• 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

Bristol Police

Status
Not open for further replies.

APX7500X2

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
590
Location
NY/CT
Does anybody know if Bristol Police would ever go back in the Clear?
Why go backwards?
In a few years they will have to do some sort of upgrade, I would guess a TDMA system like New Brittan with 100% encryption like they do now.

Remember we have no real need to listen to live PD traffic, We have a want but no need.

I like the idea of all public safety communications being encrypted and have delayed feeds so we can listen, That way everyone wins, they get what they want and we get what we want, We have no reason to listen live so 60 min delayed would be fine.
 

firerick100

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
797
Location
wolcott ct
Why go backwards?
In a few years they will have to do some sort of upgrade, I would guess a TDMA system like New Brittan with 100% encryption like they do now.

Remember we have no real need to listen to live PD traffic, We have a want but no need.

I like the idea of all public safety communications being encrypted and have delayed feeds so we can listen, That way everyone wins, they get what they want and we get what we want, We have no reason to listen live so 60 min delayed would be fine.
For what it's worth,encrypting is a good thing for sensitive channels like narcotics,bomb squad ,swat and things like that but so many people like to know what's going on in their city or town real time,If the police really have something sensitive to dispatch they should have an encrypted channel,I know the subject came up about criminals in possession of a scanner to see where the cops are or if they been called.i have yet to hear about on the news or read in the paper that the criminal had a scanner on them and couple of towns already went unencrypted in the area ( middlebury,southbury).also the newspapers and tv news stations listen to scanners to get the important calls so they can report it on the news.there are some people that are for encryption and a lot more against it. But your idea is not a bad one but 60 minutes is way to much time.
 

eclipse175

Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
53
Location
New England
For anyone who likes to know what's going on in their city, they can listen to the FD or watch news or check twitter. The benefit to encryption far outweighs the cost of a few upset scanner enthusiasts. It enables dispatch to provide more sensitive information to officers prior to their arrival on scene. Thus better preparing them for what they are walking into. Most of the time smaller towns/cities don't have the money for a secondary encrypted channel.

Another practice that is becoming more common is for initial call information to go out over encryption and units calling on scene or clearing is done in the clear. If officer safety means I lose my ability to listen to PD routine traffic, I am all for it.

Routinely I have heard of bad guys using scanners. A simple google search yielded this article http://www.oregonlive.com/beaverton/index.ssf/2014/01/convicted_burglar_accused_in_3.html
 
Last edited:

firerick100

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
797
Location
wolcott ct
We can talk about this topic forever and eclipse175 has a good point about officer safety,I hate hearing about an officer getting killed in the line of duty,Bristol and new Britain are encrypted and this is my own opinion but new Britain and Bristol are not highly violent cities unlike hartford and new haven which Hartford had 23 homicides last year and new haven was in the teens but Bristol I think had 1 and new Britain maybe a couple, and Hartford and new haven are not encrypted.the way I see it we all can talk about it until we are blue in the face but if a department decides to encrypt or not,our opinions or likes and dislikes are not going to matter to them,they will do it or not do it.the only pds I listen to are state pd,wolcott and Waterbury so it does not affect me about any other town.

As far as the initial post I do not see Bristol going unencrypted but at least the fire dept is unencrypted
 

jdanon

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
49
Eventually it's all going to be encrypted. Luckily I find enjoyment in monitoring aircraft, so I'll be OK for a long while. In the next several years 100% of police communications will be encrypted, at least in the rich states where they buy new systems like it's going out of style, and a lot of fire and EMS will be too because they seem to ride the coattails of any new police systems that are installed. It's getting kind of pointless to run out and buy the latest $500 scanner when shortly the only things you'll be able to monitor could be done with a $100 scanner. There just isn't a big enough scanner lobby, and most towns and cities go along with whatever the Motorola salesman recommends.
 

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,480
In 20 years of law enforcement, scanners where never a hindrance for us. We had them in the cruisers of neighboring towns hearing what's going on if in a mutual aid situation, or just plain curious.

We had encryption, but was only used if passing along some sensitive information (not very often) or coffee orders.

