Local PD requests my feed be delayed :(

Status
Not open for further replies.

OHIOSCAN

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
656
Location
Lorain Cnty, OH
These feeds will end the hobby, if you enjoy monitoring your local PD pull it if you can't delay it. Before the jackals howl I agree the feeds are cool and probable are not a big criminal tool. But the fact is they are giving dept's another excuse to encrypt. Even as taxpayers we have no divine right to monitor, I think we should have the right to monitor general traffic but the drug war and 911 have militarized our public safety agencies. These feeds should be delayed by 10-20 minutes, that won't make every dept happy but would be a good start. Where I live the encryption is being turned on and feeds and scanners where used as an excuse in one situation. RR should think strongly about implementing a delay or in years to come there will be little to monitor.
 

mk262

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
423
Location
Daytona Beach
May as well stop providing a feed or you'll be listening to encryption before too long.
 

dkf435

Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
707
Location
Sweet Home/Foster OR
The only times we allow a delay on a feed is if it is provided directly by the agency and marked as an official feed. Call the officer back and see if they are willing to provide the feed themselves...
Without change to this policy I am afraid that there will be more migration to full encryption if you like it or not, we have an agency in the area looking at digital formats that are not scanner friendly because of too many people listening to them on their smart phones on car stops and other incidents.

David Kb7uns
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,352
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
What a load of BS. These cops really cheese me off with this nonsense of blaming scanner feeds for their problems.

Ever watch COPS? I love that show - I watch it whenever I can. But in just about every episode of that show, the officers display sloppy, careless police work. What next, will we be told that scanner feeds on smartphones are the reason for THAT too? Give me a break, Barney Fife.

The officers should respond with the mindset that EVERYONE is listening in INCLUDING the bad guy and take proper precautions to handle that situation. The fact that they are CATCHING crooks who are listening in proves (to me at least) that their ability to monitor isn't much help to them, and with an open system comes the benefit of an entire city full of extra eyes and ears who can help when needed by calling in and reporting information that can assist the officers, such as the location of a suspect vehicle, etc. It seems like a no brainer to me why they should keep the system open. The benefits of doing so far outweigh any possible risks. I think they just need it explained to them so they understand why that scanner feed can be their best friend instead of a tool of the enemy.

-AZ
 

mk262

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
423
Location
Daytona Beach
What a load of BS. These cops really cheese me off with this nonsense of blaming scanner feeds for their problems.

Ever watch COPS? I love that show - I watch it whenever I can. But in just about every episode of that show, the officers display sloppy, careless police work. What next, will we be told that scanner feeds on smartphones are the reason for THAT too? Give me a break, Barney Fife.

The officers should respond with the mindset that EVERYONE is listening in INCLUDING the bad guy and take proper precautions to handle that situation. The fact that they are CATCHING crooks who are listening in proves (to me at least) that their ability to monitor isn't much help to them, and with an open system comes the benefit of an entire city full of extra eyes and ears who can help when needed by calling in and reporting information that can assist the officers, such as the location of a suspect vehicle, etc. It seems like a no brainer to me why they should keep the system open. The benefits of doing so far outweigh any possible risks. I think they just need it explained to them so they understand why that scanner feed can be their best friend instead of a tool of the enemy.

-AZ
COPS is hardly a baseline for police work.

Criminals can absolutely evade LE with a scanner or a feed. All those yo-yos have their boost mobile smartphones and are listening. Trust me.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
scanner

Chad, it is one of the major reasons I stopped the Grand Canyon Feed. A delay option would improve officer safety. If your stopped by the police while having a scanner in your car. You are asked to turn it off during the stop. But, with streaming feeds, someone could be listening to it via their phone and the officer would be none the wiser.
if you have the scanner hidden ,they wont see it,right,key thing here is dont get stopped.
you think they dont know what you are streaming?
Shut it off before you get pulled over.Why would you leave it out and on?
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,352
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
COPS is hardly a baseline for police work.
I disagree. The camera is there and rolling on everything they do, including all their mistakes that even I as a non-LEO can spot easily. Last night on that show I watched two cops (TWO!) walk right past a fugitive hiding under his mattress (obvious bulge under it and all) to go look for him in his closet. Thank God he was just a moron and not an armed moron because he could have easily poked a gun out from under the mattress and shot them both. It was all I could do to not yell at the TV "LOOK UNDER THE MATTRESS YOU MORONS!"

