Editorial to Asbury Park Press Concerning Encryption

[JoeyC]

:roll: So I guess you missed my post above about local agencies that provide mutual aid to their brother agencies? And most of those agencies rely on scanners to keep them informed as to what situations are going on in the surrounding areas

Neighboring agencies of encrypted jurisdictions are usually given/sold a radio(s) for those purposes.

...and again there should be no reason to encrypt normal dispatch channels...sensitive tactical channels (swat, drug) yes...but there is no rational reason to encrypt calls for traffic accidents and other routine calls...
Marshall KE4ZNR

Unless you are the administration of the police department or agency, you have no business calling what is rational or not for the operation of their department.

Further, if the general public were polled about whether their local law enforcement radios should be encrypted for security reasons, I believe an overwelming majority would be in favor of it.

Some of you guys who are so disturbed about this encryption thing seem to think we scanner listeners are a huge population. It may appear that every other person in the world has a scanner and wants to be nosy about neighborhood goings-on from the Radioreference.com perspective, but this is NOT a common hobby, so don't expect the public to join the RR masses in protest of encrypted radio systems. Most people see this as a non-issue.

 

[SCPD]

Two words: Open Goverment.

The ability to hear what your goverment is doing by way of turning on a radio is a great way to provide un-intrusive oversight into day-to-day operations. It is also an excellent public relations tool that enhances the cooperation and collaboration between public service and the public they serve. This is a win-win. Anyone advocating blanket encryption is throwing away a huge asset in terms of extra eyes and ears and overall goodwill.

I do support the use of encryption for tactical responses. That also keeps the number of radios that actually need key management down to reasonable size. Anything more is a waste of money and effort.

-rick

 

[kd7rto]

There is no need to listen to the police bands unless 1) Entertainment or 2) Ulterior motives.

Then I suppose you see the newspaper as simple entertainment, serving no purpose in society beyond providing some amusement, and no significant loss if they stopped publishing.

I, on the other hand, value all my resources to stay informed. That which impedes the ability of the public to keep informed affects life in a much greater way than if a cable provider pulls the plug on a popular channel.

People make important decisions based upon this information. For instance, knowing about recent crimes in a neighborhood is absolutely necessary information to those who live there. How else would you know whether your deadbolt locks are all the security your house needs, or whether you need to get an alarm system, a big dog, or to move into a safer place.

 

[SAR923]

Neighboring agencies of encrypted jurisdictions are usually given/sold a radio(s) for those purposes.

Really? Can you give me one real life example of an allied agency who was "given" an encrypted radio for free? Any idea what the cost would be to equip every unit of an allied agency with an encryption capable radio, especially if the surrounding agencies were all using different encryption schemes?

This is not a complicated issue. If you keep your main dispatch frequencies unencrypted, other agencies can listen on their scanners and both know what's coming their way and be able to assist if needed. You have apparently never been in the position of having to follow a hot pursuit headed right toward you with information relayed by a dispatcher when the information is already five minutes old by the time you get it. Forget scanner hobbyists - this is an officer safety issue. Interoperability, the current buzz word of the post 9/11 world, is not well served by encrypting every radio frequency.

 

[JoeyC]

Really? Can you give me one real life example of an allied agency who was "given" an encrypted radio for free? Any idea what the cost would be to equip every unit of an allied agency with an encryption capable radio, especially if the surrounding agencies were all using different encryption schemes?

No I cannot, but I do not see it as such a far fetched idea as you apparently do. Nobody suggested that any department supply every officer on the street with a radio to the encrypted department. I said it was most probable that neighboring agencies have been given or purchased a radio for that purpose, most likely kept in the radio room for the dispatcher.

You have apparently never been in the position of having to follow a hot pursuit headed right toward you with information relayed by a dispatcher when the information is already five minutes old by the time you get it. Forget scanner hobbyists - this is an officer safety issue. Interoperability, the current buzz word of the post 9/11 world, is not well served by encrypting every radio frequency.

Irregardless of whether a department encrypts its routine traffic or not, the problem of not knowing what the neighboring agencies are doing/talking about on their radios is an issue that cops across the world deal with daily. Its not feasable nor practical for alot of places - (Orange County CA comes to mind), where there are numerous small cities with their own deparments and dispatchers to have every agency listening to every other agencies radio transmissions. It may work in rural settings where there is little radio traffic, but not in metro areas where the radios are busy. Common unencrypted channels are usually available for cross-agency communications when needed. Also, I don't think most cops are like a lot of scanner enthusiasts, where the attitude is the "more radios the better".

And to answer your comment about a hot pursuit headed towards me, no, I have not experienced this scenario as I am not in law enforcement. I have, however, for 30 years or more, been an avid listener of police comms, and have heard, numerous occasions and continue to hear even today where info is passed through the dispatcher that is several minutes old. It happens everyday, at least with the California Highway Patrol and neighboring agencies, and there is no encryption involved.

 

[kc2kvz]

Well written letter. Encryption for the sake of encryption is silly. To the posters who complained about too many members of the public calling in tips, be glad someone took the time to call you. At least you know the public is supporting you and is paying attention. If you think that all crimes can be solved with the resources of the police alone, you won't solve very many crimes.

 

[w4rez]

If you think that all crimes can be solved with the resources of the police alone, you won't solve very many crimes.

Amen! I was burglarized back in 2003 and it took a bit of my own detective work to track down the perpetrator. After everything was said and done, I thanked the detective that was working with me for catching the guy and he tells me "No...thank you! You did all of the work!" and then goes to tell me about how many burglaries go unsolved because the complaintant drops it in their lap and then moves on to other things.

Most crimes aren't big enough to justify putting a public service blurb out via the local news but this doesn't mean that they shouldn't be solved. This is where the scanner owning public is a big help. Not to mention that the public gets the information in realtime and not several hours later. By the time a BOLO for a vehicle involved in a crime makes the news and the papers, the perp could already be a couple of states away.