[Scan-DC] Fw: Fw: U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system

Mon Apr 27 02:20:08 EDT 2009

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
To: Larry Van Horn <n5fpw at brmemc.net>; Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 2:16:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Fw:  U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system

Larry,
Thanks for the compliment. By all means, feel free to forward the missive to the letters section of Monitoring Times. However, Mr. (Lee) Williams' correspondence is far more "Well put, well said" than mine. He should get "1st dibs."
Also, thanks for reminding me of the excellent mag. I used to pick up a copy of MT regularly, but got out of the habit several years ago (parenthood, etc totally re-prioritizes the mental database).
-GM

________________________________
From: Larry Van Horn <n5fpw at brmemc.net>
To: Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 6:45:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Fw:  U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system

Well done Gregory, Would you like to run that comment in the letters section of MT. I think that should be shared with the rest of the radio hobby and I certainly concur 100%.

73 de Larry

Larry Van Horn, N5FPW
Brasstown, NC USA
MT Assistant/Review Editor
Milcom/What's New Columnist
Milcom Monitoring Post at
http://mt-milcom.blogspot.com/

----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Menton" <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
To: "Lee Williams" <leonzo at hotmail.com>; <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Fw: U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system

> Very well put, sir.
> I first started listening to Public Safety radio in 1968 (as I recall, much of it was done via smoke signals & semaphore back then & this was is NY, where things were cutting edge !). When I started as a dispatcher about 10 yrs later, we had advanced a little further :) :)
> The current & ever-changing technology is grand, but you do bring up some valid points as to 100% encrypting (and the legal responsibilities of listeners). Post-9/11, I feel that there has been a tendency to be overly-cautious/secretive on matters of public safety & similar realms. I have seen it firsthand. I suppose any major traumatic event  (especially one that might have been avoided) often results in some degree of excess caution.
> Tango Alpha,
> -GM (a fellow "Old Schooler")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Lee Williams <leonzo at hotmail.com>
> To: Scan-DC <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>; scan-dc27 <scan-dc at mailman.qth.net>; scanner <scanner at qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:35:57 AM
> Subject: [Scan-DC] Fw:  U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Lee Williams" <leonzo at hotmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 9:50 AM
> To: "Gregory Menton" <gmentoni at yahoo.com>; "Scan-DC"
> <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
> 
>> I would like to comment on this thread. People who are complaining about
>> what they hear on scanners are starting to really bother me. I suppose
>> that since the "Police Call" books went away maybe a lot of readers on
>> Scan-DC aren't aware of a few things that used to be posted in front of
>> the Police Calls. To paraphrase: The Communications Act of 1934 and the
>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 govern a listeners
>> responsibilities. It is currently against Federal Law to:
>> - reveal to any person not a party to a radio transmission the contents of
>> a radio transmission
>> - use any information heard to commit a crime
>> - use information for personal gain
>> 
>> Additionally most states have laws prohibiting the use of scanners during
>> or to aid in commission of crimes. So when an agency broadcasts a name,
>> social security number, and date of birth on their radio system they are
>> doing their jobs. It is not a scanner listeners job to divulge or complain
>> about it. Just like there is currently a serious review about possible
>> "abuse of power and misinterpretation of laws that allowed torture to
>> occur" there is a lot of misinterpretation and a real push from radio
>> companies, citizens and others to encrypt 100 percent of all public safety
>> or at least law enforcement radio traffic within the U.S.
>> 
>> If all law enforcement traffic was encrypted who gains? Without any
>> oversight or ability to listen to what our tax dollars are paying for who
>> wins in that scenario? There is a time and place for encryption. I have no
>> problem with the Secret Service having encrypted radios 100% of the time
>> while guarding the President and his family. I do have a problem with my
>> local law enforcement agency encrypting 100 percent of all of their
>> traffic. Also 99.9% of law enforcement personnel have cellphones and the
>> majority of cell traffic is digitally encrypted so users feel somewhat
>> free to discuss sensitive information on them. The FBI with all of their
>> radio gear and encryption use Nextel direct connect cells for the vast
>> majority of their radio traffic. Again it is already digitally encrypted
