• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Why the Forsyth County fire department has decided to encrypt its radios, and why that concerns First Amendment expert

chill30240

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
125
Location
West Georgia
HIPAA does not apply to radio communications.
All I know is that I read somewhere that's why a system encrypted their ambulance traffic back to the ER was because of HIPPA. For the life of me I wish I could remember where. Anyway that's another topic for discussion later on.
 

ipfd320

Member
Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
746
Location
W.Babylon N.Y. 11704

TailGator911

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Fairborn, OH
No. They do not broadcast their dispatches on social media. The PIO gives out a report of what happened. Now, realize there are those out there that still follow fire engines to sites and then go on social media, and a lot that are, are the news stations. When was the last time that you saw a reporter without a phone in their hands?
Very vague, I'm just not getting it. I take it PIO means Public Information Officer. The PIO gives out a report of what happened. How is this report transmitted? Is this real time? Is it a text that they send out to the media on their phones? A 'report of what happened' suggests a notification of facts after the event. Do LEOs/PIOs have some such agreement that they notify the media of each 911 dispatch in a situation where public safety dispatches are digitally encrypted? Sorry, I am just very curious about this and would like to know exactly how this works.

JD
kf4anc
 

chill30240

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
125
Location
West Georgia
This Subject was brought up a while back on 1 of the Forums

this Article is from Urgent Communications

Emergency Medical Dispatches and HIPAA: Are You HIPAA Compliant?
Emergency Medical Dispatches and HIPAA: Are You HIPAA Compliant? – Urgent Comms

its an Interesting Read--Make Sure You CAREFULLY Read Paragraphs 2 / 3 & 4--this might clear some things up


This is the Google Search Link to Multi Hippa Stuff-->
hippa radio laws - Google Search
The article is very informative but I read a news paper article from some system as to the reason the ambulance traffic back to the ER was encrypted. I remember that HIPPA was mentioned. Either way that doesn't concern me because I don't listen to that stuff anyway.
 

sc8

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
616
PIOs usually work for the department either as sworn officers or firefighters or civilians and they normally put out stories that have some public interest to them. In small agencies the PIO may just be the supervisor on duty
 

sc8

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
616
The article is very informative but I read a news paper article from some system as to the reason the ambulance traffic back to the ER was encrypted. I remember that HIPPA was mentioned. Either way that doesn't concern me because I don't listen to that stuff anyway.
A lot of healthcare agencies take a very conservative view of HIPAA. They can be more restrictive then the law if they want just not less
 

2112

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
340
Location
OK
I think if you go back and read the communications privacy act.

If I am wrong, but I don't think there is anything mentioned in the act except for cell phones, alpha pagers, cordless phones and baby monitors.

David
Be careful... the Comms Act of 1934 isn't the only law that applies to our hobby. With regard to monitoring encrypted comms, you will want to check out 18 USC § 2511.
 

jasonhouk

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
862
Location
Marion, Ohio
I usually donate something to my local LEO each year. The day that they decide encrypt will be the last day I donate. If everyone would quit donating money to those entities who encrypt, then that might cause them to change their minds about going silent.
This has to be the best response to agencies encrypting I've ever read!

Houk
 

GMB951

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
384
Location
Spring Lake,NC
Time to get together and go to local people that we voted into office and yes quite giving anything to these people no reason for this at all to keep us uninformed and in the dark
 

santafe2016

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
88
Location
German Township,Springfield, Ohio
Think back to the old days when Anytown fire got dispatched to Joe Blow residence and 123 Anytown street, The Joe Blow residence, and we all heard it but nobody gave a damn then . So now why is all this so darned important, because the government says so. The most terrifying words are" I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help"
 

radio3353

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,030
It's easy to see the points on both sides of the argument, but no matter the debate, there is no debating the Constitution and our rights as citizens. We have a right to listen as the tax-paying citizens who pay their salaries.

JD
kf4anc
I don't think that is really true. I have never found a passage in our Constitution that would support this viewpoint. Do you know what I am missing? Thanks.
 

