bluefox2163
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2005
- Messages
- 459
encryption
lets face it thier trying to hide something,especially fowl language
lets face it thier trying to hide something,especially fowl language
Meriden PD Breaking news
- Thread starter 55engine
- Start date
- Status
bluefox2163
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2005
- Messages
- 459
encryption
they are trying to hide something esp fowl language
they are trying to hide something esp fowl language
eclipse175
Member
That makes absolutely no sense..... Why would they encrypt communications just to be able to use foul language? Furthermore how would they explain their dispatcher cursing when dealing with the general public? Lastly, if they went encrypted just to be able to use what some see as "offensive" language who really cares anyways?
freightguy
Member
That's true! Frequently specific time periods are conveniently lost!
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 3,620
Um, yeah, sure.
Let me think of how many conversations I've had at cheif's meetings where it was stated:
"You know, we haven't said over the air - lets go grab this minority and bash his head in yet..., can we encypt our signals so we can say that now?"
Forget 1994, we had DVP (many CT departments have had some form of encyption since at least 1980). The majority of justification was to transmit sensitive information that the public shouldn't hear, usually crime / family related....or even for coffee orders (guilty). Remember, cell phones were not really around/cheap.
With the advent of ADP from Motorola for $10 a radio these days, its a natural specification. Those who think we spend a bunch of money to hide stuff is pretty narrow minded. Recorders for the most part have been digital for awhile and most departments run the fear of getting tapes released. If anything, its voice cell calls to each other than to the dept or over the radio.
Todays equipment also natively supports encyption out of the box for the infrastructure than needing to purchase more specific equipment. Basically, everything is intergrated and/or the cost is not as prohibitive as before.
Let me think of how many conversations I've had at cheif's meetings where it was stated:
"You know, we haven't said over the air - lets go grab this minority and bash his head in yet..., can we encypt our signals so we can say that now?"
Forget 1994, we had DVP (many CT departments have had some form of encyption since at least 1980). The majority of justification was to transmit sensitive information that the public shouldn't hear, usually crime / family related....or even for coffee orders (guilty). Remember, cell phones were not really around/cheap.
With the advent of ADP from Motorola for $10 a radio these days, its a natural specification. Those who think we spend a bunch of money to hide stuff is pretty narrow minded. Recorders for the most part have been digital for awhile and most departments run the fear of getting tapes released. If anything, its voice cell calls to each other than to the dept or over the radio.
Todays equipment also natively supports encyption out of the box for the infrastructure than needing to purchase more specific equipment. Basically, everything is intergrated and/or the cost is not as prohibitive as before.
Many years ago ( about 30 years) Wallingford PD was able to encryped their radios. If they wanted a secure transmission they called a signal 50 and the officers manually switched over to encryption. When finished they switched back to regular transmisstions and everybody could still hear what was going on. They were still on 33.90 back then. They only used it for a short time. Am I the only one who remembers this?
NYRHKY94
Member
While radio manufacturers are certainly playing a key role in the move to encryption, the decision itself to flip the switch on "ALL" comms is ultimately a policy decision made directly by officials at the local/state government level. Regardless of the form of local government (Town, City etc.) police chiefs "report to" a Town Manager/Administartor, Mayor etc. who in turn report to the Board of Selectman, Town Council etc. And they all ultimately report to the citizens of the Town and/or City that elected them.
In my experience working for and with local government, all "policy" decisions (like shutting off all comms from the citizens they serve) would have been run through the policy chain of command I outlined: Police Chief => Town Manager/Mayor => Board of Selectman/Council. If tranparency in government can indeed be maintained without compromising senstive operations, it appears to me that encrypting full-time & going completely silent is not so much a radio manufacturer sales pitch as it is a conscious policy decision made collectively by those that serve their respective citizenry. My bigger point here is that policy makers above the police chief play a much larger role in these decisions......and they appear to be getting a big hall pass from those that elect them IMO.
P.S. I absolutely agree with the premise that a well-schooled police chief who understands the bigger picture, will more likely than not lead to the more intelligent policy decision to remain transparent to those they serve (their citizens) for basic day-to-day comms and only encrypt sensitive comms (SWAT, Special Ops TAC etc.) "as warranted".
Just my 2-cents....
In my experience working for and with local government, all "policy" decisions (like shutting off all comms from the citizens they serve) would have been run through the policy chain of command I outlined: Police Chief => Town Manager/Mayor => Board of Selectman/Council. If tranparency in government can indeed be maintained without compromising senstive operations, it appears to me that encrypting full-time & going completely silent is not so much a radio manufacturer sales pitch as it is a conscious policy decision made collectively by those that serve their respective citizenry. My bigger point here is that policy makers above the police chief play a much larger role in these decisions......and they appear to be getting a big hall pass from those that elect them IMO.
P.S. I absolutely agree with the premise that a well-schooled police chief who understands the bigger picture, will more likely than not lead to the more intelligent policy decision to remain transparent to those they serve (their citizens) for basic day-to-day comms and only encrypt sensitive comms (SWAT, Special Ops TAC etc.) "as warranted".
Just my 2-cents....
Last edited:
xplorer417
Member
hi all i know what company and what radio if anyone is interested they are not using motorola they are using tait radio i saw the radio today the place i went to pick a item up
You can buy the radio but you need the
code
code
- Status
