Encrypting public safety communications is disservice to the public
Subscribe for unlimited digital access.
Try one month for $1!
Subscribe for unlimited digital access. Try one month for $1!
Many law enforcement agencies are choosing to encrypt public safety radio systems, namely police communications. While I can understand the need to encrypt special operations such as surveillance, drug enforcement, SWAT, and sensitive investigations, many law enforcement agencies are choosing to encrypt dispatch frequencies.
This is a disservice to the public, and is a discredit to government transparency. Encrypting dispatch channels can cause the public to wonder just what the police may be hiding and in some instances, makes it difficult for the public to assist the police.
SEND LETTERS TO: email@example.com. Please include your neighborhood or hometown and a phone number for verification purposes.
People with scanners can help the police with gathering information to assist with apprehending criminals, and locating lost children and pets. A lot of people who listen to scanners are current and retired police officers, dispatchers, firefighters, and EMS professionals. I think given the current climate it would behoove law enforcement agencies to reconsider using encryption on dispatch channels.
Robert Maxwell Overholt, Evanston
Why aren’t they ready?
What!?! White Sox General Manager Rick Hahn stated that Eloy Jimenez and Michael Kopech aren’t ready yet? Right, they can’t be brought up while we’re fighting for a playoff berth!
Robert Mitchell, Northlake
Who is being held responsible?
The Trump administration is in contempt of court over reuniting parents with their stolen kids. My question is: Who is being held responsible, who is being fined or punished, and why is the court letting them off the hook? What good is a court order when there are no penalties for violating it? If I violated a court order, I’d be in the slammer.
Mike A. Smith, Oak Lawn
The real problems
To those who want to know who is going to pay the cost of police to prevent harm to marchers on the expressways, caused by impatient drivers: Why don’t they worry about the millions of dollars the city keeps paying to settle lawsuits filed by the men who were imprisoned for years because of rigged confessions? Or how about the settlements to the families of those shot by police in questionable situations?
Roger Gorlicki, Buffalo Grove
Peter Roskam has been my congressman for a decade, and a recent debate with Democrat Sean Casten was the first time I have ever seen him debate an opponent or be pressed and questioned about his voting record and views in a televised forum.
Discounting town halls as “not productive,” Roskam instead holds tele-town halls. There is little to no notice given for when they will happen, questions are screened and callers rarely have an opportunity to ask follow up questions.
During the months of uncertainty over the fate of the ACA, Roskam turned down multiple offers from the nonpartisan League of Women Voters to attend a Q-and-A session, as well as repeated requests from constituents to hold a town hall to address questions and concerns about the Republican-touted AHCA plan, under which the Congressional Budget Office estimated 34,000 residents of the 6th District would lose coverage.
U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of the neighboring 9th District even invited residents of the 6th District to her town hall to learn more about the details and potential impact of the AHCA.
Peter Roskam was elected and took an oath to represent all the constituents of the 6th District, yet it doesn’t feel that way. During the recent debate, Casten and Roskam supporters and protestors marched outside the venue. In typical fashion, Roskam avoided the scene completely.
In sharp contrast, Casten introduced himself to many in the crowd and even shook hands with Roskam supporters. Now, that is the type of leadership I’d like to see representing the 6th District.
Jocelyn Mokhtarian, Clarendon Hills