I couldn't agree more JoeyC. That is exactly the point.
Chula Vista, CA. - Robbers use scanner app
- Thread starter disp10
- Start date
- Status
Okay if you really think the bad guys don't use scanner any way.... and that the police wasn't aware of it from the start then maybe you need to reevaluate who you preach common sense to... and even when they do use regular scanners they still get caught..... i also beg to ask the question why so meany people who think this hobby is wrong are on a site that is all about this hobby....
The real point here is dose the apps have any effect on law enforcement or any one else doing there job and frankly it don't, use people are going to show up at scene.... but they do any ways regardless of weather or not they here it on a phone app.... trust me i know! honestly the only bad thing about feeds are it mite make scanner prices go up due to no one buying them when some ones already broadcasting them online.... because the feeds are online has not changed the game it has just changed the means to an end which has always failed for bad guys and always will...... to me all the whining about the feeds may just show a lack in faith of departments own abilities and a lack of faith in the department by the public....
KE4RWS
Member
I have to admit I thought about becoming a feed provider after buying my second digital scanner but decided against it - at least for the masses. I do have a feed up and running but only for myself, and the stream is only online when I want it. I'm reluctant to keep one of my scanners in my car so I thought I would simply stream my local PD dispatch strictly for my own access. Although I really could care less about what the "police" think even if I did stream their traffic for public use, I decided to only provide it for my own use. I have nothing against those that do provide public streaming. This was merely a personal decision I made for myself.
JoeyC
Senior Member
There have been cases that scanners have been used in the commission of a crime, yes, but the difference in the number of scanner owners vs. the number of cellphone owners is astronomical.
not the issue being discussed
The real point is the agencies are considering encryption when all of a sudden everyone is listening and no longer is the listening from hobbyists alone.
you got it backwards, scanner prices would go down if no one were buying them, which would eventually lead to no more production of them.
radrefuser
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1
Reminds me of a story I heard from a friend. Just so happened that his kid brother had been playing too many video games and thought he and his buddies would break into the second floor of a building, cut a hole in the floor and haul the safe from an Army Surplus store below. They were brilliant, figured they'd keep a scanner handy. Not to mention the fact they planned to use two guys to lift a 100 year old free standing safe (can someone say HEAVY) up to the second floor with ropes and then carry it down the fire escape and take it home so they could take their time getting into it. They also figured they would use FRS radios to keep in touch. Well, half way through the heist, the lookout decides to change positions and walks around the corner of the building. Walks right into an officer. But there wasn't just one, there were several and there hadn't been a peep about a suspected break in on the scanner. Right then, mastermind who is busy trying to cut a whole through the floor jumps on the radio and asks his look out if he sees any signs of any cops.
Needless to say MAJOR FAIL!!
I was laughing sooo hard I couldn't breath.
Needless to say MAJOR FAIL!!
I was laughing sooo hard I couldn't breath.
I remember a story - which I probably read here at Radio Reference - about a K9 officer who was frequently calling the dispatcher looking for directions. He wasnt really lost - he was just getting a leg up on the perps who might have scanners.
online scanners
I am a feed provider for my county and also a firefighter. My brother and a few of the guys at the S.O. and other FD's use my feed on their Iphone apps to listen when not around the radio or when out of town when something is happening. Also if you go by the rules on the site about not broadcasting back channels like tac channels then there is a lot they may not hear when commiting there crimes. Its up to them to use it illegally.
I am a feed provider for my county and also a firefighter. My brother and a few of the guys at the S.O. and other FD's use my feed on their Iphone apps to listen when not around the radio or when out of town when something is happening. Also if you go by the rules on the site about not broadcasting back channels like tac channels then there is a lot they may not hear when commiting there crimes. Its up to them to use it illegally.
so true... but
Hobbyists won't be penalized by encryption. It's the filth that "think" they can utilize the tech to their advantage that pay for their crimes. YES is is sad that some of these scumbags stoop so low as to try to manipulate it but they still have no idea of the level of law enforcement that is already in place. Bottom line is if you break the law you WILL get caught and it's been a well-greased wheel for a long time. Please don't condemn the hobbyists who still enjoy the freedom of being able to vouch for the police doing their jobs.
Media also relies on radio! Evidence to convict with witnesses who "heard it go down" play a part. For example, I don't have to be an "eye-witness"... I can be an "ear-witness"!!! Isolating the evidence by way of encrypting frequencies can also sway a judge/jury NOT in the favor of conviction. Here are people who put their lives on the line every day and are trying to protect the public on a daily basis! We should be careful to jump on the "police secrecy wagon"! It could bit us in the hiney!
