Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: AZRedhawk44 on February 14, 2013, 09:25:09 AM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gAAbylq0Isk#t=10m20s
If comms were encrypted, these radio transmissions would never be making the news.
Need to outlaw encrypted comms for law enforcement.
-
Much simpler. Encrypted radios are illegal for Joe Regular, per FCC*. Ergo, they should be illegal for law enforcement as well. Law enforcement should have no extra legal powers not granted to everyone, except for traffic stuff and the ability to arrest folks.
* Yes, they are. You can set up a packet network over the radio network (ie mini internet) and encrypt the IP traffic running over the unencrypted radio links. You cannot directly encrypt anything using most end-user frequencies.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and even if I was, I wouldn't be YOUR lawyer. Above is opinion, and not to be considered legal or technical advice.
-
I not only want unencrypted commo, I want LEOs GPS-tagged in real time.
-
If comms were encrypted, these radio transmissions would never be making the news.
Yep.
I can understand the desire to hide tactical comms from suspects, but at minimum there must be a way to evaluate such communications after the fact.
-
Agreed. All police comms should be recorded and held in archive for a specified amount of time, specifically to subject police actions to external scrutiny should the need arise. Technology allows it (easy as pie) and there are really no excuses not to.
-
Agreed. All police comms should be recorded and held in archive for a specified amount of time, specifically to subject police actions to external scrutiny should the need arise. Technology allows it (easy as pie) and there are really no excuses not to.
And they should be FREE to download by any interested party, 24 hours after an action. No delay, no equivocation, no asking for permission.
-
And they should be FREE to download by any interested party, 24 hours after an action. No delay, no equivocation, no asking for permission.
Sounds fair to me.
-
Agreed. All police comms should be recorded and held in archive for a specified amount of time, specifically to subject police actions to external scrutiny should the need arise. Technology allows it (easy as pie) and there are really no excuses not to.
Most (if not all) 911/dispatch agencies record *everything* going in or out, and keep it for up to a year.... That being said, navigating a FOIA request and actually *getting* the info you're looknig for can be challenging...
-
The local city (Milwaukee) got encrypted comms awhile back under a system called 'Open Sky.'
Its a complete fiasco- the comms work inconsistantly and are often are cut off by buildings/trees/ or anything that interferes with the digital signals.
-
The "local" (that is, in or near the county seat) LE radio channel is encrypted, but out in the rest of the county they have to use the same repeaters shared by fire, EMT, road maintenance, school bus, etc.
Doesn't a specific frequency either have to be encrypted or not encrypted ???
-
Law enforcement should have no extra legal powers not granted to everyone, except for traffic stuff and the ability to arrest folks.
FIFY
Everyone should have the same arrest powers as police. I don't see why traffic is any different either.
-
Everyone should have the same arrest powers as police. I don't see why traffic is any different either.
How should that work?
-
How should that work?
Yeah I'm curious as to that myself.
-
The local city (Milwaukee) got encrypted comms awhile back under a system called 'Open Sky.'
Its a complete fiasco- the comms work inconsistantly and are often are cut off by buildings/trees/ or anything that interferes with the digital signals.
sounds like the Airwave system in use here
-
How should that work?
Same arrest powers as Joe Citizen. The difference is the salary and added responsibility.
-
Same arrest powers as Joe Citizen. The difference is the salary and added responsibility.
I'm asking about the traffic stops initiated by Joe Citizen. I can't see those going well.
-
I'm asking about the traffic stops initiated by Joe Citizen. I can't see those going well.
realist statist :facepalm: [popcorn]
-
Take the revenue aspect out of the picture and the amount of traffic stops even necessary drop dramatically.
Cops shouldn't be tax collectors.
-
The "local" (that is, in or near the county seat) LE radio channel is encrypted, but out in the rest of the county they have to use the same repeaters shared by fire, EMT, road maintenance, school bus, etc.
Doesn't a specific frequency either have to be encrypted or not encrypted
#1 Repeater tower can be configured to handle encrypted or not encrypted frequencies.
#2 All radios must have the same encrypted key or keys to be on a secured network.
