Be careful, you might get labelled a bully for that statement.
Ark Citizens Suing Over Radio Encryption
- Thread starter zzdiesel
- Start date
- Status
Be careful, you might get labelled a bully for that statement.
KF5OBS
Member
I'm certain I will get labelled a whole lot worse by some people for this action. But jaxar understood and I don't think he is offended. If he is, that was not intended.
EDIT: If someone wants to read the amended complaint, I uploaded it here: http://jaunty-electronics.com/blog/...09/Amended_Complaint_w_Exhibits_Redacted1.pdf
It's also in the court database but someone at the Court messed up the scans royally.
Last edited:
KF5OBS
Member
Not yet. There was another hearing in the Mullens case. Not much did happen there. Little Rock and North Little rock will now start live-streaming some of their audio with 30 minute delay. I'll keep everyone updated, I promise, I won't forget.
Not completly correct. North Little Rock is working on streaming. Little Rock is putting some text information from their dispatch computer on their webpage.
The hearing did not occur. There was a court appearance, but no hearing due to proceedural issues.
30 minute delay. :roll: Interesting.
NLR PD had an BCFY feed with 30 min delay.. now gone... It was only on for maybe a week?? But is ow gone. Just FYI's.....
The feed is going up and down. We are having problems with the delay software. The delay is decaying to 15 minutes in 3 hours and zero in 5 hours. We are using a vendor modified version of RadioDelay. Open to suggestions if someone knows something else that would work. We want to provide the audio, but it is not going to be possible without a delay.
Suggestion: remove the delay!
Kidding of course. Well, not really but you know what I mean. Sorry, can't really help.
I have to strongly disagree with this statement. The only reason this is being done is because of the lawsuit. If the spotlight wasn't being shined upon the system, your department would be happily hiding behind it's curtain of encryption. There are no hard statistics or FACTS that show an increase in officer safety, nor a decrease in crime when a police department implements encryption. There are many police departments providing their own feeds WITHOUT a 30 minute delay-the 1 to 2 minutes that is ever present on the internet is enough for them. DO NOT come here and try to look helpful, when all your department is doing is damage control. There is no legitimate reason for day to day police dispatch channels to be encrypted.
Concur
Yes, there are no hard facts to back up the claims, only a National Party Line.
Yes, there are no hard facts to back up the claims, only a National Party Line.
Lets not get into attack mode or this will quickly lead to infractions and me having to lock this thread too. Keep it informational guys no attacks on government or personal attacking. PERIOD! I am one of the few actual nicer guys around, but I do not have any more patience for certain violations, and as is my standard line nowadays, this IS YOUR ONLY WARNING!
you could argue that police dispatch channels should be encrypted because people could commit a crime while carrying a scanner and leave immediately as soon as they hear the location they are at on the scanner. personally i hope they don't encrypt anything, narcotics, swat, nothing. although, i think there is more of a case for encrypting dispatch than swat, since swat oftens raids a place at 6am when people are sleeping, not listening to the scanner. even if they encrypt narcotics, a drug dealer could detect that there is transmissions nearby and avoid the investigation
Yes, you could argue it, but there are no statistics that back the position up. Departments would be shouting the numbers from the rooftops if there was a decrease in crime after implementation of encryption. I am a member of a police union, and see a justifiable position in regards to special operations channels, but not to encryption of day to day dispatch.
I am facing the same issue here in Central Virginia.Over in the Va forum I have been trying to get people in those counties to approach their elected local officials to voice their displeasure over the upcoming 100% encryption of the local PD communications.We have an opportunity in Central Va to let our voices be heard .But lately in that forum I have been getting a lot of negative feedback.
Elected Officials are the key to all this.
I have to agree. I think that many here wrongly assume that it is the police themselves who are behind the idea of encryption when it is more likely the local politicians. Politicians are skilled at demanding things that look beneficial in the newspapers (and hence grounds for reelection) but may not necessarily be an asset for the public good as a whole.
While your statement is true about politicians, I'm not sure how encrypting comms makes them look good but maybe it is just my perspective as a scanner listener and a ham operator that makes me want to hear what's going on. Perhaps the general public doesn't see it that way.
It gets the politician's name in the newspaper. "See what I'm doing? It's all about officer safety and the safety of our citizens" (btw, VOTE FOR ME!!!)
As for the majority of the public, probably 95% of the public really doesn't care about encrypted comms one way or the other since they're not scanner listeners anyway.
Maybe in rural America, but not in cities where there are larger governing bodies. I can speak for a fact that in Boston, the politicians have NOTHING to do with the communications systems. In fact, the chiefs of the public safety agencies don't do much in their governing either. The Communications Managers are pretty much their own fiefdom. The only police agency in Boston that has encrypted is Boston College, and that sure as hell wasn't an elected official's decision-it was someone in the Public Safety Department. In Rhode Island, I have yet to see a politician claiming credit for the police going to an encrypted talkgroup on the RISCON system, but there are plenty of chiefs touting increased officer safety without any statistics to back up their claims. I don't see any politicians claiming credit in DC, where there is obvious department mismanagement going on, and there are many claims that the move to encryption was to remove themselves in some small measure from media oversight.
While I agree that pressure on politicians MAY get some results, I do not see them as causing the problem. It is the radio salesmen that tout the features "already in the radio" that are available "at no additional cost."
- Status
Similar threads