There is a reason some counties choose not to encrypt. Myself, I think it is a smart decision. Most of the people who listen to scanners are well-intentioned.
The golden rule should be this(for both sides of the argument) Evil hides when brought to light and hates to be in the light. If you have nothing to hide and your intentions are pure... why hide?
Peace all! Be safe!~
Hobbyists won't be penalized by encryption. It's the filth that "think" they can utilize the tech to their advantage that pay for their crimes. YES is is sad that some of these scumbags stoop so low as to try to manipulate it but they still have no idea of the level of law enforcement that is already in place. Bottom line is if you break the law you WILL get caught and it's been a well-greased wheel for a long time. Please don't condemn the hobbyists who still enjoy the freedom of being able to vouch for the police doing their jobs.
Media also relies on radio! Evidence to convict with witnesses who "heard it go down" play a part. For example, I don't have to be an "eye-witness"... I can be an "ear-witness"!!! Isolating the evidence by way of encrypting frequencies can also sway a judge/jury NOT in the favor of conviction. Here are people who put their lives on the line every day and are trying to protect the public on a daily basis! We should be careful to jump on the "police secrecy wagon"! It could bit us in the hiney!
There is a reason some counties choose not to encrypt. Myself, I think it is a smart decision. Most of the people who listen to scanners are well-intentioned.
The golden rule should be this(for both sides of the argument) Evil hides when brought to light and hates to be in the light. If you have nothing to hide and your intentions are pure... why hide?
Peace all! Be safe!~
JoeyC.
The bigtime criminals WILL buy the best of the best digital scanners and use them real-time. We hobbyists enjoy the feed for better reasons than the scum. Most of the scumbags will never think of such a thing. I know for a fact, listening to MY local feed that we have one helluva TEAM. To think that that drunken bast^age that left the bar after assaulting someone had a scanner on his iphone is laughable. To all keeping us safe here at home! BE SAFE OUT THERE! rock on!
The bigtime criminals WILL buy the best of the best digital scanners and use them real-time. We hobbyists enjoy the feed for better reasons than the scum. Most of the scumbags will never think of such a thing. I know for a fact, listening to MY local feed that we have one helluva TEAM. To think that that drunken bast^age that left the bar after assaulting someone had a scanner on his iphone is laughable. To all keeping us safe here at home! BE SAFE OUT THERE! rock on!
Thank you. Well said. As far as I see it after listening to my local feed, criminals have no chance even if they listened in. Our law enforcement down here is awesome. I've watched scenarios unfold that only command respect. Seeing apprehension of individuals suspect to crimes within literally minutes (time and time again) on my feed only serve to blow my mind and make me pray for our law enforcement officers at every level from dispatch to patrol, daily. Keep feeding! TYVM!
So how about a compromise. Have the streaming servers delay the audio for a set period of time. Say like 5 minutes for example. This is how it's done with Listen to Live ATC (Air Traffic Control) Communications | LiveATC.net with the audio to comply with FAA regulations.
Most scanning enthusiasts already have a scanner that can receive in real time. And for those not in the area (and maybe some who are) what difference would it make? They still get to monitor day to day communications.
Most people considering ill intent would likely take the easy way and use a smart phone app. If the criminals did have a scanner then they likely have planned out the crime in a little more detail and have taken additional precautions.
Somehow there needs to be a balance of transparency and security. "Homeland Security" and "terrorists" are not of themselves reasons to encrypt ALL communications. Transparency helps the public know what their officers are doing (or not doing) and provides a level of accountability. I have no problem with Spec ops, TAC and investigation channels being encrypted due to the sensitive nature of the communications. There is room for all.
However, this is an internet forum and I'm trying to be reasonable.
Most scanning enthusiasts already have a scanner that can receive in real time. And for those not in the area (and maybe some who are) what difference would it make? They still get to monitor day to day communications.
Most people considering ill intent would likely take the easy way and use a smart phone app. If the criminals did have a scanner then they likely have planned out the crime in a little more detail and have taken additional precautions.
Somehow there needs to be a balance of transparency and security. "Homeland Security" and "terrorists" are not of themselves reasons to encrypt ALL communications. Transparency helps the public know what their officers are doing (or not doing) and provides a level of accountability. I have no problem with Spec ops, TAC and investigation channels being encrypted due to the sensitive nature of the communications. There is room for all.
