• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Police scanners should be ILLEGAL PERIOD

n1das

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
1,158
Location
Nashua, NH
Don't feed the new troll. My guess a system or systems the OP listen to have flipped the E switch and is mad about it. And due to that scanners now need to be illegal.
LOL. I think this post early on in the thread sums it up pretty well.
 

hitechRadio

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
392
I am on the side of encryption!
It is all ready illegal to decrypt encryption.
If they encrypt, there is no need to make it illegal.
 

Signal-Zero

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Messages
3,044
Location
Fortified Bunker
I think we should encrypt this Forum. Only those that are voted in as true whackers will get the encryption key.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Signal-Zero

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Messages
3,044
Location
Fortified Bunker
It wouldn’t be just one particular thing but rather a combination of many, such as your signature line. A true whacker lists multiple scanners that he owns in his signature line like a hunter who mounts heads of their kills on their walls. The older the model, the more street cred the whacker has. Then we have the “shack” pics. It usually involves several computers (one has to have a minimum of Unitrunker or DSD running). The other usually has the RadioReference homepage, forums or database. Of course no shack is complete without the multiple scanners, radios, MDC decoder, clock in every time zone, weather station and of course, the most bad ass commander chair. And let’s not forget the mobile shack. Usually an old police interceptor with multiple radios and antennas. You can’t go covert and be a whacker. And make sure to finish it off with your call sign vanity license plate. These are just a few that will earn you an encryption key.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

kb2crk

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
134
Location
arnoldsville ga.
Well I would not be a good whacker then. No scanners at all just a bunch of old radios. There are several compters in the shack but most of them are sitting in the corner until I have to change the programming on one of the old Motorolas. I have no idea what unitracker is. Only one clock showing eastern time. Would not be caught dead in a crown vic. I do ham the call letter license plate but the radios are still sitting in the broke down minivan in the back yard. One of these days I may get them moved to the truck. I do have a Hi vis vest but that is only used when I am helping CERT which almost never responds to anything. They had a missing persons search last night but I was already asleep....
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,082
I would love to get a nice clean low mileage Crown Vic for a sleeper car. I want a powerful V8 and RWD. I want a powerful car that is useful for touring. I also want roof space to mount various various antennae. Does that mean I would be a whacker?

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

com501

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
1,235
Location
127.0.0.1
Ford Excursion V10 - like mine, 4WD and leather everything. LOTS of roof space, I have 4 APX mobiles in the center console and two EDACS radios. Plus the Excursion will do well over 100+. I raced the Sheriff of a neighboring county a few years ago up a lonely stretch of road. Dusted him.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,082
Ford needs to make a new model; I would suggest the name "INQUISITION" to surpass the Expedition and Excursion. A supercharged V12 AWD to out sprint the cheezy impractical Bugatti Veyron..

I had an E350 15 passenger van for a while, bought it nearly new and drove it 138K miles until the dual AC strarted to be a bother. It was a very powerful and pleasant vehicle to drive on the long haul. As an everyday driver it got better gas mileage and handled better than the Expedition that replaced it. Extremely tough truck.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,082
Nobody on a scanner group wants to talk about making scanners illegal. It's one of those freedoms we enjoy that the EU and UK dont.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

mmisk

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2003
Messages
558
Location
Ottawa, Canada
Ridiculous UN-enforceable Laws.

A law such as making scanners illegal is just a ridiculous UN-enforceable law.

Remember the electronics privacy act [not sure if that is the correct name] ?
Was something to do with monitoring cell transmissions in the early days. Did not stop anyone from listening.
Completely UN-enforceable.

The radio manufactures blocked the cellular 800 mhz frequency's, and that was a wast of time, did not stop anyone from listening.
 

mmisk

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2003
Messages
558
Location
Ottawa, Canada
I recall when cellular first came into use it was narrow band FM in the 800 mhz region.
There were no receivers that covered 800 mhz that long ago.

I found an old mechanical UHF TV tuner the kind that was variable.
The output was somewhere around 50 to 60 MHZ [don't really remember the tuner I.F. frequency] , so I just sent the tuner I.F. output to an old scanner that covered low band.
And there they were...cell conversations.....what a load of fun. Then the signal would change sites and I would loose the signal , however sometimes I could find it again. I could hear the data burst just before everything changed frequency.

Well that shows how old I am, but sure was fun in the good old days, could listen to everything. And why not?
I did not cause any harm and did not divulge anything that I heard. It was just entertainment and my love of radio communications and the technology involved.

/MM
 
Last edited:

Token

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
2,029
Location
Mojave Desert, California, USA
Ridiculous UN-enforceable Laws.


A law such as making scanners illegal is just a ridiculous UN-enforceable law.


Remember the electronics privacy act [not sure if that is the correct name] ?


Was something to do with monitoring cell transmissions in the early days. Did not stop anyone from listening.

Completely UN-enforceable.

The radio manufactures blocked the cellular 800 mhz frequency's, and that was a wast of time, did not stop anyone from listening.
To be clear, I am not for outlawing any form of radio receiver. But, just for the sake of discussion....


You have picked the wrong comparison from the ECPA. The ECPA made it illegal to listen to cell conversations, that is true. It is arguable that it was unneeded in this aspect as it was probably already illegal to listen to these conversations under other regulations, but that is a different discussion. So the ECPA made it specifically illegal to listen. Pretty much unenforceable except after the fact in some cases.


However, another thing the ECPA did was to make it illegal to manufacture or offer for sale any "scanner" capable of receiving 800 MHz cell transmissions. What was a scanner was specifically defined. And in this way it had a much greater impact. Later it was amended to make it illegal to make a scanner that could be easily modified to receive such transmission.


The upshot of all of that is that today, and it has been that way for over 30 years, you cannot purchase, legally, any scanner in the US with such coverage. And you essentially never see them for sale as new equipment.


It very affectively made it very difficult to find/purchase a new scanner with this capability. Sure, you can, illegally, import one from outside the country. You can build an external converter and tune to these frequencies, illegal, but possible. This reduced the number of new scanners in the country with these abilities to a trickle, at best.


If a law was passed today that made police scanners (any scanner capable of receiving police transmissions) illegal it would be similar to that impact, however much worse.


If it was illegal to offer for sale a scanner capable of receiving police transmissions, with the same kind of limitations as 800 MHz cell transmissions, that would mean no scanner hardware sold in the US today would be legal. You can find Part 90 freqs in HF, VHF-Lo, VHF-Hi, and scattered through UHF.


Of course, it might not stop people from using the equipment they already have, but getting new equipment would become much more difficult. It would kill the scanner hobby (even for those who do not monitor the police) in the US, or at least reduce it to a few die-hards using existing equipment (until that died) or illegal imports.


A law making it illegal to listen is hard to enforce, a law making it illegal to sell or own the equipment is much more enforceable. Still not fool-proof, no law is, people will find a way to break every law you make, but it would kill the hobby and the industry.

T!
 

mmisk

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2003
Messages
558
Location
Ottawa, Canada
Very interesting comments.

Now that cell is encrypted it is not possible to listen, so it is not necessary to block out that portion of the spectrum.
(there is nothing to listen to in the blocked out segment )

I don't know how difficult it is for manufacturers to do so, but I assume it is easy with algorithms.

Members often say in the forums: "it is illegal to listen to enc communications"
I find this somewhat amusing as it is not possible to break AES 258 encryption.
So, there is a law making something illegal that is impossible to do anyway. Silly?


Mike
 
Last edited:
Top