#3 If the cops have encrypted radio they would need a non secured radio for, firefights , EMT's , and air recover if, they are not on the same network.
-
I'm asking about the traffic stops initiated by Joe Citizen. I can't see those going well.
No, if Joe Citizen is pulling folk over for no good reason, that would not go well. But, LEOs ought not do that, either. It not being Joe Citizen's job to do so, I don't think we'd have to worry overmuch, as he would leave the arresting to those paid to do so. If a LEO makes a habit out of bad stops, he ought to be subject to sanction as well, the same sanctions that would nail Joe Citizen.
-
No, if Joe Citizen is pulling folk over for no good reason, that would not go well. But, LEOs ought not do that, either. It not being Joe Citizen's job to do so, I don't think we'd have to worry overmuch, as he would leave the arresting to those paid to do so. If a LEO makes a habit out of bad stops, he ought to be subject to sanction as well, the same sanctions that would nail Joe Citizen.
I'm not even thinking bad stops. What if someone is driving dangerously - maybe speeding and swerving left of center? How does Joe Citizen initiate a stop? If you are speeding a little and someone comes right up behind you flashing their headlights, are you supposed to pull over? Is refusing to stop for Joe Citizen a crime? If not, why bother? If so, wouldn't that be a perfect MO for attackers?
I guess I just don't understand how it would work.
-
I'm not even thinking bad stops. What if someone is driving dangerously - maybe speeding and swerving left of center? How does Joe Citizen initiate a stop? If you are speeding a little and someone comes right up behind you flashing their headlights, are you supposed to pull over? Is refusing to stop for Joe Citizen a crime? If not, why bother? If so, wouldn't that be a perfect MO for attackers?
I guess I just don't understand how it would work.
I think we are coming at it from different directions. Maybe you are assuming that Joe Citizen will be given more authority to do this-and-such, and will then do more than he does today. OYOH, I assume that Officer Leo D Kopp has particular powers and legal assumptions stripped or placed on parity with Joe Citizen. I am not assuming folks hired to enforce the law go buh-bye and leave all policing to Joe Citizen. I AM assuming that Joe & Leo are treated similarly when they do similar things and that there is no law that makes one or the other somehow immune or above the other.
Leo, being paid to enforce the law will have an incentive to do so. Joe will not have that incentive and can be expected to play a much lesser role in enforcing the law in his community. Perhaps he (and other Citizens) may initiate only when they witness some grievous act or in the prolonged absence of Leo & his kind. After all, Joe needs to make a living.
-
I think we are coming at it from different directions. Maybe you are assuming that Joe Citizen will be given more authority to do this-and-such, and will then do more than he does today. OYOH, I assume that Officer Leo D Kopp has particular powers and legal assumptions stripped or placed on parity with Joe Citizen. I am not assuming folks hired to enforce the law go buh-bye and leave all policing to Joe Citizen. I AM assuming that Joe & Leo are treated similarly when they do similar things and that there is no law that makes one or the other somehow immune or above the other.
Leo, being paid to enforce the law will have an incentive to do so. Joe will not have that incentive and can be expected to play a much lesser role in enforcing the law in his community. Perhaps he (and other Citizens) may initiate only when they witness some grievous act or in the prolonged absence of Leo & his kind. After all, Joe needs to make a living.
Fair enough. FYI, I'm not figuring that Joe Citizen will do all the policing, but if he's got the authority to pull someone over it will happen.
For good or ill:
Parity at the current Joe Citizen level would essentially eliminate enforcement of traffic laws and put any attempt to stop someone for just about any crime at the sole discretion of the perpetrator.
Parity at the current Leo D Kopp level would create all matter of problems of its own.
-
There are too many "laws" on the books for John Q Public to self police itself.
It would take an overhaul of the entire system, gutting the stupid revenue enhancing framework in favor of minimalist good sense law.
Unfortunately there just aren't enough folks with good sense. We're surrounded by pampered, entitled, full grown humans with the temperament of adolescents.
-
There are too many "laws" on the books for John Q Public to self police itself.
We'd really only need a handful of laws to make it work.
6, 8 & 9 of the Ten Commandments should cover 99% of it.
