Insulator
Member
Has Longmont PD changed their TG for primary dispatch? I have not heard a peep out of them for over 12 hours, even on my new sds 100. Any info would be appreciated.
Mark
Mark
I find it ironic that the pilot project was created after the media caught Longmont PD performing warrantless searches.
BTW, I wonder if Boulder County deputies can communicate with Longmont at all now?
The best statement was that they said Loveland PD was encrypted. I just got the scoop from the Comm. Director. No they are in the clear.I
BTW, I wonder if Boulder County deputies can communicate with Longmont at all now?
Probably yes and no. Dispatch probably has some console to console ability, but as far as BSCO deputy to LPD dispatch direct? Not without some patch from their VHF to LPD's digital, which would have to be activated by somone's dispatch anyway. Or the obvious exception would be if BSCO is carrying multiband radios.
It is pretty frustrating.At first they kept the main dispatch channel in the clear and encrypted the others, which is understandable. When an incident got sensitive they moved it to another channel. They have
no proof a scanner or app was used during a crime. As far as 5 people having a scanner in the car or home when they responded to a call or pulled someone over? The 5 people probably KNEW they were being pulled over or the cops were coming to their house so how does that affect officer safety?
Even if Boulder County has their channels I'm sure State Patrol is in the dark, even while they are passing though or en route to a call thats just outside of Longmonts jurisdiction but Longmont isn't willing to cover. They only get 3rd hand info from their dispatch and have no idea whats going on. Mutual Aid has always been an issue since we border both Weld and Larimer Counties. Many times a major vehicle accident near the border results in several "commands" being set up by the different agencies who are all on scene, making the Incident Command System useless for those incidents.
I can remember several examples in Northern Colorado of agencies not being able to COMMUNICATE and work together because of encryption.
As a volunteer ham operator, I couldn't even hear the car to car channels they would use at the same events we were supporting. As a Longmont resident, I signed up for Everbridge Alerts (like reverse 911 for people without landlines) and have NEVER received an alert. It was nice having a scanner so I knew when to lock my door because something was up in my neighborhood, or encourage my kids to go to a different park because someone was just shot or stabbed at the one they planned to go to. As a school district employee, it was nice to have an idea of what was going on when several cops were across the street but they hadn't notified the school.
I think it does more damage than good, and we all have legitimate legal reasons to monitor public safety. Maybe they can buy us all ice cream to make us feel better: https://denver.cbslocal.com/2018/10/12/cops-nurses-ice-cream-arrest-lobby/
If I may, I'd like to offer an alternative point of view and ask questions on a couple of you points.
"It's frustrating".
I get that for the listening enthusiast. And, the PSAP isn't there to serve radio enthusiast.
"I'm sure State Patrol is in the dark.../....They only get 3rd hand info from their dispatch...."
Their dispatch is the channel they would primarily (should/need to be) be on anyway, unless asked to change to LPD or an interop. Would they really be in the dark, or actually know what it is they NEED to know via appropriate channels? The two (or more) PSAPs can talk to each other at the push of a button and coordinate response or channel changes.
"I can remember several examples in Northern Colorado of agencies not being able to COMMUNICATE and work together because of encryption."
Encryption would have had zero to do with this, as any interop freqs would be in the clear, with multiple freqs (think NIFOG, Blue NW, Red NW) available for their use.
"....and we all have legitimate legal reasons to monitor public safety."
I could probably defend various positions on that, but I'd like to hear your thinking and legal references on it.