However, this is an internet forum and I'm trying to be reasonable.
On the bottom of this page: http://www.airtrafficatlanta.com/ there is a disclaimer in tiny, little letters that state:
* Audio and Video is delayed about 5 minutes in accordance with United States Federal Regulations.
I'm not sure why the FAQ is different. Regardless, an audio delay would still be a good compromise.
* Audio and Video is delayed about 5 minutes in accordance with United States Federal Regulations.
I'm not sure why the FAQ is different. Regardless, an audio delay would still be a good compromise.
Last edited:
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
So how about a compromise. Have the streaming servers delay the audio for a set period of time. Say like 5 minutes for example. This is how it's done with Listen to Live ATC (Air Traffic Control) Communications | LiveATC.net with the audio to comply with FAA regulations.
Most scanning enthusiasts already have a scanner that can receive in real time. And for those not in the area (and maybe some who are) what difference would it make? They still get to monitor day to day communications.
Most people considering ill intent would likely take the easy way and use a smart phone app. If the criminals did have a scanner then they likely have planned out the crime in a little more detail and have taken additional precautions.
Somehow there needs to be a balance of transparency and security. "Homeland Security" and "terrorists" are not of themselves reasons to encrypt ALL communications. Transparency helps the public know what their officers are doing (or not doing) and provides a level of accountability. I have no problem with Spec ops, TAC and investigation channels being encrypted due to the sensitive nature of the communications. There is room for all.
However, this is an internet forum and I'm trying to be reasonable.
I don't think the issue is delaying the audio. I think the issue is that agencies' radio traffic now reaches a worldwide audience. Sure, anyone in the RF coverage area can buy a scanner, or radio programmed to RX that system, and listen in to any unencrypted communications.
It's a different ballgame now that feeds are up streaming to the world. The risk managers are now factoring this in when re-configuring or replacing radio systems, which are occurring more often as grants become available and the narrowband mandate of Jan 2013 comes closer.
Digital is the future. Digital is being pushed by radio vendors. It's no secret that it's a click of a mouse to enable encryption on modern digital radios. Misuse of streaming apps keeps this in the front of many peoples' minds.
It's only a matter of time before all public safety radio goes to encrypted digital, or LTE, whichever comes first.
Don't say it's not going to happen. Look at the UK with Airwave. Scanning in the UK is about as fun as watching paint dry.
Are you sure? So a risk manager is going to encrypt his system NOT because criminals in his area can hear them on a scanner, but because someone on the other side of the globe can? That doesn't compute.
If you mean "in the next 5-15 decades" then you would be accurate. Anything sooner would be a hazardous and improper guess.
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
I'm pretty sure, this topic comes up more and more in the many state drills I've attended lately. It's the fact that there are more listeners period, and the ease of access that is getting the attention.
As far as all PS going digital, it's going to happen. and I don't think the timetable is as far off as some think. It also depends on how bad the market, that is users, demand it.
The fact is there are a tremendous more ears listening in, not just guys in rooms full of radios either. Encrypting in the digital domain is cheap and easy these days compared to say, 10 years ago.
It is what it is.
brianearlspilner
Member
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/4.5.1_57_D2G-38) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
Didnt want to create another thread about criminals using a scanner.
Good thing this moron got caught.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...-of-homes-of-public-officials-police-say.html
However Covina PD might not be so happy about this.
Didnt want to create another thread about criminals using a scanner.
Good thing this moron got caught.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...-of-homes-of-public-officials-police-say.html
However Covina PD might not be so happy about this.
Last edited:
OK, didn't realize you where referring to airtrafficatlanta.com as your post talks about LiveATC.net. Just did a comparison with Las Vegas Tower on 119.900 vs the LiveATC feed and there was a negligible (less than 15 second) delay at the moment. Although, I have seen delays of closer to a minute at times.
I think a lot of us here on these forums realize that as technology moves forward this is inevitable.
Sure it does. Identity theft can occur globally now (instead of only locally) with a scanner feed that is broadcast ***as well as archived*** on the net. The threat of potential occurrence increases dramatically by the coverage (worldwide.....can't get much bigger than that), perhaps even to a point that it actually becomes a threat.
This will absolutely "compute" to any risk manager who is wise, and it should prompt that manager to be proactive when it comes to protecting the personal information of those public safety (the gov't.) comes into contact with.
- Status
Similar threads
