https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...on-chicago-police-department-of-justice-probe
As usual, the bad guys fu** it up for the rest of us...
As usual, the bad guys fu** it up for the rest of us...
"Public shouldn't listen"...
- Thread starter werinshades
- Start date
- Status
He's part of the Daley clan that has run Chicago for years. They were never known for transparency.
By bad guys, you mean government, right?
Quote from the article...
• Increase department transparency and ensure that promotions are fair.
By encrypting???
Let them encrypt, it's their right and they feel it's necessary. Don't like it, write to your Police Chief or Mayor about the situation. No where in The Constitution does it guarantee a right to monitor public safety comms. It's frustrating when they do but the encryption must be needed in this case. There are other ways to check if misconduct is happening.
This may earn me an "infraction" but do you really think streaming has some part of this?. ABC and NBC news likes to air the actual transmissions from Broadcastify rather saying according "to scanner radio reports" this is what happened.
Last edited:
kraziebill
Member
"The bad guys can hear what's going on on the radios. ..."
The bad guys can see with there own eyes too, so we better make blindfolds required for all.
The bad guys can see with there own eyes too, so we better make blindfolds required for all.
Governments cannot and do not have rights; only privileges. When agents of government act under the color of authority, they act under privileges and not rights
The Constitution does not grant rights. No document can. There are many rights that are not enumerated in the Constitution. The argument that something is not a right because it's not listed in a document is a faulty one.
Thank you HANS. Very well stated.
IMHO
IMHO
Don't see it happening as the good old missed 800 Tac system was in the clear.
Yea, we fu**ed that up too. Posting talk groups, discussing surveillance's that doesn't help. "Oh, but we have a right to do that since it's open airwaves"...yep they'll solve that problem too. I'll say it again, we need to police ourselves in this hobby but as usual the defenders of on-line broadcasting will come out and scream bloody murder when a department encrypts. The bad guys are the criminals, but we are also falling into that category too with some of our antics.
The "ENC" law needs revision to the fact that freedom of the air waves for normal police and fire dispatching and used only for UCover and Tactical work...This is not fair....Down here in my area my city PD and FD and PW are gone and Will Co and surrounding areas are headed the same way...Its too bad i cant warn my family anymore of road problems and things that could keep there travel safe anymore....Rant over!!!!!
The greatest single criminal enterprise ever known to mankind has always been government and probably always will be. That is why it is crucial for a free people to keep close eye on their government. Wholesale encryption of all government communication is unacceptable because it does not allow the rightful masters of our government to watch their servant.
Much like fire, government can be useful but very dangerous at the same time. What fools would start a fire and then walk away, assuming that everything will be alright and the fire will do exactly as they intended? Allow wholesale encryption to stand and you get tyranny.
Streaming did not cause encryption. People posting in forums did not cause encryption. The bottom line is that all governments, from the beginning of time, tend towards tyranny and they cannot accomplish that without secrecy. That secrecy will be achieved under any pretense. Pointing blame where it does not belong just adds to the deception.
It's laughable to think that there are some people who actually believe that monitoring a police agency on a scanner is some type of "right" protected by the US Constitution.
Should you, perhaps, also be allowed access to the PD's computer network, too?
You may pout and yell, because of all the money spent on radios, but it's a totally losing argument.
You want to know what's going on: contact your PD's public information office. As long as the department maintains one of those, there's little argument that you, as a citizen, is being kept "in the dark."
But there is one way around it: join one of the volunteer agencies in your community, like the ambulance or FD. That way, you won't need a scanner: you'll be at the scene working it.
But I guess that's too much to ask.
Should you, perhaps, also be allowed access to the PD's computer network, too?
You may pout and yell, because of all the money spent on radios, but it's a totally losing argument.
You want to know what's going on: contact your PD's public information office. As long as the department maintains one of those, there's little argument that you, as a citizen, is being kept "in the dark."
But there is one way around it: join one of the volunteer agencies in your community, like the ambulance or FD. That way, you won't need a scanner: you'll be at the scene working it.
But I guess that's too much to ask.
AZScanner
Member
It's also laughable to think that calling the PIO is going to get you anything you'd otherwise hear on a scanner. Does the PIO call you if your neighbor's house gets broken into? Will he tell you what's going on with that dozen cop cars you saw in front of your kid's school? No and no. Unless you are the media or the mayor, the PIO is too busy to talk to YOU.