Criminals can absolutely evade LE with a scanner or a feed. All those yo-yos have their boost mobile smartphones and are listening. Trust me.
Then why do we keep hearing that the cops are CATCHING crooks who are listening on smart phones? Wouldn't most of them get away? I think it's not that much of a risk because most criminals are dopers who are too stupid to have real jobs. They can listen in all they want and it doesn't matter because they're too high, stupid or both to use the information they hear to their advantage. That's why they keep getting caught. I say make it an additional charge and beef up the law to include a mandatory minimum 5 year sentence. Then that little problem would solve itself in due time, don't you think?

-AZ
 

OHIOSCAN

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
656
Location
Lorain Cnty, OH
Patrol guys are not the problem, it's the decision makers who count. In most large depts the high level command types are very political, they are no different then the average politician. To them transparency and an informed public means more grief for them. "Nothing to see hear folks, just keep moving". To many idiots using scanner feed phone apps are giving are hobby a bad rap. The Discovery channel has aired at least 2 shows where phone scanner apps where used to evade LE. The Federal Fusion Center has even warned LE about there use, does anybody not think this will won't lead to trouble.
 

mk262

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
423
Location
Daytona Beach
I disagree. The camera is there and rolling on everything they do, including all their mistakes that even I as a non-LEO can spot easily. Last night on that show I watched two cops (TWO!) walk right past a fugitive hiding under his mattress (obvious bulge under it and all) to go look for him in his closet. Thank God he was just a moron and not an armed moron because he could have easily poked a gun out from under the mattress and shot them both. It was all I could do to not yell at the TV "LOOK UNDER THE MATTRESS YOU MORONS!"



Then why do we keep hearing that the cops are CATCHING crooks who are listening on smart phones? Wouldn't most of them get away? I think it's not that much of a risk because most criminals are dopers who are too stupid to have real jobs. They can listen in all they want and it doesn't matter because they're too high, stupid or both to use the information they hear to their advantage. That's why they keep getting caught. I say make it an additional charge and beef up the law to include a mandatory minimum 5 year sentence. Then that little problem would solve itself in due time, don't you think?

-AZ
It's hilarious you think COPS is how it works in the real world. That's a terrible source for your experience. I'm sure while you drink your natural ice and eat store brand potato chips it's very safe and calm to armchair quarterback. I can tell you've never cleared a room before.

Just because someone is listening to a scanner feed doesn't mean they WILL get away but it definitely gives them a leg up. Especially in areas where they have very strict pursuit rules--it lets them know when it's safe to stop running (or hiding). It also most importantly removes all the barriers to access. Instead of hobbyists, now any random criminal or suspect can tune in. In other words, you're seeing X number who were caught with them but you have no idea what Y number is that got away.

The difficulty of passing a law is a lot higher than simply encrypting traffic. It's cheap (or free) in many cases. You can keep living in a fantasy or accept reality.

Enjoy DPS while you can. Our HP is 100% encrypted statewide.
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,190
What a load of BS. These cops really cheese me off with this nonsense of blaming scanner feeds for their problems.

Ever watch COPS? I love that show - I watch it whenever I can. But in just about every episode of that show, the officers display sloppy, careless police work. What next, will we be told that scanner feeds on smartphones are the reason for THAT too? Give me a break, Barney Fife.

The officers should respond with the mindset that EVERYONE is listening in INCLUDING the bad guy and take proper precautions to handle that situation. The fact that they are CATCHING crooks who are listening in proves (to me at least) that their ability to monitor isn't much help to them, and with an open system comes the benefit of an entire city full of extra eyes and ears who can help when needed by calling in and reporting information that can assist the officers, such as the location of a suspect vehicle, etc. It seems like a no brainer to me why they should keep the system open. The benefits of doing so far outweigh any possible risks. I think they just need it explained to them so they understand why that scanner feed can be their best friend instead of a tool of the enemy.

-AZ
Because you are some sort of expert right? Give me a break.
 

