Mr. Ingersoll, I'll try to be as respectful as possible, here...
First of all, you have no clue which police agency I work for, or whether I work in a big city or in sticks. I haven't said. Secondly, you have no clue how old I am. Don't assume.
In many jurisdictions (I've worked for a few) the police will respond to a call at a residence for whatever reason, and will realize there is a scanner present. The police will make the determination that the residence be 'flagged' through the dispatch computer system as having a scanner. The typical reasons are hostile to law enforcement, gang activity, drug activity, constitutionalists types, repeated calls for theft (fencing), etc, etc. That way, when officers are responding to calls for service from these houses they can remain safe. These types of residences usually will make up a large percentage of the calls police respond to. It's unfortunate but the 5% who can't seem to behave are also the ones who use police services the most. When I say the most, I'm talking the vast majority of police time, and resources, and calls for service.
If a police officer is responding to a domestic disturbance at a residence, and this is a repeat residence, with known drug activity, or an aszhole who is anti-law enforcement, then you can damn sure bet I would want to know there is a scanner there. Having been involved in a shoot-out at a domestic disturbance nine years ago with a man armed with a gun, I want every little bit of information I can get prior to arriving. If the bad guy is listening, and knows we are coming, then I need to know that too. If the dispatcher knows there is a scanner at a residence they are sending officers to, then they will typically put the call out via other methods. Ambush of police officers is a new stark reality in this day and age. There have never been more than in 2009. Ever.
If you don't fit any of the above, then I wouldn't get your panties in a wad.
The only reason I have explained this is because I know who you are, and I respect what you've done. I'll accept your apology.
Quiet frankly, I would like to see all police agencies go to encrypted channels. The public has no need to listen to the day to day operations of their local agencies. The only reason many haven't is because of the costs involved. As Brett mentioned, most agencies have to switch to digital by federal mandate, and the monitoring equipment will become very expensive for the public, but not entirely impossible. I would like to see agencies encrypt and then there won't be a threat to officers safety.
edit-oh, and little6pack, I appologize for hijacking your thread. I guess this particular topic is sensitive for me because of my personal experiences I've had a work. There have been several of them that solidified me feelings about the subject.