-
#1 Repeater tower can be configured to handle encrypted or not encrypted frequencies.
#2 All radios must have the same encrypted key or keys to be on a secured network.
#3 If the cops have encrypted radio they would need a non secured radio for, firefights , EMT's , and air recover if, they are not on the same network.
So the repeater would have to handle 2 incoming frequencies and 2 outgoing frequencies to support both encrypted and non-encrypted ???
-
There are too many "laws" on the books for John Q Public to self police itself.
I'd also be worried about some folks' (mis)interpretaion of the laws on the books - and their attempt to enforce the laws as they read them. :police: Sure, it might not hold up in court, but it would still put a strain on whoever they arrest and has to show up at court.
-
So the repeater would have to handle 2 incoming frequencies and 2 outgoing frequencies to support both encrypted and non-encrypted
Yes!
-
So, the retired guy doing 55 in the fast lane to keep you from speeding... now he's going to be in your rearview mirror with his Harbor Freight flashing lights? :police:
-
Quote
So the repeater would have to handle 2 incoming frequencies and 2 outgoing frequencies to support both encrypted and non-encrypted
Yes!
Our county comm guy can barely keep what we have operational. He is also the chief of EMS.
Main thing that I want to keep track of is when they start chasing somebody through our neighbohood. Sheriff Woody likes to play Roy Rodgers, except the guy they're chasing doesn't always follow the script. ;/
I maintain a pretty high level of security all the time anyway (doors locked and sidearm plus rifles handy), but honestly our local LE is more of a hazard to public safety than any kind of protection. =(
-
Our county comm guy can barely keep what we have operational. He is also the chief of EMS.
Main thing that I want to keep track of is when they start chasing somebody through our neighbohood. Sheriff Woody likes to play Roy Rodgers, except the guy they're chasing doesn't always follow the script. ;/
I maintain a pretty high level of security all the time anyway (doors locked and sidearm plus rifles handy), but honestly our local LE is more of a hazard to public safety than any kind of protection. =(
Maybe the dept should send him off to a big city for proper training. A couple weeks of training in a big city dept like the LA Police Dept should help :P
-
Maybe the dept should send him off to a big city for proper training. A couple weeks of training in a big city dept like the LA Police Dept should help :P
Yeah, but who would drive the ambulance ???
:facepalm:
-
If the local LEO's, are using a non-encrypted radio , you should be able to pick them up with a good scanner. I could take a little while to find the right frequencies. My buddy found the MP frequencies on post with his scanner. =D
But you need to remember one thing.....
We are talking about line-sight comm, if the bad guys goes into a heavy wooded area or in a valley comm can get sketchy . Just like a cell phone.
-
If the local LEO's, are using a non-encrypted radio , you should be able to pick them up with a good scanner. I could take a little while to find the right frequencies. My buddy found the MP frequencies on post with his scanner. =D
But you need to remember one thing.....
We are talking about line-sight comm, if the bad guys goes into a heavy wooded area or in a valley comm can get sketchy . Just like a cell phone.
Are you talking to me?
I have a VFD pager which monitors our repeater channel. =)
I also have a 2-way portable radio, but you can't use it when it is in the charger because of static. =(
Our old Radio Shack scanner just up and died last year.
-
So the repeater would have to handle 2 incoming frequencies and 2 outgoing frequencies to support both encrypted and non-encrypted ???
No. The repeater is just repeating the RF audio from the radios in the field, encrypted or not.
eta: correction necessary due to adult beverage consumption
-
No. The repeater is just repeating the RF audio from the radios in the field, encrypted or not.
eta: correction necessary due to adult beverage consumption
Yes!
Now we have two conflicting opinions. =|
But I don't understand how dispatch could receive both encrypted and non-encrypted on the same frequency ???
-
No. The repeater is just repeating the RF audio from the radios in the field, encrypted or not.
eta: correction necessary due to adult beverage consumption
Minor correction here.... You were right the first time... Repeaters work by using paired frequencies, and they retransmit RF. One pair if it's simplex (only one person can talk at a time), two pairs if it's duplex (works like a telephone). It's easiest to explain with the simplex - the incoming transmission is received on frequency X, then rebroadcast on frequency X+Y, where Y is the offset, a predetermined shift in the frequency (depending on the frequency range that the radios operate on). So if the radio is running at 825MHz, with an offset of 25MHz, then the incoming transmission would be rebroadcast at 850MHz (on a + offset) or 800MHz (for a - offset). Whether it's a +/- offset is also determined by the system, and the radios are programmed accordingly.