Likewise, not everyone can join their favorite agency in a volunteer capacity. Some are disabled and others are too busy with work and family to have the time required, not to mention many volunteers have to pay for uniforms, equipment and even sometimes radios personally - it's not just a matter of sign up here and go ride with a cop whenever you want. Last but certainly not least, there's the media who rely on scanners to know what's going on. Putting them in the dark puts everyone in the dark - save for what the PIO wants them to tell you, which is often not the whole story and in some cases is complete and total BS.
I'm not saying it's my constitutionally protected right to own a scanner, far from it. And I know there's nothing any of us can really do about it (just look at what they've done to gun ownership, which IS a protected right). But I've found that the tired old "criminals with scanners or phone apps" excuse is really just a scapegoat when these agencies go dark - often times they go dark to hide from public scrutiny rather than to improve public safety. Sorry but that's just reality. In Phoenix for example, it was the over zealous MEDIA showing up to an active shooter before SWAT did that drove their decision to encrypt their channels - NOT criminals with scanners, despite the line of bull we were all given by the Public Disinformation Office. Crooks in Phoenix had scanners since the VHF days and it didn't help them then. They still got caught. So I'm not buying the hype.
-AZ
Likewise, not everyone can join their favorite agency in a volunteer capacity. Some are disabled and others are too busy with work and family to have the time required, not to mention many volunteers have to pay for uniforms, equipment and even sometimes radios personally - it's not just a matter of sign up here and go ride with a cop whenever you want. Last but certainly not least, there's the media who rely on scanners to know what's going on. Putting them in the dark puts everyone in the dark - save for what the PIO wants them to tell you, which is often not the whole story and in some cases is complete and total BS.
I'm not saying it's my constitutionally protected right to own a scanner, far from it. And I know there's nothing any of us can really do about it (just look at what they've done to gun ownership, which IS a protected right). But I've found that the tired old "criminals with scanners or phone apps" excuse is really just a scapegoat when these agencies go dark - often times they go dark to hide from public scrutiny rather than to improve public safety. Sorry but that's just reality. In Phoenix for example, it was the over zealous MEDIA showing up to an active shooter before SWAT did that drove their decision to encrypt their channels - NOT criminals with scanners, despite the line of bull we were all given by the Public Disinformation Office. Crooks in Phoenix had scanners since the VHF days and it didn't help them then. They still got caught. So I'm not buying the hype.
-AZ
It is sadly remarkable that some, possibly many, are too ignorant to realize that governments are dangerous things and that rights exist, inalienable to the individual, while not all of them are enumerated in a document. As long as we are a free people, we have a right to monitor our government. All those who are insinuating or saying out right that we do not, are really saying that we are not a free people. To them, enjoy your servitude.
AZScanner
Member
It is sadly remarkable that some, possibly many, are too ignorant to realize that governments are dangerous things and that rights exist, inalienable to the individual, while not all of them are enumerated in a document. As long as we are a free people, we have a right to monitor our government. All those who are insinuating or saying out right that we do not, are really saying that we are not a free people. To them, enjoy your servitude.
OK, I'm game - I mean come on, if we can force the cops to never use encryption because it violates our rights as a free people, then what are we waiting for? So... now comes the $64,000 question. Your agency just encrypted. Now what?
See, that's the problem. It's not really a right recognized by the government UNLESS it is enumerated in a document that government must abide by.
That's why the Bill of Rights had to be added to the Constitution before any of those rights became a right anyone could possibly enforce.So there you have it. You must start a grassroots movement to get Congress to amend the Constitution to prohibit encryption of non-sensitive public safety communications so you can listen to the cops on your scanner. Good luck with that.
Not trying to be an *** about it, but you get the point... if there were any legal recourse to encryption, the very large companies that own your local news media outlets would have already pursued it, big time.
-AZ
I wasn't replying to you. Your post slipped in between. I didn't have any real argument with a lot of what you posted previously.
However, here is your face-palm quoted...
I've been a rights advocate for a very, very long time. There have been many lawsuits many other activities. We've been very successful.
You simply do not understand the true nature of inalienable individual rights and it shows. One cannot be free if they don't even have a basic grasp of liberty. People like that will get the government they deserve.
Moving on.
However, here is your face-palm quoted...
See, that's the problem. It's not really a right recognized by the government UNLESS it is enumerated in a document that government must abide by.
I've been a rights advocate for a very, very long time. There have been many lawsuits many other activities. We've been very successful.
You simply do not understand the true nature of inalienable individual rights and it shows. One cannot be free if they don't even have a basic grasp of liberty. People like that will get the government they deserve.
Moving on.
That's a good idea. Let's try to keep things on topic.
- Status
Similar threads
