• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t quite get these comments, I think our emergency services went encrypted a while back in Vancouver Canada and I’m surprised NY wasn’t already encrypted?

    What about keeping the communications encrypted for the privacy and safety of people involved, and storing the records for a set amount of time. Anyone with access to the live feed can access the backups during that time, and report issues as needed.

    I’m not familiar with the issues with the police department, so maybe a better compromise would be to open up the feeds publicly after a set amount of time?

    • doppelgangmember@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ll put it simple.

      American cops are not equivalent to Canadian cops. US cops use tax payer money to pay lawsuits but are allowed a special police union as well. No other public servants get a union to do their bidding while tax payers foot the bill.

      Open the channels. What’s there to hide. In emergency events, yes it could be an issue. But people also need to know where serious events might be occurring in their areas.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d much rather have some real accountability measures than the accidental accountability occasionally provided by broadcasting their communications.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          How about both? The governmental systems are supposed to be open so that they can be observed to be truthful and trustworthy, and then keep checking anyways.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t think things like names of suspects or victims should be made public.

    • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Historically in the USA many police agencies have tried to cover-up and hide evidence of wrongdoing by on duty officers. Some people viewed the open radio policy as a way to monitor the police to make sure they’re not breaking the law themselves. I personally have never tried to listen in to a police radio so it doesn’t bother me much but some people are upset about it.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey I love snooping on shit and watching reality shows as much as the next guy but I couldn’t be that mad about the police wanting to have a secure way of communicating

      • Rolder@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t imagine that radio communications contain much evidence of wrongdoing. All the real illegal shit happens in person.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Police interactions are public information. If you go to a police station and do a FOIA request, you get all that info anyway. Why would it need to be kept secret before the point it is requested?

      Apart from the fact that many departments deny legal FOIA requests and force people to take legal action to get the information they are legally entitled to.

      Oh wait. Maybe that’s why they want encryption.

      • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Isn’t personal information taken out of FOIA requests first? I can see why victims wouldn’t their names and addresses given freely out. Heck I think suspects should get the same amount of privacy too.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Suspects would already be covered, FOIA requests usually aren’t released before a case is closed, and you ideally don’t close a case half finished.

          Yes, some information is redacted from FOIA requests, but it’s normally not stuff that would be broadcast over a radio. For instance, they may blur the faces of bystanders, or mute a section where someone is giving the officer personal info. But again, there would be no reason to broadcast this info over the radio regardless.