We ought to commend the teacher who deliberately interrupted phone signals within his classroom, recognizing that it is a singular environment where this intervention is warranted.

The incident involving teacher Dean Liptak, who is also a former pro-wrestler, facing backlash for his decision to block cell phone signals in his classroom at Fivay High School, was an inappropriate response from both the administrators and, quite frankly, the government.

Without a doubt, his actions were unquestionably illegal. As per the Federal Communications Commission, the deliberate utilization of 'cell jammers' or comparable devices intended to intentionally obstruct, jam, or interfere with authorized radio communications (such as signal blockers, GPS jammers, or text stoppers) is a direct violation of federal law. Moreover, it is important to note that the sale of jammers within the United States is strictly prohibited, although they can still be readily obtained from international sources, provided that the seller remains uncaught. It is crucial to highlight that only government employees are legally permitted to procure such equipment.

Liptak's punishment seems lenient, as he only received a five-day suspension without pay. In contrast, a Florida man who had a jammer in his car for several months was fined a staggering $48,000. It is worth noting that there have been instances where a priest resorted to using a jammer during sermons and even a funeral, allegedly with permission from the police.

Admittedly, the driver, the priest, and the teacher may have exercised questionable judgment when utilizing the jammers, as they inadvertently disrupted more than just their intended locations. However, their actions were driven by good intentions, and it could be contended that Liptak had the most compelling rationale of all: to compel the little troublemakers we affectionately call our future to finally pay heed.

In the days of yore, distractions within the classroom were limited to occurrences such as catching a glimpse of something outside the window (SQUIRREL!), passing folded notes, or perhaps sneaking in a comic book. However, in the present day, a student can partake in all of those activities and a thousand more on a single screen. How can a teacher, regardless of their proficiency, effectively compete with the allure of YouTube, Snapchat, Trivia Crack, or even PornHub? Merely implementing a filter on the local school Wi-Fi network holds no significance for a student who possesses unlimited data from their parents' family plan.

Instead of condemning Liptak, it is imperative for society to seek ways to empower teachers in need of assistance. The FCC and Congress should establish exceptions to the Communications Act of 1934, which serves as the basis for many restrictions on cell jammers. Enterprises should be permitted to explore new avenues for developing easily manageable jamming device.

It is an indisputable fact that there are various scenarios where the careful deployment of jammers with limited and precisely calibrated range would be an excellent decision.

Theaters

I've been on the wrong end of a couple of cell phone calls at movie theaters in the last few years. Namely, in the middle of a movie, people's phones not only went off, but the idiot in question answered, then proceeded to have a conversation, at normal volume, as if that's perfectly okay, and not grounds for justifiable homicide. (At one of those films-the execrable Land of the Lost, so perhaps I should have been grateful for the distraction-I actually stood up and said to the offender, "Are you kidding me?" I like to think the rest of the audience applauded, but I couldn't hear anything over the hate-blood pounding in my ears.)

Those who attend concerts, have a deep appreciation for Broadway productions, are avid film enthusiasts, and various others would be spared from such impoliteness if theaters made use of jammers that activated as soon as the lights dimmed. Granted, there may be occasional emergencies, doctors on call, or parents who need to ensure the babysitter can contact them, etc. Nevertheless, these individuals should explore alternative options for their night out.

Restaurants

The sign should display: No shorts, No shoes, No phone usage, No service. Customers who fail to place an order with a server because they are engrossed in a phone call should be subject to a 35 percent tip automatically added to their bill. Alternatively, the bistro's signal blocker should disconnect these supposed customers-if their call is truly that significant, they can go outside.

The Workplace

It is widely acknowledged that email and the Internet have become indispensable tools in most office settings. However, the significance of cell phones in the workplace is subject to debate. According to a survey conducted by Pew Research, only 24 percent of adults with full- or part-time jobs consider a cell or smartphone as "very important" for accomplishing their work tasks. Moreover, research indicates that 50 percent of employers perceive cell phones as detrimental to workplace productivity.

It is worth noting that there are plenty of locations where using a cell phone can be actively perilous. However, it is highly likely that cell phones are regularly brought onto warehouse or assembly line floors without detection. If employers had the ability to block signals while still permitting emergency calls, it would ensure the absence of any harm or wrongdoing.

At Home

No matter how much parents rely on parental control and monitoring software, it becomes an arduous task to encourage a child (or even the spouse or grandparents) to engage in conversation during family dinner once they have access to a smartphone with a data plan.

Just like how parents have the capability and authority to disable the Wi-Fi connection at home, they should also have the choice to disable the cellular signal if they wish to do so. Attempting to take phones from individuals' hands and putting them in airplane mode is unlikely to be effective, and transforming the entire house into a Faraday cage is an extreme measure that should only be considered by those who are overly paranoid. However, having an in-home cell jammer should be a viable option whenever it is desired or necessary. (Remember to keep that landline, everyone.)

All these illustrations rely on the availability of alternative communication lines during emergencies, or at least on individuals having enough mobility to move outside the range of the signal jammer. Unfortunately, at present, even those with the best intentions cannot utilize the limited technology available without significantly disrupting services beyond the boundaries of their classrooms, theaters, offices, or homes. If you suspect the use of an illegal jammer in your vicinity, please access the FCC online complaint portal or dial 1-888-CALL-FCC (or 1-888-225-5322).

Prior to taking any action, it is important to consider whether you have genuinely encountered any adverse effects, or if perhaps, that hour without cell signal was the most enjoyable hour of your day. Additionally, if your signal is disrupted, it is unlikely that you will be able to place the call anyway.