How to you write police 'lingo'?

[J. F. Juzwik]

All the codes, all the profession-specific dialog, cops know all of it. But, how are the rest of us able to interpret and replicate that?

The detective in my novel is dealing with small town folk and cops and they insist on keeping it simple. The police in my other stories talk to my 'bad' guys, and not terribly much to each other in 'that way'.

If you use a lot of dialog cop-to-cop or cop-to-station/dispatcher, where do you get the correct jargon from? Do you know cops and ask them? Is there a central base you can research it from? I'm really curious because some things I've read are so good and so realistic, it's like listening in on the police. I, unfortunately, don't believe I could write a 'cop' conversation like that. How to you do it?

[William Bushman]

Personally, I have been a big fan of police officers and firefighters since I was a kid, so I have picked up a lot on the way. I've also listened to a scanner since I was in Jr. High, so I have a pretty good ear for what the radio traffic sounds like and I like to add that to my stories to add an air of realism. It's also a good source for story material (I think I was corrupted at a young age by Jack Webb). If you do a Google search there are plenty of websites that are state and region specific that list the typical radio and penal codes. I have also read a lot and have watched a lot of documentaries as well as way too many cop shows in my life.
If it helps, there is a movement by FEMA, I believe, to have the emergency services in the U.S. move away from using codes and such on the radio and more "plain text".

[J. F. Juzwik]

Dragnet was a staple in my home. There was an example of the best doing their best. Some may call it unrealistic or old fashioned, but it was glorious and not completely fiction. When I was growing up in the south side of Chicago, we had 'beat' cops and they were heroes to all of us in the neighborhood.

I have heard something about that code thing, planning to let them speak 'English' instead of conversing in numbers. I can see the up and the down side of that though. The up side being less chance of error or misunderstanding with communication. Although, cops know what codes to use, but everyone is human and anyone can make a mistake. The down side being if criminals have a scanner, everything the police are planning or doing will be an open book. I don't know. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it all. What do you think about changing the codes to plain text?

[William Bushman]

Well, the main reasoning behind it is interoperability. Say two neighboring police or fire departments have to work together, there is less chance of them being confused by each other's different radio codes. There are a few die hard departments like the FDNY and LAPD for example, that still stick to using codes on the radio, though.
Codes are kind of a moot point now, because the bad guys can look up the codes online anyway.

[J. F. Juzwik]

I think it might be a kind of 'secret society' type complex, don't you? Not that there's anything really wrong with that mindset, but it's almost like, 'we can talk in code and you can't'. Not to trivialize any of it, but like you said, the bad guys know exactly what's being said, what type of response is coming, what type of firepower, etc., so they're not exactly sneaking up on anybody. But the fact that they use coding does differentiate them from other professions. It's like the corporate nonsense I am all too familiar with. You know. 'We're playing phone tag' and 'we need to be on the same page' and 'let's brainstorm' and all that stuff. People almost take on another persona when they use expressions like that. It's not bad; I just find it extremely interesting that people in certain professions believe they need to speak that way. I do think it would be much more effective if police, fire, etc., spoke 'regular' though. Different counties, different departments, different disciplines, things would go much smoother if they all spoke the same language.

[William Bushman]

Well, the whole idea behind the codes originally, was less secrecy and more clarity or brevity. There would be no mistaking what a dispatcher said or less chance of something like that occurring. Sometimes it's still quicker to say a "211 Now" instead of "an armed robbery in progress".

[J. F. Juzwik]

Well, that makes a lot of sense, but still. I can only wonder why they all don't stop using the codes, or why they all don't continue using the codes. My point being, consistency is needed. I understand different departments, different jurisdictions, and all that, but at least within this country, there should be some sort of standardized language for police. That way, none of them could walk into a situation that is more dangerous than was originally anticipated because of a misunderstanding. Perhaps I'm mistaken, maybe there already is. Do you know if all police/dispatchers within the United States use the same coding/language?

[William Bushman]

No, there is no "standardized" set of codes, only ones suggested by the APCO (The Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials).
In most regions, the police/fire departments use similar codes, but they can still differ somewhat, which is why FEMA has pushed for the change.
As a small anecdote, I remember an LAPD pursuit that terminated in my neighborhood when I was a teenager. I grabbed my scanner and heard the LAPD helicopter communicating with the Burbank PD dispatcher. The BPD dispatcher used a code that the the airship was unfamiliar with. I heard the airship's observer ask the dispatcher to clarify, saying something to the effect "I'm sorry, Ma'am. You're using ten dollar words on a two dollar man." Haha!

[J. F. Juzwik]

That's a unique way to put it! But, you see what can happen? It would be tough for everyone to re-learn stuff so they would all be the same, but wouldn't they all be a lot safer out there if they knew what they were walking into? I am still amazed that the codes presently used are suggestions only. It boggles the mind.

[William Bushman]

In my personal opinion, I think they should just leave things the way they are. I'm not sure how much of a difference it will make (plain text) in the long run, but again, that's just my opinion as a civilian.

[J. F. Juzwik]

It is a tough call. Standardize the codes? Good idea? Yes. Use regular language? Good idea? Yes. Make the coding uniform throughout all jurisdictions and disciplines? Good idea? Yes. Okay. So, what do you do...

I guess it comes down to the old saying, 'if it ain't broken...'. So far, things work acceptably, I suppose. I don't know statistically how many times errors or misunderstandings occur. If, and when, they do, do things still proceed without a hitch or are there serious consequences? I wonder if anyone has ever done a study on that. Maybe it doesn't occur enough to warrant one. I certainly hope that's the case.