However, the trend in law enforcement since 9/11 has been one of more intrusive investigations and hiding certain operations or techniques. Now, I am NOT saying that cops are using it to do things illegally as many nay-sayers suggest, but that with the advent of Facebook, Twitter, text messaging by scanner users, media and keyboard investigative reporters - what may have been routine law enforcement jargon and casual dialog is now taken way out of context and skewed out of proportion.

We didn't see stuff like we do now even up to 2004. Now its a madhouse. Along with the advent of "cheap" encryption, its a no-brainer when ordering new equipment than it was before. What would cost $400-$600 a radio is now $10.
 

ansky

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,043
Location
NYC Metro
I am a scanner enthusiast, so I don't enjoy encryption. But I have heard police officers in various towns give out people's social security numbers, names, and addresses over the air and in the clear. I have even heard home security alarm codes given out by dispatchers. This is obviously a problem in terms of privacy and security.
 

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,480
...and that has been going on for well over 30 years... really nothing new. Go to "Any City USA" and (if available) turn on a "records" channel/talkgroup and you will hear information all day long.

With the widespread use of MDT's, it less of a problem, but nothing that hasn't been done since NCIC/NLETS and radio has been around.
 

MFCJR

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
266
Location
New Britain, CT
I have heard where the public helped the police catch criminals because of the information the police gave out over the radio and they heard it on their scanners. New Britain is not encrypted. Not sure why most think they are. Some cars are at their choice and sometimes the dispatch is. But mostly not. The only channel that New Britain has on full time encryption is the vice channel. As it should be. Because in the past they were monitored by the criminals.

Mike
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
10,448
Location
Taxachusetts
Can you say ASR28 :)

...and that has been going on for well over 30 years... really nothing new. Go to "Any City USA" and (if available) turn on a "records" channel/talkgroup and you will hear information all day long.

With the widespread use of MDT's, it less of a problem, but nothing that hasn't been done since NCIC/NLETS and radio has been around.
 

ansky

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,043
Location
NYC Metro
...and that has been going on for well over 30 years... really nothing new. Go to "Any City USA" and (if available) turn on a "records" channel/talkgroup and you will hear information all day long.

With the widespread use of MDT's, it less of a problem, but nothing that hasn't been done since NCIC/NLETS and radio has been around.
30 years ago people were not worried about identity theft and all the nonsense that goes on now. Just because it was happening 30 years ago doesn't mean it's still acceptable today. Would you be ok with all your personal details being broadcast in the clear?
 

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,480
In most instances, a drivers license (or state ID card) number is all that is needed to find out if someone is wanted. If neither are available, a name and date of birth is all that is needed.

Typically social security numbers are no longer used to try to identify a person, and typically state databases for license searches cannot be performed by just a SSN.

Federal and state warrant databases can typically be searched if the persons SSN is known when a warrant or missing person's SSN was entered.

So in reality, in the past and in today's world, typically a DL# or name and DOB is all that is required.

I can use Google and Facebook and learn and discover more information about a person than a NCIC/state check would return. In fact, we routinely used those and other sources as information tools than anything else.

If I wanted to steal someone's identity with a decent success rate, chances are I will not be using a scanner sitting on a police channel in hopes that enough detailed information will come across to fill out a credit card application.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
10,448
Location
Taxachusetts
YMMV for your Local files, but many states do allow LE to search by SSN. Especially those DMV/RMV who previously used the SSN as the OLN.

NCIC (Person Files- Warrants/Missing) and FBI III (Triple I - criminal records) can be searched by SSN, yes if Entered in the first place :(

Typically social security numbers are no longer used to try to identify a person, and typically state databases for license searches cannot be performed by just a SSN.

Federal and state warrant databases can typically be searched if the persons SSN is known when a warrant or missing person's SSN was entered.

So in reality, in the past and in today's world, typically a DL# or name and DOB is all that is required.

.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
10,448
Location
Taxachusetts
Yes, I have no problem with it.

The chances of someone sitting on the freq to obtain info to steal is minimal. And (in my experince) 95% of the info being run is for a person who already has had a run-in with the law, who would want to steal that identity....:D

Would you be ok with all your personal details being broadcast in the clear?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top