Using mobile phones in banks is a Constitutional right

[taga_ipil]

---

I think this provision already clarify the issue.
If the intention of the bank is for safety and order to prevent robbery and probable loss of life,
then it's quite impossible to challenge the ruling.

now... here's his argument... quite funny but there's a valid point.

I surmise that banks are preventing the use of mobile phones to prevent bank robberies. That logic is as stretchy as Mister Fantastic’s arms. We can’t use the “ends justifies the means” sense to defend this. It is actually the reverse in law.

To prevent crime, one CANNOT suppress Constitutional Rights. That is what martial law is for. Has there been any link of mobile phone use to bank robberies? If we use that reason, then we should ban knifes in restaurants because they can be used for harm. We should ban barbeque grills because the matches used to start the charcoal can cause fires. What controls our society is “the means justifies the end.

[R_sQuArEd]

sobraan ka advance sa huna²...pag ginamit ang cellphone sa banko holdap agad?!

[carbrill]

Maski di paka makagamit ug cellphone sud sa bank kung planado na jud nga ihold upon ang banko mangita jud nag pa agi ang mga kawatan. kawatan man gani nang naay cctv ug naa'y guard na...

there are many ways para hatagan ug signal ang taga gawas nga pwdi na sila maka sud ug mo hold up... so para nako way gamit ang ilang pag ingon nga for security reason...

[Echelnalf]

Security. Same reason why some or maybe all banks, would prohibit wearing of caps, shades, bringing of umbrella inside.. etc.

[digitalsuperman]

if kinahanglan gyud siguro tubagon ang phone call inside sa banko i think pwedi raman tarungon istorya ba.hangyoon lang gud. makasabot raman pud na sila ba.

[<SMILE>]

now... here's his argument... quite funny but there's a valid point.

It's a plausible argument,
but seeing the part of the bank side,I could also say that they are quite reasonable,
for banks are prime targets. In view to this fact i could never censure them to become extra careful, the life of their client
as well as the deposited money at the establishment are within the scope of their responsibility.
I think the main purpose of the rule is never to entirely deprive basic rights but giving more weigh towards safety.
Bank robberies do occur and without warning of course to defeat the randomness is to become extra vigilant and we should contribute to become disciplined to follow the rules of the entrusted bank.

By the way one could go outside and tend with the call (just in case if it's an emergency) and free to go inside again to continue the bank transactions.

[pirehro]

na anad nako na prepared nako daan mu do sa ako transaction inig sud nakos bangko para way hasol.
sometimes naa nakoy form na gi fill-upan daan para inig sud nako kay kuha rako priority num or direcho na line.
much better if madali imo transaction para dali raka mahuman and less ra ang chances na dili nimo matubag ang calls.

cheers!

[slabdans]

palahi ko gamay...gitapol kog basa gud...

ako mo tubag raman ko sa ako phone sa banko..mo reply paman gani ko kung dunay text...kung badlongon ko sa guard mo guwas raman pud ko

[R_sQuArEd]

the article has been published in yahoo and is gaining the public's interest...try to check the comments
Using mobile phones in a bank is a Constitutional right

[kit_cebu]

no qualms following No Cellphone inside bank premises...if there's a call, just go outside...that will be the end of it...

i understand sa "security reason"...kaysa naa'y thread napod nga "banko gi-tulis human pag-konpirmar nga wala'y sikyu sa sulod gumikan sa text message sa ilang kauban nga nag-una sa sulod"....