kd7ckq

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
213
Location
No. AZ
if you have the scanner hidden ,they wont see it,right,key thing here is dont get stopped.
you think they dont know what you are streaming?
Shut it off before you get pulled over.Why would you leave it out and on?
I have six uncles not including my Father who where LEO's and several Cousins that currently are LEO's. They tell me that on the occasion someone does have a scanner in their vehicle, most of the time it on when they walk up. Some people like to shove it in their face and argue with them over turning off while stopped. It only takes one person to pull a stunt like that to change a LEO's views.
I was pulled over once for going thru a stop light that had turned yellow as I went thru the intersection. The officer decided to pull me over. I turned it off before he got out and walked up to my drivers door. Seeing that I did have a scanner in the vehicle along with ham radio gear. He asked me to step out of the vehicle. Gave me a warning for driving thru a yellow :roll: and let me go. The point is, YOU cant tell when your going to get pulled over and for what. Your vehicle might 'Match the Description', 'You where over the Speed Limit by a couple mph', or you might not notice your tail is out.
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,352
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
It's hilarious you think COPS is how it works in the real world. That's a terrible source for your experience. I'm sure while you drink your natural ice and eat store brand potato chips it's very safe and calm to armchair quarterback. I can tell you've never cleared a room before.
OK, if you say so. I guess giant lumps under a mattress couldn't POSSIBLY be the suspect. :roll: You're right about one thing - this IS quite hilarious watching the LEO's in here fall all over themselves in favor of encryption.

Just because someone is listening to a scanner feed doesn't mean they WILL get away but it definitely gives them a leg up. Especially in areas where they have very strict pursuit rules--it lets them know when it's safe to stop running (or hiding). It also most importantly removes all the barriers to access. Instead of hobbyists, now any random criminal or suspect can tune in. In other words, you're seeing X number who were caught with them but you have no idea what Y number is that got away.
And that has changed in the last 50 years.... how again? The bad guys have ALWAYS been able to listen. This is nothing new. And locking out EVERYONE won't mean the bad guys magically don't get away anymore. If anything, it increases the odds since the only ones who would even know to look for them are the understaffed police. In quite a few pursuits here in Phoenix over the years, the only thing that kept the bad guy from getting away was the fact that the news media had a helo overhead and reported the suspect's location to the cops. Encrypt everything and that goes away. This isn't rocket science guys.

The difficulty of passing a law is a lot higher than simply encrypting traffic. It's cheap (or free) in many cases. You can keep living in a fantasy or accept reality.

Enjoy DPS while you can. Our HP is 100% encrypted statewide.
You've got me there. It's far easier to flip the magic switch than to use a brain and think about the consequences. No argument from me on that.

-AZ
 

mk262

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
423
Location
Daytona Beach
OK, if you say so. I guess giant lumps under a mattress couldn't POSSIBLY be the suspect. :roll: You're right about one thing - this IS quite hilarious watching the LEO's in here fall all over themselves in favor of encryption.



And that has changed in the last 50 years.... how again? The bad guys have ALWAYS been able to listen. This is nothing new. And locking out EVERYONE won't mean the bad guys magically don't get away anymore. If anything, it increases the odds since the only ones who would even know to look for them are the understaffed police. In quite a few pursuits here in Phoenix over the years, the only thing that kept the bad guy from getting away was the fact that the news media had a helo overhead and reported the suspect's location to the cops. Encrypt everything and that goes away. This isn't rocket science guys.



You've got me there. It's far easier to flip the magic switch than to use a brain and think about the consequences. No argument from me on that.

-AZ
I don't see anyone in here advocating encryption? We are just telling you the reality and I guess you're uncomfortable with that.

Let's observe:
Situation A (1994): To listen to the popo, you have to buy a scanner which may costs hundreds of dollars and have some level of specialized knowledge to program it, setup a better antenna, etc. Plus on-going changes like rebanding, changing of frequencies, new talkgroups.
Situation B (2014): Install free app on free-after-rebate phone and click play.

You're seriously telling me that nothing has changed in the past 50 years? Denial.
 

prcguy

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
8,283
Location
So Cal - Richardson, TX - Tewksbury, MA
My opinion is do not delay the feed and do not take it down. A feed provider should provide a real time feed or go get out of the business. There are probably many more people listening on hardware scanners than feeds on cell phones so why should one facet of this hobby be crippled when another is not?

Last time I checked it is a federal offense to make use of police radio traffic during the commission of a crime. I would make sure anyone caught listening to a feed while doing the deed pays the maximum penalty instead of penalizing the 99.9 something percent of those that simply enjoy listening to a scanner feed from across the country, etc.

Depending on the PD, the amount of jurisdictions and frequencies, it could be nearly impossible for someone with a cell phone to actually make good use of a scanner feed to aid them in a crime. There may be too many channels to monitor simultaneously to pick up the specific call that is related to the criminal monitoring on his cell phone. Like LAPD where I live where you can be standing next to the police car and miss the radio traffic unless your scanning several frequencies related to your area.

Don't delay! Don't drop the feed!
prcguy
 
Last edited:

QDP2012

Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Messages
1,901
The OP can:
  • leave the feed as is and risk upsetting the police
  • shut-down the feed
  • move the feed to a different provider that allows delays
  • try to convince the police to sponsor the feed as an official-feed here, and have it delayed.
The next step is for the OP to choose what to do.
 

