Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s


Richard Heightchew
 

I have 7 both t and XD models and I love the 396 is a great little radio so I'm interested in joining this group to see what people are listening to and to help the group out I think it's the best radio unit I ever put out I have 30 uniden radios  of them


Richard Heightchew
 

To the administrator of this group I guess it's working now for some reason it wasn't letting me subscribe but I'm now able to get my messages through so have a good morning


On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:45 AM, Richard Heightchew
<mikeheight99@...> wrote:
I have 7 both t and XD models and I love the 396 is a great little radio so I'm interested in joining this group to see what people are listening to and to help the group out I think it's the best radio unit I ever put out I have 30 uniden radios  of them


Bernard Skoch
 

The 396 is a cool radio; I have two myself.

But if you are in an area with multicast systems, the SDS 100 far outperforms it.


John Gewecke
 

You would REALLY like the SDS 200 if you ever get the Pleasure ! 😎👍 John. n9zas


From: main@Uniden.groups.io <main@Uniden.groups.io> on behalf of Richard Heightchew <mikeheight99@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 10:50:02 AM
To: main@Uniden.groups.io <main@Uniden.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s
 
To the administrator of this group I guess it's working now for some reason it wasn't letting me subscribe but I'm now able to get my messages through so have a good morning


On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:45 AM, Richard Heightchew
<mikeheight99@...> wrote:
I have 7 both t and XD models and I love the 396 is a great little radio so I'm interested in joining this group to see what people are listening to and to help the group out I think it's the best radio unit I ever put out I have 30 uniden radios  of them


Joseph Shynn
 

Care to provide a quick comparison of the two radios.
And perhaps signing your messages please.

Joey
VA3GOC
VE3XMU


Boyd Prestwood
 

As does the SDS-200.
Boyd Prestwood K5YKG
Near Houston, TX


Robert Mosby
 

I remember how it was suggested to me to go with the SDS 100, and it’s actually turned out to be my favorite!




On Saturday, April 9, 2022, 1:20 PM, Boyd Prestwood <boydprestwood@...> wrote:

As does the SDS-200.
Boyd Prestwood K5YKG
Near Houston, TX


don robinson
 

For the time being, my 396xt has served me well over the years. In the SanFrancisco Bay Area, however, the local police and fire systems have been upgraded to phase II. I still am picking up RX on my phase I, so it isn't time to run out and buy a new scanner yet. I've been looking at the 325 since the price came down a little. What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up. I have a small  seven-element 700 MHz yagi for when too much signal mixing happens I can aim for the best. Most of the time the stock antenna is fine. When I'm out and about I use a 2 " stubby to cut down physical stress  on the antenna jack, which I had to solder back  to the main board a while back. The stubby works fine since the local sigals are pretty strong.

On Saturday, April 9, 2022, 08:45:35 AM PDT, Richard Heightchew <mikeheight99@...> wrote:


I have 7 both t and XD models and I love the 396 is a great little radio so I'm interested in joining this group to see what people are listening to and to help the group out I think it's the best radio unit I ever put out I have 30 uniden radios  of them


Jim Walls
 

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...


Evan Platt
 

Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
the next few months, they won't have a choice.So the choice is either
encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
So easiest solution is encrypt everything.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...







Jim Walls
 

It's not just California.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 19:34
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
the next few months, they won't have a choice.So the choice is either
encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
So easiest solution is encrypt everything.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...







Evan Platt
 

Oh. I didn't realize any other state had the same requirement :(

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:10 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

It's not just California.




-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 19:34
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
the next few months, they won't have a choice.So the choice is either
encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
So easiest solution is encrypt everything.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...

















Jim Walls
 

It's nationwide.


Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 20:15
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Oh. I didn't realize any other state had the same requirement :(

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:10 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

It's not just California.




-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 19:34
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
the next few months, they won't have a choice.So the choice is either
encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
So easiest solution is encrypt everything.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...

















Dan Dahms
 

What is nationwide?