A full duplex system works slightly differently. In reference to the base station, there's a "talk" frequency and a "listen" frequency (these are reversed in the field radios). The repeater works exactly the same, but with a total of 4 frequencies instead of 2.
-
Actually, a standard repeater does use paired frequencies, but it does not mix and retransmit the actual RF of the incoming signal. It receives on the input frequency, fully demodulates that incoming signal, then uses the resulting audio or data to modulate the outgoing RF at the new offset frequency. A repeater has a separate receiver deck (sometimes more than one, remoted and linked) and a separate transmitter deck, although usually in the same case, that allows them to operate in this full duplex mode.
Repeaters are often linked into multiple systems to cover larger areas. These linked systems can even be cross banded.
The offset frequency differs based on the service, whether it's land mobile or amateur radio or something else.
-
Minor correction here.... You were right the first time... Repeaters work by using paired frequencies, and they retransmit RF. One pair if it's simplex (only one person can talk at a time), two pairs if it's duplex (works like a telephone). It's easiest to explain with the simplex - the incoming transmission is received on frequency X, then rebroadcast on frequency X+Y, where Y is the offset, a predetermined shift in the frequency (depending on the frequency range that the radios operate on). So if the radio is running at 825MHz, with an offset of 25MHz, then the incoming transmission would be rebroadcast at 850MHz (on a + offset) or 800MHz (for a - offset). Whether it's a +/- offset is also determined by the system, and the radios are programmed accordingly.
A full duplex system works slightly differently. In reference to the base station, there's a "talk" frequency and a "listen" frequency (these are reversed in the field radios). The repeater works exactly the same, but with a total of 4 frequencies instead of 2.
What they call "simplex" around here is a non-repeated frequency: tx and rx frequency is the same.
Usually, that is our "tactical" or mobile-to-mobile channel used for comm on an incident. The state owns multiple of these channels which means that different divisions or different incidents can have their own channel with little overlap to other incidents because of limited range.
When we want to talk to the county dispatch (or a neighboring county), we have to use the repeated channel but for incident operations you want to keep the repeater clear for other traffic.
Anyway, the whole point being (again!) that our county has a base channel (non-repeated) for LE that is encrypted now, which only covers the county seat and nearby. Anywhere else in the county (2500 sq mi and mostly mountains), LE has to use the non-encrypted repeaters which are also used by fire, EMS, road crews, school buses, etc.
-
Now we have two conflicting opinions. =|
But I don't understand how dispatch could receive both encrypted and non-encrypted on the same frequency ???
It isn't the frequency that is encrypted it is the information carried on the frequency. The encryption/decryption occurs at the sending and receiving ends .
Talk -encrypt - IF - RF -transmit/receive - RF - IF -decrypt - listen.
-
It isn't the frequency that is encrypted it is the information carried on the frequency. The encryption/decryption occurs at the sending and receiving ends .
Talk -encrypt - IF - RF -transmit/receive - RF - IF -decrypt - listen.
But how would the dispatch radio know whether or not to decrypt the rx signal if it is used for both ???
-
Getting a little out of my field of experience and it's been more than 20 years since I've worked with RF equipment but it doesn't seem like it would be to hard to do with digital equipment. Receiver detects a signal, it can detect if it's encrypted by the signal, along the lines of an IP header perhaps.
-
Getting a little out of my field of experience and it's been more than 20 years since I've worked with RF equipment but it doesn't seem like it would be to hard to do with digital equipment. Receiver detects a signal, it can detect if it's encrypted by the signal, along the lines of an IP header perhaps.
I don't think they're ever going digital in our county.
They still haven't switched over to narrow band yet.
Plus, the damn digital doesn't work too well anyway. The neighboring county switched over a couple years ago and can't hardly hear anything anymore.