APSN556

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
155
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I have spoken again with the commander and Deputy Chief of the department regarding this issue. They are completely against hosting the feed themselves. That came as no surprise. I presented to them a few options that I consider compromises. The first is to pull down the police feed from broadcastify and host the audio myself. If I host it myself, I would place a delay on the feed and it would only be available on my site. No mobile apps. The second option is to host it myself and make it only available to myself and a couple of my volunteer reporters. This would be done though a password protected feed. The third option to to remove the feeds completely and go back to listening and reporting straight from the scanner.

If none of these options are accepted, and they wind up going fully encrypted, then its obvious the reason for encryption wasn't really to keep information out of the hands of bad guys (in my opinion) but rather out of the hands of... reporters. I wholeheartedly agree with one of the posters above that mentioned politics play a HUGE roll in these types of decisions.
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,352
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
Let's observe:
Situation A (1994): To listen to the popo, you have to buy a scanner which may costs hundreds of dollars and have some level of specialized knowledge to program it, setup a better antenna, etc. Plus on-going changes like rebanding, changing of frequencies, new talkgroups.
Situation B (2014): Install free app on free-after-rebate phone and click play.

You're seriously telling me that nothing has changed in the past 50 years? Denial.
Bad guys have always been able to listen. That much has not changed. One of the stories I shot was about a ring of armed robbers dubbed the "Sonic Bandits" by the local police because the Sonic drive-ins around here were their favorite targets. When they caught the gang finally, they found them in a hotel room with a dozen scanners. So fast forward to today, they might have had a dozen smartphones. Big whoop.

Also most feeds are pretty much useless for following one call - they jump all over the place, especially in large metro areas. Imagine being a bad guy listening in on your phone as the cops chase you and then all of a sudden you hear some totally unrelated call on another channel about a domestic dispute or two cops on a talkaround channel discussing where they want to take lunch. Pretty useless right? So we can cut the bull about the bad guys being able to evade the cops thanks to smartphones. They might get lucky once in a while but if criminals have proven anything it's that they never learn, they get greedy/cocky/careless and eventually caught. It's not a matter of if, only when. Meanwhile, all the good guys out there who are listening can keep an eye out for the guy if he does elude police or even better, they can use the information to stay away from the area altogether instead of unknowingly wandering into a police situation.

We're straying from the topic here - Chad's got a big problem. He can either tell the cops "too bad" and then they encrypt or he can find a way to put a delay in and keep his site running. If it were me, I'd find another host and use a delay, or just limit the stream to dispatch only so they can move to a tactical channel and the baddies can't hear it. I honestly don't understand why RR won't give us the option to delay a feed if requested, but if that's their stance on it then I don't see that he has any other choice.

Chad, if you want some help with feed hosting, PM or email me. I know a guy who might be able to help you out.

-AZ
 

DisasterGuy

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
1,203
Location
Maryland Shore
As someone on the system administration side I can say that things here don't line up with reality. The hype of mobile app listeners is akin to the fear of mobile scanners (leading to mobile scanner laws in several states) that sprang up in the 60's, 70's and 80's. As someone else mentioned, anything on an unencrypted talkgroup should be considered as being monitored by the whole world. If you have something that requires security - use encryption. We maintain all Law Enforcement agencies with a minimum of one unencrypted talkgroup and one encrypted talkgroup for this reason.

In the '70's we had evil mobile scanners and aggressive dobermans and rottweilers
Now we have evil mobile apps and aggressive putbulls.
We need to stop blaming technologies (and popular dog breeds) for the actions of people. In a few years no one will care about mobile apps and they will blame something else. I


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.1.2; en-us; DROID RAZR Build/9.8.2O-72_VZW-16-5) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30)

QDP2012 said:
The OP can:
  • leave the feed as is and risk upsetting the police
  • shut-down the feed
  • move the feed to a different provider that allows delays
  • try to convince the police to sponsor the feed as an official-feed here, and have it delayed.
The next step is for the OP to choose what to do.
Missing option: introduce a delay anyway.
 

APSN556

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
155
Location
Phoenix, AZ
The only times we allow a delay on a feed is if it is provided directly by the agency and marked as an official feed. Call the officer back and see if they are willing to provide the feed themselves...
What if the department were to send a request on letterhead asking RR to provide a delay to my feed? Would that suffice? They do not want to host the feed themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top