[Scan-DC] Mentions Navy Yard Shooting (how much longer do we have to put up with this?)

[Earthlink]

Beware of generalizations such as "Law enforcement types are so paranoid of their idea of their privileged position..."  As a ham radio operator, scanner listener as well as a 26 year police officer I support the public's ability to listen to the day to day radio traffic of public safety.  Undercover operations and tactical response is different, but I would say that 90% of police work over the radio is not sensitive.  So, this is one "law enforcement type" who does not agree with the "encrypt everything" trend.


Frank Carson

On Jul 30, 2014, at 13:52, Sean Hoyden <sean.hoyden at gmail.com> wrote:

> I realize that is a rhetorical question, but the truth of the matter is
> "No"... nobody can explain it because there's nothing to explain.
> 
> Law enforcement types are absolutely paranoid of the idea that their
> privileged position of being able to say and do what they want over the
> radio is being impinged upon by hobbyists.  So they concoct these stories
> to rationalize why they need encrypted communications in order to protect
> "tactical information" when in truth; it is doing little more than
> protecting their ability to engage in shadier activities that they know or
> should know aren't what their multi-million dollar communications systems
> were intended for in the first place.
> 
> Do criminals use scanners?  Yep, that hasn't changed since the 70's or
> maybe earlier, somehow they've always managed to keep doing their jobs.  By
> and far however, most of the bad guys don't know how to use a scanner or
> radio in the commission of a crime, few still understand what the cops are
> saying on the radio.
> 
> Cops want to be able to keep sharing "Personally Identifiable Information"
> (PII) over the radio, and they want to be able to exchange shop talk about
> whatever they want without worrying about Tom, Dick and Harry listening to
> them and reporting them to their elected bosses.  It's not about protecting
> tactically relevant information for police operations, its about protecting
> police and law enforcement egos.
> 
> I've worked with literally hundreds of law enforcement professionals over
> the years, and I can assure you, the larger share of them think this way.
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Lee Williams <leonzo at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I find it fascinating that the Navy Yard Shooting is being used as an
>> example for encryption because: Metropolitan Washington DC Police were the
>> lead agency in the Navy Yard Shooting. They are encrypted so can someone
>> explain to me "what scanner traffic" was being broadcasted or quoted
>> involving the Navy Yard Shooting?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> From: alan at henney.com
>>> To: Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
>>> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 03:37:56 -0400
>>> Subject: [Scan-DC] Mentions Navy Yard Shooting (how much longer do we
>> have    to put up with this?)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Arkansas Daily Weblog
>>> 
>>> July 28, 2014 Monday 8:53 PM EST
>>> 
>>> Little Rock