• Critical_Insight@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Surprised it’s not encrypted in the first place. You haven’t been able to listen to police communications in Finland since the 90’s. I would assume most of Europe is the same way.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apparently Americans feel like this is a way of keeping taps on what their police do.

      It’s interesting. One argument for encrypting is that it keeps private info of the people involved private. But some retort that they can just use other means to communicate that info. But wouldn’t that mean that it doesn’t help keeping taps on the police doing shady shit since they can just use those more secure means of communicating anyway?

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

        They’re getting away with shady shit now, via the unencrypted channels, hiding behind qualified immunity and get away with literal murder.

        The question should be how successful is it holding the police accountable based solely on their radio communications. I’d imagine the answer is “not fucking likely”.