What on earth is the purpose of encrypting the VHF patch talkgroups?
I could never figure that out either.
The logic that was explained to me by a Phoenix FD member is that they don't want handheld fireground traffic to be heard over a wide area, or to be easy to stream online or on live news broadcasts. They understand and can live with the fact that receivers close to the scene can hear handheld traffic on VHF, because (for now) they still prefer the simplicity of simplex analog on the fireground, but that doesn't mean they want to turn it into a wide area broadcast unencumbered by encryption.
The Brett Tarver incident has had a really long tail. We take for granted that unencrypted radio traffic may inhibit successful law enforcement missions, but we aren't as quick to see how some things that come across fire radios can be quite unsettling to some, too. I understand an entire department cringed when they heard
this on local news, especially knowing Brett's wife Robin was at home watching the TV in panic. Even as a scanner hobbyist in the Valley in 2001, I remember watching the Southwest Supermarket fire live on the news and thinking "they should not be broadcasting this audio; this is not going to end well."
Here in metro Atlanta, where I primarily live now, I remember hearing live radio traffic of
this incident on local news. At the time, Gwinnett County law enforcement was all encrypted but the fire service had remained 'in the clear'. Within months of this incident and the audio being widely aired live, Gwinnett County Fire went 100% encrypted.
I'm struggling to find a news story about it now, but I also remember an incident in the Valley where news crews overheard the address of the registered owner of a suspect vehicle and arrived to 'set up' on his house before undercover police vehicles could.
Online streaming of scanner audio is frequently referenced in encryption discussions. We forget the contributions some local news crews have made to that trend too.