Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Telephonic Regression Message-ID: <8818@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 8 Jun 90 17:58:49 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 57 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 423, Message 2 of 9 In the spirit of government over-zealousness, how many have noticed (at least in California) the latest media attention to the role of telephony in the matter of drug sales? It would appear that drug warriors have just discovered that many drug deals are consumated with the assistance of public telephones, pagers, and cellular equipment. According to some of the stories (including a mention in this forum), a number of the utility pay phones have been replaced with old rotary dial models (so that pagers can't be activated) and some merged subset of these phones have also been disabled from receiving calls. In the Bay Area, there has even been talk about removing some pay phones altogether, although Pac*Bell spokespeople have pointed out that should be considered a last resort option. So it appears that in the name of the War On Drugs, telephone service is to be denied to a certain subclass of people. Disabling the TT pad after the call is dialed (or installing rotary phones) eliminates the use of many services, not just pagers. What we are in effect saying to people who live and work in certain (arbitrarily selected) areas is, "You are not entitled to have the convenience or utility afforded to those in more upscale places." Not that drug use or trading doesn't occur in Willow Glen (as an example), it's just that more money makes possible a more sophisticated and covert methodology that isn't obvious to residents or police. Saying to people whose only telephone service might just be a public telephone that they will have to do with less because of a current hysteria is highly offensive. But I feel that more is on the way. In the California legislature is a bill under consideration that would make it a crime for anyone under the age of 18 to have a pager (Dougie Howser--watch out!). I predict that in the forseeable future, legislation will be considered that will require ALL users of pagers and cellular phones to register with the state attorney general's office, stating the use and purpose of the equipment. No registration, no service. It is sad that while we are seeing great advancements in both the utility and convenience of telecommunications, congresscritters (and others who depend upon re-election for their fat pay checks) feel the need to artificially restrict citizens' use of technology in the cause of "crowd pleasing". Do they really think that if you take away pagers and pay phones that the "drug problem" will go away? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: The Chicago City Council is now on this same tangent, thinking somehow that if Illinois Bell eliminates pay phones in the housing projects (or makes them one-way outgoing, or removes the touch-tone or some combination thereof), that the drug traffic will slow down. Of course, the fact that these steps would be all the more oppressive to people who live in Housing Authority properties and are too poor to have a phone of their own and must rely on the single outdoor (frequently out-of-order) payphone in front of the combination liquor store / state lottery agent on the corner is never considered. PT]