile, we only aid and abet the problem by sitting silently and passively on the side.
> ...


Sounds like some pretty long-suffering, patient people on that train--sixteen HOURS!! Your advice about how to speak up safely is good. You never know when a person that rude could get violent.


----------



## George B (May 18, 2011)

busboy said:


> Peter KG6LSE said:
> 
> 
> > Once again I was not scheduled to be on call till after I got off !!!! .
> ...



His role of holding lives in his hands seems to be diminished the more he has to explain it, so let’s just let it all speak for itself.

There would be no need for him to talk back to your boss on this anyway because an organization that holds lives in their hands would not keep California’s Emergency Response organizations tied to a single person with a cell phone….especially one on a train.

I like his comparison of his job to a 9-1-1 operator. Hmmmm……can’t think of the last time I saw a 9-1-1 operator on duty using a cell phone on a train. Things must be different in California. Perhaps the gal that got kicked off the Coast Starlight the other day was working her shift for Oakland PD’s 9-1-1 from her seat. I’d be pretty upset with the crew, too, if I was trying to take 9-1-1 calls all night and the people around me ratted me out. I wonder if she dispatched Salem PD herself from her phone.


----------



## fairviewroad (May 18, 2011)

singwith said:


> News reported she was on "quiet car". Is there "quiet car" on Coast Starlight?


Yeah, I noticed that too. Weird. This article even goes as far to detail the history of "quiet cars"

and accepts as fact that the yakker was riding in a designated "quiet car." And yet the CS does

not have designated Quiet Cars, both in my recent on-board experience and as noted in the

current timetable. (In fact, I'm not aware of any LD trains with "quiet cars")

Probably Amtrak doesn't want to come out and correct this kind of thing because they would

have to explain why:

1. They don't offer "quiet cars" on more routes.

and

2. And why, Amtrak policy notwithstanding, the on-board crew felt the need to unilaterally prohibit

cell phone use (assuming that's even true, which I'm starting to doubt.)


----------



## AlanB (May 18, 2011)

zepherdude said:


> singwith said:
> 
> 
> > News reported she was on "quiet car". Is there "quiet car" on Coast Starlight?
> ...


While there have been a few reports of dining car crews making up rules that do not exist, there is no rule against cell phones in the dining car. I can see, support, and understand a crew asking someone who is just yaking away with no end in sight to either hang up or leave the car for the moment, but they have no authority to tell people that they cannot bring their phones with them into the car.

Like wise, there are no rules against cell phone useage in the coaches, unless you are on a train with a quiet car and then only in that specific & well marked car are you forbidden to use your phone to talk. That said, I can see a crew asking people to refrain from using their phones after 10 PM and to either turn them off or set them to vibrate.

All that said, if someone's language and/or the conversation is not appropriate, that would also be cause for a conductor to step in and ask for the conversation to cease. And failure to comply would be grounds for the conductor to kick you off the train.


----------



## Tumbleweed (May 18, 2011)

Here's an idea....there should be a "penalty box" car for trouble makers......


----------



## HotlantaAl (May 18, 2011)

Tumbleweed said:


> Here's an idea....there should be a "penalty box" car for trouble makers......


Hmmm...How about a sound proof booth?


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 18, 2011)

Yahoo Home Page has the Video from "Good Morning America' Showing her being escorted off the Train Under Arrest after Talking 16 Hours Non-Stop in a Quiet Car from Oakland to Salem,OR.  She became Belligerent with fellow Passengers and OBS and the Conductor, hence "Say Good NIght Gracie"! Next Train is after Making Bail! About Time, Americans have become Cell Phone and I-Pad Junkies! :help:


----------



## Trogdor (May 19, 2011)

http://www.pleaseshutup.com/hidden-videos/#/video/train


----------



## singwith (May 19, 2011)

Reading all your comments, I guess there's no "Quiet Car" on #14 & #11. (also no on #5 & 6?)