TailGator911

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Fairborn, OH
Think back to the old days when Anytown fire got dispatched to Joe Blow residence and 123 Anytown street, The Joe Blow residence, and we all heard it but nobody gave a damn then . So now why is all this so darned important, because the government says so. The most terrifying words are" I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help"
And, also, as technology advanced, so did crime using that technology. You can blame the azx@*!& criminal losers that use the info they hear to commit identity theft and various other crimes. That is just one of many reasons why the climate is changing. Those people.

I'd like to spit some Beechnut in that dude's eye...and you know the rest.

JD
kf4anc
 

TailGator911

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Fairborn, OH
I don't think that is really true. I have never found a passage in our Constitution that would support this viewpoint. Do you know what I am missing? Thanks.
I am not sure it is written verbatim in the Constitution, but in the ongoing aspect of transparency of public officials, particularly police officers, it should be. Lest we not forget, we do have the First Amendment which does guarantee the public's rights to access information about their official's public activities …. a good read from the Washington Post ..."The First Amendment protects the public’s right of access to information about their officials’ public activities..."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/07/a-first-amendment-right-to-record-the-police/?utm_term=.1d3b8bee815f

We do have the right, whether it be monitoring their activities on a scanner radio, or videotaping them in public with a cellphone. I am not against the police and I do not monitor them for nefarious reasons, I monitor them for personal safety and security awareness as many here do. We should not be made to suffer the consequences of other people's actions. It is our right as citizens to monitor public servant's activities.

JD
kf4anc
 

paulmohr

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
162
Location
Adrian MI
I read the article and I didn't see where he mentioned why it would be against the 1st ammendment, nor did he argue the case by citing any specific reasons or cases that would apply.

I don't understand how encrypting their channels would infringe on my rights. It doesn't effect how I practice my religion, what I can say or what the media can say or print.

Do I like encryption, no, not really. My area is switching from analog to a digital simulcast system soon and they are talking about using encryption. This sucks for me because I enjoy listening to the local PD and fire stations. I have a digital scanner but if they go simulcast I might consider getting a better one that can handle that better. However if they decide to encrypt that would be a huge waste of money for me. I however wouldn't feel like my rights had been violated.

The only thing I find "shady" about it is the cost. If it costs them more to encrypt I want to know who is paying for that extra expense because I certainly don't want it to be me or other tax payers in my area. I really don't see a huge need for it in a fairly small town or backwater county like the one I live in. I do advocate it for some government agencies, state police and tactical situations. Like swat, detectives, drug enforcement and stuff like that. But local PD and fire? I don't get the need for that other than cutting down on people that like to show up to scenes with no reason or chasing ambulances.

I am far from being an expert in the law though so these are only my personal opinions. And I only listen to the scanner for entertainment value. I do not rely on it for any info or situational awareness. I am just not into that kind of thing.
 

radio3353

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,030
We should not be made to suffer the consequences of other people's actions. It is our right as citizens to monitor public servant's activities.

JD
kf4anc
The story of our lives. In a perfect world, yes. But, we live in an imperfect world and that is why we have laws. We suffer from other people's actions every day. And always will.

I would posit that one of the reasons we see encryption growing is because everybody (e.g. public, ambulance chasers, criminals, etc.) can now listen to PD dispatches via their cell phones via RR's Broadcastify feeds. I am not making that up. Philadelphia Police has publicly stated that fact as one of their reasons for soon encrypting police communications. Yet, RR denies being part of the problem.

Say what you will about what you think are our rights, but the governing document is the Bill of Rights in our Constitution. And I don't think it gives you a leg to stand on in fighting encryption.
 
Last edited:

TailGator911

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Fairborn, OH
The story of our lives. In a perfect world, yes. But, we live in an imperfect world and that is why we have laws. We suffer from other people's actions every day. And always will.

I would posit that one of the reasons we see encryption growing is because everybody (e.g. public, ambulance chasers, criminals, etc.) can now listen to PD dispatches via their cell phones via RR's Broadcastify feeds. I am not making that up. Philadelphia Police has publicly stated that fact as one of their reasons for soon encrypting police communications. Yet, RR denies being part of the problem.

Say what you will about what you think are our rights, but the governing document is the Bill of Rights in our Constitution. And I don't think it gives you a leg to stand on in fighting encryption.

You're probably right. What we think are our rights are not what we know anymore. But, then, some people could be so lucky to live as we do.
 
Top