newspaper report on open sky

[Citywide173]

The rights in our nation go only as far as not posing a clear and present danger. I dont think criminals or the public should know where a drug bust is about to happen or the location of federal agents tracking potential terrorists. Freedom of the press allows people to publish what they want in any form they want, it does not mean the press is allowed to do as they please and access sensitive information. I always said, the public pays for the nuclear missile codes, but we dont have access to them.

Again. it comes down to interpretation. IMHO, and i will catch static for this one, there should be an impartial committee to determine what gets encrypted and what does not. But if JQP feels that his rights are being ignored because the Feds are tracking someone on the other side of the country, but he cant listen in, I am not losing any sleep over it.

And sorry Citywide, I have always known it as FOIL (Freedom of Information Laws) on a local level.

I absolutely agree that there are things that need to be encrypted. But they are a very small percentage of the overall amount of public safety communications that take place. The Feds have endorsed a national standard for public safety, and that standard is P25. Departments should be following the Feds' lead and going with the standard instead of unmonitorable technologies.

One of the big things I see becoming an issue actually involves FOI (whether it be a local law or the Federal Act)-people are using these systems with the belief that what they are saying will never be heard by a member of the public, What happens when a media outlet starts getting the tapes a month at a time and making the archived audio available for anyone to hear...more importantly, when they scour those tapes for inappropriateness to put their spin on it, and run an article or piece on how the system users are "misusing the system" that was paid for with "your tax dollars", but that "you can't monitior"? You know as well as I do that there are people that are transmitting information that's inappropriate for the airwaves, monitorable system or not, and even though they are a very small percentage, it's things like this that can give departments a black eye.

 

[program1]

encryption

I have a prediction in the event of a maior emergency the open sky system will fail secondly there is no good reason to prevent the public from hearing routine radio traffic . NYS realized that opensky is not what its cracked up to be and decided to kick them out. also open sky prevents pd departments not using that system from talking to each other beacause they have different radio systems.AND yes i belive i do have a right to listen in on routine radio traffic . after all the air ways belong to the public

 

[brey1234]

thats no the only one

I have a prediction in the event of a maior emergency the open sky system will fail secondly there is no good reason to prevent the public from hearing routine radio traffic . NYS realized that opensky is not what its cracked up to be and decided to kick them out. also open sky prevents pd departments not using that system from talking to each other beacause they have different radio systems.AND yes i belive i do have a right to listen in on routine radio traffic . after all the air ways belong to the public

Don't forget about Lancaster County Pa who also cancelled Open Sky!

 

[skip39]

i see that pennsylvania state police in pike county is now using the opensky system. this area is not good for trunked systems,too many mountains. i think the opensky system was big waste of our taxpayer money. me as a resident is very upset at the decision that the state made.

 

[ChrisRupert]

Yes, I agree as an Emergency Responder (FF/EMT) as well as a 911 dispatcher, we are going backwards. As stated in previous posts, not being able to monitor radio traffic is not a very good idea. With the current system, PSP can talk to our local law enforcement and vice-versa. We have Police 1, a regional frequency (17 counties linked with this one), and national. I have to wonder if "patches" will be established once the VHF frequencies are no longer in PSP units. Also, PennDOT was able to talk on our county's EMA channel. With OPENSKY this option was also lost.

 

[paramedszaf]

Don't forget about Lancaster County Pa who also cancelled Open Sky!

I believe threated to tar and feather might be a better description, if memory serves me correct the system's users were less than happy with the system.

If I am not mistaken it has been the better part of a decade with this system and IMO they don't have much to show for it. Other than PennDOT and SOME PSP troops who else is using OpenScam? Didn't York Co. make (or is trying to make a go) with OpenSky?

 

[bassman21]

We neeed to push law makers to require these departments to simulcast their main dispach channels on a convetional radio transmitter. If they don't want people hearing something they can go to another channel. For most this will only be a hand full of frequencies. I remember when our county switched to trunking in the late 1980s they simulcast the main dispach channels for a few years.

BTW how do these departments make wrecker calls?