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

As far as the navigation system interference, I agree that it seems unlikely that my $50 phone could take down a billion dollar aircraft. But whereas I agree that it might not be reasonable to think that one phone could cause a problem, I wonder as to the effect of 220 phones crammed into roughly 250 cubic meters. I will be the first to admit that I don’t have anything *close* to the right training/knowledge to figure this one out, so I leave it to the people who get paid to do this sort of stuff.

One line of note in the wikipedia article comes in the “Electromagnetic Interference” section and says, essentially, that a major reason for the ban is that the FAA/FCC don’t want to pay for the testing to figure it out.

And you have to feel for the FAA (at least a little), because much like the FDA, these people get absolutely no credit for the things that go right on their watch and 100% of the blame for the things that go wrong. Add to that the fact that the blame typically comes hot on the heels of unimaginable horrors and usually involves Congressional hearings.

The Wikipedia article also addresses the competition from in-flight telephone services as well as social considerations, so all in all it appears fairly balanced, at least to me.

None of this is by way of saying that its right or wrong to leave your phone on during a flight. Its only to say that there are a few different explanations of the reasoning behind the ban. Whether or not one believes them is one’s own choice, but they are there nonetheless.

My apologies for coming late to the conversation.

Most of this “security” bullshit, including the “security threat level” is intended to keep everyone paranoid so more money can go to all of the defense contractors and everyone else who profits from war and fear.

I never turn my phone off either, I just put it on vibrate.

I KNOW my shampoo bottle isn’t filled with picric acid, so yes I get frustrated at the nonsense attendant to these ridiculous restrictions. But with cellphones, enough is not known that I feel it’s not an unreasonable restriction.

Also, who are you people who have to be on the phone every damn minute? I am really kinda hoping that someday they DO show health effects from cell phones, because then it will be safe to ride my bike on the road again without having to worry about people who think they’re piloting two-ton phone booths.

I really don’t like the attacks some people are making in their comments. Like the one about parents and rules — so are you saying the government is all grown-up and we, the general public, are simply children? Unfortunately, it is the world we live in; the general public is too passive about our freedoms.

I was told it was illegal to carry a wrench and at the risk of making things worse asked why. “Because you could take parts of the plane apart sir”. Amazing, as much as I hate flying I’ve never once felt compelled to take parts of a the plane off. Would a terrorist really do that?

Everything else I agree with, I’m pretty sure the freaking 1/8 static electricity spark that I almost always produce at gas stations when I touch my car could cause a lot more damage than my cell phone.

That said security shouldn’t shoulder all the blame, a lot of it rests squarely on the tax-paying public. Whenever something goes horribly wrong the public wants to know *how* the security *let* this horrible thing happen, someone must *pay* for it. In hindsight it’s always obvious that the person with a classic shaving straight razor shouldn’t have been let on board or that those two chemicals could create a bomb. Usually someone complaining about the long security line is the exact same person to write an op-ed piece about the how blind security was for not noticing the *obviously* suspicious looking person.

As much as I wish it was otherwise the issue isn’t nearly as neatly black & white as you make it out to be.

Sometimes you have to use your own ethical and moral radar and apply it logically and judiciously and brave the consequences. I may be a cantankerous bitch, but I’m a bitch with morals and a very clearcut sense of right and wrong. I always root for the underdog, and unfortunately WE as photographers and citizens are now the underdogs.

I’ve been fascinated with the work of Milgram over the past several years. It merely proved to me something I already knew intuitively, that most people are driven by fear (immediate visceral fear and fear of negative consequences) rather than logic and a compassionate moral compass. One of the most fascinating elements is the concept that people are so willing to absolve themselves of personal responsibility because “someone else” told them to do something. They don’t even need to BE an authority, they just need to APPEAR to be an authority figure!

Even though I may feel quite negatively towards someone I can’t imagine ever doing something so heinous. I always put myself in the other persons shoes and see how I would feel, and when I do violate my sense of morality for whatever reason I always feel guilt and remorse afterwards and try to rectify the situation. There are many however who do not.

The Stanford Prison experiments are another touchstone to focus on in terms of control and fear and how humans interact in certain situations. As far as photography goes, I take mostly street candids and have yet to be accosted by law enforcement – I usually am verbally assaulted at least once each time I venture out. But to me it is worth the risk. London is my favority city and it is sad what has happened there, and is surely to become more prevalent in the US.

Thanks for writing this. Would like to see you blog on some of the other abuses occuring in our country.

You plainly cross the line.

“It is the power to question, particularly, “why?”, that makes us human”.