'10' codes will be obsolete in 2006

[scannerfreak]

Check this out:

 

[tglendye]

We're going through some of this here- but it's mainly effecting our law enforcement agencies. I don't like it. 10 codes reduce radio traffic. Saying things in "plain english" sometimes takes longer. But then again, I'm from the fire service and we don't use a whole lot of 10 codes anyway.

 

[AZScanner]

There is a reason for this besides brevity. The same code can have several different meanings. For example, in many parts of the country a 10-50 is a traffic collision. Here in Arizona, 10-50 means change to channel ____. Also, if a major attack like 9-11 occurs and you have to rely on civilian volunteers, you can waste valuable time explaining to them what 10-50 means or just tell them what anyone can understand: "Go to channel 2."

-AZ

 

[nmfire10]

Your subject line is very misleading. You make it sound like a nationwide event. It's one locality.

 

[michael_m_rubino]

According to this station, it is going to be nationwide eventually:

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3752049

 

[retroactiv]

I think that this will be a great system... More 10-43 (info) will be availible to the responder, becuase the dispatcher will most likely say, insted of 10-50 PI they will say, accident with 3 injured, entrapment... So, the FD doesn't have to find out what is wrong when they show up... Better prepared for what they are responding to.

 

[gg750]

Your subject line is very misleading. You make it sound like a nationwide event. It's one locality.

The first line of the article reads "Emergency responders in Coffee County and ACROSS THE NATION....".

G

 

[scannerfreak]

Your subject line is very misleading. You make it sound like a nationwide event. It's one locality.

Read the story again, it says mandated nation wide or else risk losing federal grants..

 

[LarrySC]

As always the federal ideas miss the boat. Plain talk "ONLY if talking to another agency" would work. Keep the codes for proprietary use only

 

[mlevin]

I think it's a good idea. I think the 10 codes are good for keeping transmissions short and to the point, but with the use of commonly used phrases and terms, I think plain talk is a good alternative. Ideally, adopting a national 10 code list would be the best solution. However, I think that with the large number of public safety agencies in the country, drafting a code list that's practical for all agencies nationwide would be nearly impossible.

 

[scannerfreak]

As always the federal ideas miss the boat. Plain talk "ONLY if talking to another agency" would work. Keep the codes for proprietary use only

I thought the same thing. I think the reason they did that was they are wanting to break the habbit of saying it. When in the heat of the moment, you're not thinking, "okay no 10-codes" You just doing what comes naturally.

 

[RyltnVFD]

I'd rather have my dispatcher tell me "Is subject x 10-98? He has a possible 32." than "Is that guy standing next to you? He might have a felony warrant."

10 codes can actually save lives.

 

[cellblock776]

Unless that's me standing there next to you and I probably know your signal and 10 codes as well as you do.

 

[RyltnVFD]

Most of the criminals in Benton Harbor are too stupid to count, let alone know the 10 codes.

 

[nexus]

THIS IS RETARDED! What the hell does the federal government think they're doing? HELPING? No they're going to just cause more problems.

When ever outside agencies communicate over here they use plain english. But to remove it from within the department is just DUMB. First off we know it shorten's radio traffic down. It's quicker to say 10-99 for emergency help needed now instead of yelling emergency help needed now. Like the one person said codes are used often so that non-public safety won't know what's being said.

If I was LEO and I pulled someone over I would much rather just have the dispatch say that vehicle is signal 10 instead of saying that vehicle is stolen... while standing right next to the subject. This is going to certainly cause problems with officer safety!

 

[rdale]

"becuase the dispatcher will most likely say, insted of 10-50 PI they will say, accident with 3 injured, entrapment... "

My guess is that if the dispatcher doesn't say "10-50 with three injured and entrapment" now, he won't say it when he replaces "10-50" with "accident."

 

[RyltnVFD]

If I was LEO and I pulled someone over I would much rather just have the dispatch say that vehicle is signal 10 instead of saying that vehicle is stolen... while standing right next to the subject. This is going to certainly cause problems with officer safety!

Exactly my point. There are certain things civvies don't and shouldn't ever understand.

 

[pblumer]

Bunch of crap in that article!!! Let me say this though. How long will it take for a LEO to lose his life or be seriously injured because of this. I have worked security and would rather use ten codes. its short to the point and you can explain things without the public knowing what you are doing unless they got your codes. But I will say if things are intense ten codes do go out the window but what they are saying in the article is crazy but O well.

Patrick M. Blumer

 

[Otto]

Ah whatever... The oldtimers will still be using them,I'll bet on it. It's just radio nature for some. I do agree that the codes keep things a little confidential, especiall when you have a person right next to you that has a warrant.

then on the other hand, many hardened criminals that have spen alot of time locked, sometimes learn the ten codes too. they are so bored in there, they do whatever to fill their minds...

 

[Linn]

I have worked for several police agencies. One of the agencies used all signals and 10-Codes, now I work for an agency that uses mainly plain english. I prefer the plain english. We communicate with surrounding agencies regularly and some use signals and 10-Codes. I understand a lot of it because of my scanning hobby, but my co-workers don't.