Re: Just sayin' @jake
I don't understand is why you're hung up on cell contracts, BART and suing over a lack of infrastructure but I'll try by looking back over your previous posts. Here's the problem, BART is a government entity and they can't do what they want on "their" property because BART doesn't own property, the government does. Their board of directors are publicly elected officials. The BART police are real police and not security guards. They don't have a "bottom line" because they are a government entity and as such they are accountable to the public. What's more, even if they were private they still don't have a right to infringe the First Amendment, all they can do is have the police remove you from the property.
Here's a small hint, their website is www.bart.gov and if you go there you can find out all sorts of interesting facts like the cost to build BART was $1.619B and of that >$1.4B was paid by taxes and tolls not private investment. Granted you could be confused since new stadiums being built by teams such as the Washington Nationals were majorly funded by taxpayer dollars but remain private property but that has more to do with stupid pols than anything else.
Oh, perhaps your parental units, as you kids apparently like to call them, didn't get you up in time and you missed the civics class when they were teaching the difference between private property and publicly owned government property which may or may not be have restricted access. It isn't private property any more than the Humvees and MRAPs down the road at Camp Pendleton are private property or for that matter Camp Pendleton itself. Yeah, I know, try trespassing there even though the property is publicly owned.
Finally the only obvious reason for the government, specifically the FCC which was the primary target of my original post, to "turn off" mobile access is the same reason Libya turned off mobile access. Due process, that's all I'm really asking for.