When I was on train #6(from Omaha to SAC), a lady front of me using her celphone every 10 mins or ringing her celphone every 10 mins. Thanks God she got off the train somewhere in NE but I just hate celphone ringing!


----------



## WhoozOn1st (May 19, 2011)

Clip from the HBO series "Curb Your Enthusiasm:" Larry isn't impressed by the guy sitting next to him at the restaurant talking on the hands free so he decides to play him at his own game...


----------



## WhoozOn1st (May 22, 2011)

This Los Angeles Times editorial begins with the intransigent talker on the Coast Starlight, then widens the issue to public cell phone use as a general nuisance.

Quit your yakking (print edition headline)

"The question of how to cope with cellphones in public has been a thorny issue for more than a decade. But what's heartening here is that Amtrak officials did something assertive on behalf of the suffering passengers after the woman broke the rule forbidding cellphone use in coach cars at night."


----------



## PaulM (May 22, 2011)

The incident even triggered an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. The gist of the article was that going out into public nowadays and expecting not to be subjected to a lot of noise is the new rude.

The author also mentioned the quiet car. Do you think the crew took it upon themselves to declare a quiet car?


----------



## PRR 60 (May 22, 2011)

PaulM said:


> The incident even triggered an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. The gist of the article was that going out into public nowadays and expecting not to be subjected to a lot of noise is the new rude.
> 
> The author also mentioned the quiet car. Do you think the crew took it upon themselves to declare a quiet car?


She was not thrown off the train simply for talking on a cell phone. The woman was disturbing passengers with loud conversation much (but not all) of which was on a cell phone. When the crew told her to tone it down, she became combative, belligerent and threatening toward the crew. That is a bad idea. Her behavior toward the crew is what got her tossed from the train into the arms of the police, not just talking on the phone.

Throwing passengers off a train for bad behavior is not unusual. The cell phone connection made it more interesting to the media than the normal drunk passenger expulsion.


----------



## PaulM (May 22, 2011)

PRR 60 said:


> She was not thrown off the train simply for talking on a cell phone. The woman was disturbing passengers with loud conversation much (but not all) of which was on a cell phone. When the crew told her to tone it down, she became combative, belligerent and threatening toward the crew.


I'm not sure whether the author of the WSJ article was being serious or just trying to be funny. But the point was that, according to the new morality, it was the crew that was rude when it told her to tone it down. Another words, if the passengers were disturbed by loud cell phone conversation, they should have stayed home.

Next thing you know, cell phone users will start claiming a right to privacy.


----------



## dlagrua (May 23, 2011)

Discourtesy seems to be getting more prevalent these days. How about the person who boards the sleeper at 12:30 AM and starts a loud discussion in the hall or the people that choose to have a discussion by the coffee machine at 5 AM? In coach there are those that believe that speaking on a cell phone or playing the radio at 3AM is OK? Amtrak should get the "QUIET in this car, while passengers are sleeping" signs that were once used on overnight trains back in the day put back up.

In the case of the woman taken off Amtrak I guess her life is completely about her and that she cares about no one other than herself.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 23, 2011)

PaulM said:


> I'm not sure whether the author of the WSJ article was being serious or just trying to be funny. But the point was that, according to the new morality, it was the crew that was rude when it told her to tone it down. Another words, if the passengers were disturbed by loud cell phone conversation, they should have stayed home. Next thing you know, cell phone users will start claiming a right to privacy.


Sounds like the Wall Street Journal is just following their traditional view that singling out and blaming the _victims_ is the best editorial policy.

My job expects me to be reachable pretty much around the clock. Vacations, holidays, and sick time are all fair game if a given problem is considered to be serious enough. I don't get calls all the time and nobody is going to die if for some reason I can't be reached, but if I want my paychecks to continue I have to be easily reachable. However, I still do my best to take reasonable precautions against unnecessary noise pollution. I assume that most folks don't want to hear my own phone conversations any more than I want to hear theirs. I'm not aware of any quiet cars on the LD network but when I was on the NEC as part of my NTD trip I sat in the quiet car by choice but made sure to keep my phone on vibrate. When I had to make or take a call I didn't start talking immediately. Instead I waited until I had made my way to the cafe car. The cafe car turned out to be so noisy that I couldn't easily hear folks on the other end so I ended up talking in the vestibule between the cafe car and one of the non-quiet cars next to it. In my view that's a reasonable attitude toward mobile phone use and it's exactly how things _should_ work in a civilized society. Not surprisingly the WSJ disagrees completely.


