3 ms·

I'm sort of on the fence. Previously I would have completely agreed - police comms chatter should be public information. I live in a small country, and I set u

I'm sort of on the fence. Previously I would have completely agreed - police comms chatter should be public information. I live in a small country, and I set up a police scanner recently (a bit more effort than the US scanners, as we use TETRA digital radio, so there aren't many people listening). I had fun for a couple of nights listening to the stream. Then I realised that most police work is dealing with really sad human drama. Listening to that stuff is draining, and honestly a lot of it is none of my business. One of the early recordings I got was talking about an asylum seeker who was threatening to kill himself. The officer was clearly worried about him, and was talking to dispatch about how he'd previously talked to this guy when he doused himself in gasoline in the red cross office and tried to put himself on fire. The person was named and his social identity number was read out through the radio. I really felt bad after listening to that, like I was trying to get kicks from others misery. I don't listen to the recordings anymore. But I still record, in case something big and interesting comes up (think police shooting - having a record of police radio could potentially clear things up). Still, I think it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they paid for the TETRA encryption license.

danso 10y ago
OTOH, I think it's important for the public to have a low-friction channel to day-to-day police work, the kind of things that police do 99% of the time when they aren't in the news for something extraordinary (I use extraordinary in a neutral sense, for both heroic and scandalous incidents). Much of it is quite mundane and often depressing, but it's part of civil society, and it sheds light on why police work is sometimes the way it is. Of course, there's always the danger that some entrepreneur will try to monetize this public information by appealing to pruriency [0], but I think we should cross that bridge when we get there, rather than preemptively shutting down a valuable channel that has more benefits (for now) being open than closed. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us/28mug.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us/28mug.html?_r=0
- superuser2 10y ago
  >Much of it is quite mundane and often depressing, but it's part of civil society Thanks, I think it's part of civil society nails what I was trying to say.

danso 10y ago

OTOH, I think it's important for the public to have a low-friction channel to day-to-day police work, the kind of things that police do 99% of the time when they aren't in the news for something extraordinary (I use extraordinary in a neutral sense, for both heroic and scandalous incidents). Much of it is quite mundane and often depressing, but it's part of civil society, and it sheds light on why police work is sometimes the way it is. Of course, there's always the danger that some entrepreneur will try to monetize this public information by appealing to pruriency [0], but I think we should cross that bridge when we get there, rather than preemptively shutting down a valuable channel that has more benefits (for now) being open than closed. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us/28mug.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us/28mug.html?_r=0

superuser2 10y ago
>Much of it is quite mundane and often depressing, but it's part of civil society Thanks, I think it's part of civil society nails what I was trying to say.