
Rick NK7I
The CHP site (cad.chp.ca) is well filtered by
dispatch before posting, it's benign and close to real time.
Rick NK7I
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 11/8/2019 9:00 PM, Teton Amateur
Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
Criminals can't read and don't know about the internet! lol
Mick
----- Original Message -----
From: paulduer
To: main@Uniden.groups.io
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 09:52:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Uniden] P25 for Cheap
> The California Highway Patrol uses encryption but publishes
an as-it-happens log on the web. Go figure.
>
>
>
>
>
> Do not say a little in many words but a great deal in a
few. – Pythagoras.
>
>
>
> From: main@Uniden.groups.io
On Behalf Of Mark Lassman via Groups.Io
> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 8:12 PM
> To: main@Uniden.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [Uniden] P25 for Cheap
>
>
>
> I can’t see ANY logical reason why ANY normal or routine
radio traffic can’t be sent over the air as normal
communications and not scrambled or encrypted. With the
possible exceptions of narcotics, gang, vice and other
“sensitive” types of operations, the great majority of law
enforcement communications does not — in my opinion — meet the
criteria that would benefit from being encrypted.
>
>
>
> It’s also about “transparency”. The people have a right
to know what the police departments are doing. To a point,
that is. If there is “law enforcement activity” in my
neighborhood, I would like, at the very least, to know what’s
going on. I don’t want the police to justify their use of
encryption by saying, essentially, “it’s on a need-to-know
basis and you don’t need to know.”. Uhhhhh, yes, I do. Its my
town, my city, I want to know.
>
>
>
> “Sensitive” information such as identifies of victims and
suspects and anything else that the public should not be privy
to, can be sent over encrypted channels. By encrypting
EVERYTHING, departments are saying, essentially, “we can’t
tell you! Ha ha ha ha!”.
>
>
>
> I know that some Fire departments have encrypted and
there’s absolutely NO reason to do THAT. Especially when
different departments are going to be working together in a
mutual aid situation. Fortunately, encryption by Fire
departments has not been a very large movement.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2019, at 6:26 PM, Thomas Rafferty Jr. > wrote:
>
>
>
> When I was working, the CAD system, computers in car
were used to give back dispositions on calls, and when you
wanted to give Dispatch info that shouldn't be heard by the
public. Everything else was in the clear.
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: main@Uniden.groups.io
> on behalf of Jim
Walls >
> Sent: Friday, Novembegive i fo that shouldn't be
heard by the public.r 8, 2019 7:13 PM
> To: 'main@Uniden.groups.io
' >
> Subject: Re: [Uniden] P25 for Cheap
>
>
>
> Steve T said:
>
> > There are a lot of law enforcement
agencies here in Ohio that have went to in-cruiser
laptops for most communications.
>
> > Scanner traffic on their freqs are
virtually silent.
>
>
>
> Yes, and no. Yes, lots of agencies use mobile
data terminals or computers in vehicles. They work
very well for dispatches and things like license
and registration checks. What they don’t work well
for is tactical traffic, and obviously not for
anything when the officer is out of the vehicle.
If you are hearing nothing on the radio channels,
most likely they moved to new channels or systems.
I can’t give any specifics about Ohio since I am
not there.
>
> To give you an idea how true this is, I run a
regional trunked radio system that is used by
several dozen cities. Some cities have all city
services on the system and some are just public
safety. Almost all of the police agencies have
mobile data terminals of one sort or another in
their vehicles. I just ran a report of the busiest
50 talkgroups for the past 24 hours. Here is a
summary of the results:
>
> #1 – #8 were all police dispatch talkgroups
(all different agencies),
>
> #9 was a police tac talkgroup,
>
> #10 was a police dispatch talkgroup,
>
> #11 was a regional fire dispatch talkgroup
(dispatches for 12 cities plus one airport fire),
>
> #12 – #19 were all police dispatch
talkgroups,
>
> #20 was a police tac talkgroup,
>
> #21 was the first non-public safety talkgroup
– it was trash collectors for one of the cities.
>
> Total radio time for the top 20 was 551
minutes for #1 down to 125 minutes for #20 (out of
1440 minutes for a full day). So the least busy of
those still talked for just over two hours out of
the last 24. Hardly what I would call silent.
>
>
>
> BTW, almost universally, even though
dispatches are sent out via data terminal, they
are also sent out by voice (sometimes a summary
version). The reason for this is situational
awareness, It lets other units in the area know
what’s going on. I can’t tell you how many times
that I heard a dispatch, and it was almost
immediately followed by another unit (who is
closer, but already on a call) say something like
“I’ll be clear in a minute and can take that call
on xxx street”. Happens all the time.
>
>
>
>
>
> Jim Walls - K6CCC ? City of Glendale
>
> Information Services ? Wireless
Communications
>
> 120 N. Isabel St. ? Glendale, CA 91206 ?
(818) 548-4804
>
> jwalls@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|