DMR, NXDN and ProVoice Upgrades for SDS200

[jlynch4614]

If primary monitoring area is Kent, Cecil, Talbot, Queen Anne Counties, do I need to upgrade for DMR, NXDA or Provoice with the SDS200?

Thanks

 

[maus92]

If primary monitoring area is Kent, Cecil, Talbot, Queen Anne Counties, do I need to upgrade for DMR, NXDA or Provoice with the SDS200?

Thanks

No, if you listen primarily to Public Safety. Those four counties operate on Maryland FIRST, a P25 Phase 2 network.

 

[jlynch4614]

Thanks

 

[maus92]

Thanks

Note that Cecil, Talbot and Queen Anne counties feel the need to encrypt their law enforcement operations for some reason, while Kent County Sheriff and all the FDs remain in the clear.

 

[Dispatcher308]

Note that Cecil, Talbot and Queen Anne counties feel the need to encrypt their law enforcement operations for some reason, while Kent County Sheriff and all the FDs remain in the clear.

Its coming in the future

 

[maus92]

Not unexpected - have to keep up with the Jones.

 

[doctordave]

Its coming in the future

I find it interesting that small, rural LE agencies are heading in this direction. Do we know why they are pursuing this? Is this something that is being actively encouraged by the state? Do you have a sense that MSP will move to fully encrypt?

 

[maus92]

Encryption is not being "encouraged" by the state, but it is available and easier to manage on fully digital systems like FIRST. It is however being "encouraged" by Motorola, since the make money on encryption licenses for each subscriber. DHS is "encouraging" encryption as a policy, but then again they don't answer directly to constituents as local officials do. I doubt MSP will encrypt routine operations since they have MDTs, plus they have a consent decree wrt profiling a few years back. Same with Montgomery County. The smaller, more rural jurisdictions are generally more conservative, and give sheriff's departments and smaller forces wider latitude to conduct operations in secrecy (it seems.) And bottom line, it is relatively inexpensive to install and maintain encryption on a few radios rather than thousands - and we haven't started to talk about interoperability and the key management headaches that entails.

 

[u2brent]

They want to keep the public (primarily chicken farmers) in the dark as far as what police are doing in their own neigborhoods.. It's like they have something to hide, Or would rather not deal the public unless it's on their own terms..

Oh Wait, I have an excellent idea! Let's start an LE stream for Kent.. That'll surely help the process along.. wt...

 

[maus92]

They want to keep the public (primarily chicken farmers) in the dark as far as what police are doing in their own neigborhoods.. It's like they have something to hide, Or would rather not deal the public unless it's on their own terms..

Oh Wait, I have an excellent idea! Let's start an LE stream for Kent.. That'll surely help the process along.. wt...

Some departments would like to control the message, and police unions want to protect their membership from scrutiny, both antithetical to open and transparent government.

 

[AK9R]

Folks, let's keep the thread on topic. The OP is asking about monitoring certain counties and I don't think he's looking for a debate about encryption.