Quote Originally Posted by asmo View Post
I am against the whole encryption thing. I get the 'safety' argument but it doesn't trump the 'Taxpayers paid for this, so they have a right to listen.' argument. The whole point of having unencrypted comms for public servants is so that people could monitor what was going on. Encrypting the comms is a slap in the face to every single tax payer. This is bad policy.

Those that know me know that, among other things, I design, build, and engineer *real* encrypted comm architectures for a living. So this is something that I know a little more than something about.
You also don't work in LE, so this is something you know a little less about. There is still a lot that goes on, real time, that are beneficial to keep out of the hands of the public, such as ongoing searches, attempts to locate, and felony apprehensions. I don't see encryption of LE radio traffic as a slap in the face, I see it as a means of keeping us safe. If I'm out on a search for a violent suspect, and we set up a perimeter, and air that information over the radio (without encryption) and the bad guy has a scanner app that can hear our comms, he knows exactly where we are and can map that out to avoid detection or even ambush those units. You want transparency? Do what they do with video and other data- fill out a FOIA request after-the-fact and the agency should be more than happy to oblige. But going on in real time, no, you shouldn't have a *right* to that for officer safety reasons.