----------



## Mackensen (May 23, 2011)

Just to throw my two cents in, I was on the previous day's _Coast Starlight_ and the only mentions of cell phones that I recall were (a) a request that passengers take calls in the lounge car and (b) the general request to silence electronics after 10 pm (which is also when they usually stop making onboard announcements until the following morning). I haven't read anything which suggests that the CS crew went any further than that. There may have been a request to not bring electronics into the dining car, but I might have heard that a few days ago on the Builder. It's not an unreasonable request, regardless.


----------



## George B (May 23, 2011)

Mackensen said:


> Just to throw my two cents in, I was on the previous day's _Coast Starlight_ and the only mentions of cell phones that I recall were (a) a request that passengers take calls in the lounge car and (b) the general request to silence electronics after 10 pm (which is also when they usually stop making onboard announcements until the following morning). I haven't read anything which suggests that the CS crew went any further than that. There may have been a request to not bring electronics into the dining car, but I might have heard that a few days ago on the Builder. It's not an unreasonable request, regardless.


This is similar to what I always experience on the CS. The conductors on the CS have always made some type of announcement regarding phone calls when I have been on board. Some conductors have announced that phone calls are not allowed in Coach. Now, the language they have used for this is “cell phone conversations should not be done in Coach”, which can be interpreted either as a requirement, or a suggestion.

All Dining Cars on all of the LD trains I have been on have been announced as prohibiting cell phone calls, or all electronic devices. Sometimes the conductor announces it, sometimes the LSA does it when reservations are being called. I have always interpreted this as not necessarily being for the comfort and convenience of other passengers, but as a courtesy to Dining Car staff who do not want to compete with your cell phone or iPad for your attention. It makes sense, in that if they can get your full attention when they talk to you, they can get you served and out of there quicker.

The Parlor Car is an interesting topic, as you obviously are encouraged to sit in there and use electronic devices and make use of their top-notch always-reliable WiFi (Pause here for laughter to subside). But when being seated for food service, the attendant usually will give you a “look” if you have your cell phone out and taking pictures, or sending text messages. This might be a carry-over from the attendants rotating in from the Dining Car. Oddly enough, I have never seen anybody talk on a cell phone in the Parlor Car. That seems strange, but is another thing that makes the car so enjoyable.


----------



## leemell (May 23, 2011)

daxomni said:


> PaulM said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not sure whether the author of the WSJ article was being serious or just trying to be funny. But the point was that, according to the new morality, it was the crew that was rude when it told her to tone it down. Another words, if the passengers were disturbed by loud cell phone conversation, they should have stayed home. Next thing you know, cell phone users will start claiming a right to privacy.
> ...


Actually, I believe thay had their tongue planted firmly in their cheek. " It's clear that everything we once assumed about the workings of manners has shifted. Lakeysha Beard is the brave herald of an emerging renaissance of rudeness." You should read the whole article.


----------



## roomette (May 23, 2011)

> I have always interpreted this as not necessarily being for the comfort and convenience of other passengers, but as a courtesy to Dining Car staff who do not want to compete with your cell phone or iPad for your attention.


Who cares. They need to just get over it. Annoying passengers and patrons should be dealt with individually. I've never had the maître d’of a restaurant inform me that cell phone conversations should not be done in the restaurant.


----------



## leemell (May 23, 2011)

roomette said:


> > I have always interpreted this as not necessarily being for the comfort and convenience of other passengers, but as a courtesy to Dining Car staff who do not want to compete with your cell phone or iPad for your attention.
> 
> 
> Who cares. They need to just get over it. Annoying passengers and patrons should be dealt with individually. I've never had the maître d'of a restaurant inform me that cell phone conversations should not be done in the restaurant.


