BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Lou Kline <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:44:30 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
Hi Bob.

That's why agencies switch to digital--they don't want you to listen, and 
unless somebody develops a device to decode that digital signal, you are 
done.  Look at it from the police department's point of view.  Someone 
could easily stay a step ahead of the law if they can readily intercept 
their communications.  It's really a tactical advantage on their part to 
scramble their communications so that someone with criminal intent cannot 
profit from eavesdropping.

Ultimately, since ECPA in 1985, you have had no right to intercept 
communications in the United States.  Some communications, you can be 
prosecuted for listening to, and other communications, you are permitted to 
listen to, but your state and federal government agencies exercise the 
authority to determine which you may and may not listen to.  Prior to the 
passage of that law, you could listen to whatever you wanted to as long as 
you did not divulge protected information, but the precedent changed with 
that law, and as it stands now, you can listen to what the government tells 
you that you can listen to, and that is subject to change at any time.

73, de Lou K2LKK



At 10:52 AM 12/15/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>     Hi,
>When the pro96 scanner first came out from Radio Shack, I bought one because
>our local police were switching to 800 mhz trunked digital apco25.  Now,
>they have completely encripted the digital signal and no scanner that I'm
>aware of can decode these signals.  Does anyone have any info on a sollution
>to this problem?
>73
>Bob, [log in to unmask], K8LR
>Skype name:  BobTinn
>No trees were harmed in the sending of this message,
>but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>---
>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.2/1185 - Release Date: 
>12/15/2007 12:00 PM

Louis Kim Kline
A.R.S. K2LKK
Home e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work Telephone:  (585) 697-5740  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2