The progression of law enforcement communications to encryption?

Yes a lot are across the nation.  

Mandates by USDOJ for all law enforcement nationwide to encrypt?

The only state I’m aware so far is just crazy California by their own California DOJ. With limited ways around it.

A lot of misinformation by that office to California law enforcement agencies. But hey either they have idiots working for CDOJ that can’t read or they are more than likely are doing it to force their agenda. 

But let’s face it wants to have to switch channels every time you need to share personal identification information? So let’s just throw it on the taxpayers to pay for it😠




On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 08:43 PM, Jim Walls wrote:

It's nationwide.


Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 20:15
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Oh. I didn't realize any other state had the same requirement :(

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:10 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

It's not just California.




-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 19:34
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
the next few months, they won't have a choice.So the choice is either
encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
So easiest solution is encrypt everything.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:

From: "don robinson

What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.

On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.


73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@...

















jim myers
 

There is NO federal mandate to encrypt. That is purely FUD bring spread via this forum.


jim myers
 

There is NO NATIONWIDE MANDATE TO ENCRYPT POLICE COMMUNICATIONS - please stop spreading FUD!

 

California STATE DOJ ≠ FEDERAL DOJ


imhstar1
 

The government does not want us to hear what they are doing.

On Saturday, April 9, 2022, 08:43:36 PM PDT, Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:


It's nationwide.


Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 20:15
To: main@uniden.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s

Oh. I didn't realize any other state had the same requirement :(

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 8:10 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:
>
> It's not just California.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Evan Platt" <evan@...>
> Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 19:34
> To: main@uniden.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [Uniden] Hi everybody my name is Mike and I have 7396s
>
> Yep, California DOJ requirement is any PII (anything to be used to
> identify a person - name, etc) needs to be only over an encrypted
> channel. So far a few agencies have pushed the date back, but within
> the next few months, they won't have  a choice.So the choice is either
> encrypt everything, or only give ID'ing info on an encrypted channel.
> So easiest solution is encrypt everything.
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM Jim Walls <jim@...> wrote:
> >
> > From: "don robinson
> >
> > > What scares me is not knowing if or when more encryption will show up.
> >
> > Assume within the next year or two almost all law enforcement will be encrypted.
> >
> > On the system I run, our PD is essentially being told by DOJ that they must plan for encryption.
> >
> >
> > 73
> > -----
> > Jim Walls - K6CCC
> > jim@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>













Stephen Krupa
 

Pennsylvania has encrypted. Also, some municipalities in the Commonwealth have done so.





On Sunday, April 10, 2022, 11:56:12 AM EDT, jim myers <kd7eir@...> wrote:


There is NO NATIONWIDE MANDATE TO ENCRYPT POLICE COMMUNICATIONS - please stop spreading FUD!

 

California STATE DOJ ≠ FEDERAL DOJ


Joe M.
 

PA State police have been encrypted for about 20 years.

Some PA municipalities have encrypted, but using them to say everyone is doing the same is no more accurate than using the few who have recently turned off encryption to say that everyone is turning it off.

Reality is that will will and some will not. Those areas that have major crime problems will probably do it before most others.

Joe M.

On 4/10/2022 3:43 PM, Stephen Krupa via groups.io wrote:
Pennsylvania has encrypted. Also, some municipalities in the
Commonwealth have done so.





On Sunday, April 10, 2022, 11:56:12 AM EDT, jim myers <kd7eir@...>
wrote:


There is NO NATIONWIDE MANDATE TO ENCRYPT POLICE COMMUNICATIONS - please
stop spreading FUD!

California STATE DOJ ≠ FEDERAL DOJ


ROBERT QUINLAN
 

Hello and welcome

first may I ask what area are you in ,and your interest in monitoring that will generally get you started with reply's and others with the same interest or in your location or suggestions if you have any questions we have people who have spent a lot of time in this hobby and have a technical back ground or have a law enforcement experience  

    I have 8 radios on my desk at this time.

                      again welcome Robert Q