Argument AGAINST allowing encrypted comms for PD's, SWAT, etc

[AZRedhawk44]

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.

[RevDisk]

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.

[roo_ster]

I not only want unencrypted commo, I want LEOs GPS-tagged in real time.

[cordex]

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.

[Blakenzy]

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.

[AZRedhawk44]

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.

[cordex]

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.

[AmbulanceDriver]

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...

[brimic]

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.

[Tallpine]

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 

[zahc]

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.

[cordex]

Everyone should have the same arrest powers as police. I don't see why traffic is any different either.

How should that work?

[Boomhauer]

How should that work?

Yeah I'm curious as to that myself.

[agricola]

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

[roo_ster]

How should that work?

Same arrest powers as Joe Citizen.  The difference is the salary and added responsibility.

[cordex]

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.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

I'm asking about the traffic stops initiated by Joe Citizen.  I can't see those going well.

realist   statist

[Ron]

Take the revenue aspect out of the picture and the amount of traffic stops even necessary drop dramatically.

Cops shouldn't be tax collectors. 

[Frank Castle]

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.






   

[roo_ster]

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.

[cordex]

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.

[roo_ster]

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.

[cordex]

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.

[Ron]

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.

[RoadKingLarry]

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.