>> so no one is hearing them. I point this out not as a complaint but as an
>> example that there are work arounds in place and being used daily to add a
>> layer of privacy to things discussed previously on an unencrypted radio
>> system. Things in place that do not require 100% encryption on two way
>> radios 100% of the time.
>> 
>> Does local law enforcement need to encrypt that they are looking for a
>> lost child that I may see? Do they need to encrypt that they are running
>> the name of a guy over the air that as an off duty officer/dispatcher I
>> may recognize and have some info that could help out in a case? Do they
>> need to encrypt their traffic stops so that as a neighboring jurisdiction
>> I can start that way and be just that much closer if the original officer
>> now requests a back up? Do they need to encrypt the call about juveniles
>> hanging out or a suspicious person call and the local neighborhood watch
>> hearing the call can look over that way and gather additional information
>> that may aid law enforcement?
>> 
>> You see what is being lost in this rush to encrypt all law enforcement in
>> this country is all of the positive outcomes that aren't always
>> quantifiable with regard to radio monitoring. Not to mention that having
>> ears on an agency makes citizens and the media keep agencies honest, above
>> board and reinforces the principle that we are a nation of laws and not
>> people kingdoms! I am no bleeding heart liberal and I have been listening
>> to public safety on radios since 1970. I am becoming alarmed at the amount
>> of public safety agencies going to full time encryption in this country.
>> Florida is the first state to have a full time statewide public safety
>> encrypted system and I suspect other states will soon follow. So what
>> happens when only the police can listen to the police? Hopefully I will
>> have passed away by then but personally I don't think that its a goal
>> worth obtaining!!
>> 
>> -from a retired and now on a second go around law enforcement officer 33
>> years and still pushing a cruiser!
>> 
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Gregory Menton" <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 1:03 AM
>> To: <johnantonelli at verizon.net>; <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
>> 
>>> Paisan,
>>> Remember, they're not officially skells until they have been certified as
>>> skells by a court of law...(not that Metro Transit PD is in the habit of
>>> routinely stopping people who are going about their normal business).
>>> Metro Transit PD is the only agency that I've heard broadcasting SSNs
>>> over the air in eons.
>>> Tango,
>>> Mentoni
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: JOHN ANTONELLI <johnantonelli at verizon.net>
>>> To: Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net; Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 7:49:15 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But he would only be using the infor of other skells.....
>>> 
>>> --- On Fri, 4/17/09, Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> From: Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
>>> To: Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
>>> Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 2:59 AM
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It amazes me, also, that they are still on an analog system. For several
>>> years,
>>> I worked in the SOC for an IC agency that had a relatively much lower
>>> profile
>>> (as far as the general public knows) than the US Capitol, and we went
>>> digital/encrypted years ago.
>>> Then again, Metro Transit PD (analog) still broadcasts the names,
>>> addresses
>>> & SSNs of subjects being stopped.
>>> (I hope that everyone in
>>> our email group is on the level, otherwise I've
>>> just "enabled" some skell in the pursuance of his/her career
>>> choice :).
>>> Tango,
>>> GM
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Alan Henney <alan at henney.com>
>>> To: Scan DC <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 12:56:30 AM
>>> Subject: [Scan-DC] U.S. Capitol Police Department's radio system
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Frontrunner
>>> 
>>> April 15, 2009 Wednesday
>>> 
>>> $71
>>> 
>>> SECTION: WASHINGTON NEWS
>>> 
>>> LENGTH: 76 words
>>> 
>>> According to The Hill (4/15, Yager), "Tucked inside President Obama's
>>> Most Recent 60 Days's 2009 war-spending measure for Iraq and
>>> Afghanistan is a $71.6 million request to overhaul the U.S. Capitol
>>> Police Department's radio system. Capitol Police and area law
>>> enforcement officials have complained for years of having an
>>> inefficient system that crashes periodically, loses its signal in
>>> various parts of the
>>> Capitol complex and can be overheard with
>>> store-bought radio scanners."
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Scan-DC mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
>>> 
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Scan-DC mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
>>> 
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Scan-DC mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
>>> 
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.4/2078 - Release Date: 04/24/09 07:54:00