I've seen it done several times.


----------



## roomette (May 23, 2011)

I'd appreciate your sharing the names of those establishments so that I may easily avoid them. Thanks!


----------



## JulieRose (May 23, 2011)

I was seated in front of a woman like this on the Silver Star on New Years Day. She wouldn't stop yapping loudly on her cell phone and her kid was listening to his music loud enough to make the guy next to him deaf. After about 2.5 hours of this, I finally complained and the conductor said something to her. Maybe it's just because I live in a city with a "quiet car" on most (rush hour) trains - that I love to utilize - but I've never had problems with noise around me like I did on that trip.

Then again, that particular trip was a fiasco from the start as there was a guy in my car who was quite inebriated and grabbed both me and the woman behind me as we boarded in West Palm Beach. All the women in the car cheered when he was thrown off in Tampa. Apparently he had done it to all or most of us.


----------



## leemell (May 23, 2011)

roomette said:


> I'd appreciate your sharing the names of those establishments so that I may easily avoid them. Thanks!


One comes to mind immediately --- Bric's Ramp in Burbank, CA. We'll all be happier without the noise. A restaurant is a place to relax and eat, not being forced to listen to some else s conversation.

BTW, don't cross Gary Bric, he has been known to take things into his own hands. ;-)


----------



## roomette (May 24, 2011)

> A restaurant is a place to relax and eat, not being forced to listen to some else s conversation.


Perhaps he should just install one of these and then he won't even have to ask! :giggle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_jammer

I actually know of a couple of restaurants that utilize these quite successfully. Never does a cell phone ring during dinner! Ever!

Everyone is happy and no one has to be threatened or scolded!


----------



## trainman74 (May 24, 2011)

roomette said:


> I actually know of a couple of restaurants that utilize these quite successfully.


I'm sure the FCC would be interested to know about that, too, considering it's illegal to buy and/or use jamming equipment in the U.S.


----------



## roomette (May 24, 2011)

trainman74 said:


> roomette said:
> 
> 
> > I actually know of a couple of restaurants that utilize these quite successfully.
> ...


So is running a red light but it happens all the time! :mellow:


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (May 24, 2011)

To be blunt I wish endless misery to any one who breaks laws that can put some one eles life in direct danger .

seatbelts helmets I could care less . but blowing a red or a stopsign or jamming Pisses me off .

I have good reason to be a tad grumpy about this .

I was Hit by a Idot on a cell phone at my college last year .

And years ago I was jammed by a Ex Ham ( who was pissed ) while I was calling in a nasty car crash in the high desert in cali where My phone and the crash victims phone would not get a Sig . :help:

I ended up doing Simplex to the back end of another repeater.

KG6LSE .


----------



## JulieRose (May 24, 2011)

I don't necessarily agree with the blocking as much as I agree with common courtesy. I mean, really, does anyone want to listen to someone elses' conversation for that long? keep your convos on your phone short and sweet. We all thank you.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Dec 31, 2011)

Old thread but Heres video of the arrest from KATU News on youtube


----------



## NAVYBLUE (Jan 1, 2012)

Sorry to hijack the OP's thread, but I heard this on the CARDINAL eastbound from CHI-BAL on 12/14. We pulled in to Huntington, WV about (6) hours late because of the freight train wreck with the RV in Indiana. About 30-40 Marshall University students boarded and about 10-15 minutes later the conductor gets on and says something to the effect that people are expected to wear their clothing correctly and the exposing of undergarments if it continues will result in being put off the train at the next stop. I was flabbergasted. The guess he had a low tolerance for gangsta wannabes showing their underwear while low riding their pants.

NAVYBLUE


----------



## xyzzy (Jan 2, 2012)

In 2011 the FCC increased its enforcement of the no-jamming rule. See http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/jammer-enforcement


----------

