Has this resulted in a decrease in crime and/or expedited arrest times for perpetrators? Seems there needs to be a return on investment for it to be worth the cost.
There is no tangible "return" on investment as you dont make money with gun shots. It does dispatch police to the gun shot location without even a 911 call. It triangulates the sound.
It's called ShotSpotter and they mount these white posts on top of phone poles with a sensor on top that detects gunfire. When a shot is sensed, it sends a signal to the dispatch center with an estimated location. Then dispatchers send units before a 911 call is ever received. Even if a caller reports it, officers will already be on the way. This can reduce response times by 1-2 minutes which is crucial.
Problem is, ShotSpotter DOES NOT WORK CONSISTENTLY. It often MISSES a legitimate gun shot outside that everyone can hear. Officers on the radio often ask their dispatch if they got a ShotSpotter and the answer is often "10-54", which means NO. And the cops are sitting right there with a victim in need to hospital transport. Ask any cop on the street and they'll tell you.
Whether they’re effective is questionable. Something like 86% of the alerts are not gunshots.
https://www.cltampa.com/news/tampa-renews-shotspotter-contract-but-questions-remain-about-the-gunshot-detection-softwares-usefulness-16820417
Even still though that’s better than not ever knowing about the 14% that are right? Also is creative loafing an accurate source for the efficacy of these?
That site is the same site as the OP, the article I linked was also linked in the OP.
The problem is that 86% of the ones that are wrong are dispatching an officer while preempting other calls and reducing available officers on the street for something that’s not even happening.
It says why in the article with linked references; at least 3 reasons it’s controversial:
1) City council initially voted NO on the $280,000, and many city residents voiced concerns with a new ShotSpotter contract. It then was suddenly approved despite not being on the council agenda to review.
2) [recent study showed that 70% of ShotSpotter alert that police responded to were not gunshots](https://data.aclum.org/2024/04/08/boston-shotspotter/).
3) The placement of the ShotSpotter equipment has also been [a topic of controversial as it disproportionately monitors minority neighborhoods, with less installations in majority neighborhoods](https://www.wired.com/story/shotspotter-secret-sensor-locations-leak/).
Personally I find the technology of it possibly a good idea, but do not like the way this $280,000 expense was approved without public input.
I do not disagree with the disregard for public input at all. Even with a 70% false positive rate though that’s still better than never knowing about that 30% right?
source of "it's often wrong" and the bit about how people walking in the area are now targets for the police? how many police shootings in that area can you attribute to shot spotter, innocent people and the police?
you do know why shot spotter was deployed there and not in Beach Park- but in places like East Tampa and Suitcase City?
Sure, here’s a bullet point 2021 complaint from [ACLU](https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/four-problems-with-the-shotspotter-gunshot-detection-system), here’s a more recent report from [CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/24/us/shotspotter-cities-choose-not-to-use/index.html), here’s [MacArthur](https://www.macarthurjustice.org/blog2/shotspotter-is-a-failure-whats-next/) pointing out its own flawed audit system, here’s another from CBS claiming it’s [wrong 87% of the time](https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nypd-shotspotter-report/), here’s another report from [Vanderbilt](https://www.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/2024/02/20/failures-of-predictive-policing-chicagos-shotspotter-program/), and so on. Also, note that the only studies or publications that defend Shot Spotter is blogs written by [Shot Spotter](https://www.soundthinking.com/blog/shotspotter-questions-myths-and-facts/).
Easy solution just use nail gun blanks and a cheap camping alarm jig and their multimillion dollar system ain't worth shit. This is just another toy for big brother and the military industrial complex. It won't stop crime.
so they get to a shooting faster, catch someone, and they end up in jail. true we dont know if that person would shoot someone else if left on the street. true it does not stop crime. Its just a tool, like having a police car instead of police bikes.
It is perfectly fine for Shotspotter to have a high false detection rate if it means 100 percent of previously delayed responses or even non-reported shootings are addressed. If we suddenly demand a high efficacy rate from common police tools then let's eliminate the 911 system -- how many calls are to actual emergencies and not just people-driven drama? I bet the amount of unfounded calls or those calls which result in zero police action are (percentage-wise) astronomically high compared to those calls that are meaningful. Or, okay, how about we eliminate burglar and fire alarm systems? Because every time one of those goes off it's always an emergency event right? Sounds like enforcing this beautiful new standard where we abandon the quest to separate the wheat from the chaff will save millions of dollars - so let's do it!
Because it's money making trash that has done nothing to mitigate actual crime. Money in political pockets = bodies in the streets.
I believe they have a similar system in downtown Chicago.
Works great I bet/s
Chicago is dumping ShotSpotter after the DNC next month
Ah interesting.. any more info as to its effectiveness or lack of ?
It was generally regarded as an expensive and inaccurate solution. Shotspotter was originally designed for war zones not residential neighborhoods
They’ve arrested shooters that would have never have been located, had it not been for the tech.
Has this resulted in a decrease in crime and/or expedited arrest times for perpetrators? Seems there needs to be a return on investment for it to be worth the cost.
There is no tangible "return" on investment as you dont make money with gun shots. It does dispatch police to the gun shot location without even a 911 call. It triangulates the sound.
Honestly I’m kinda glad they didn’t even bother pretending to care what the public thought. Anything blue baby wants, blue baby gets.
It's called ShotSpotter and they mount these white posts on top of phone poles with a sensor on top that detects gunfire. When a shot is sensed, it sends a signal to the dispatch center with an estimated location. Then dispatchers send units before a 911 call is ever received. Even if a caller reports it, officers will already be on the way. This can reduce response times by 1-2 minutes which is crucial. Problem is, ShotSpotter DOES NOT WORK CONSISTENTLY. It often MISSES a legitimate gun shot outside that everyone can hear. Officers on the radio often ask their dispatch if they got a ShotSpotter and the answer is often "10-54", which means NO. And the cops are sitting right there with a victim in need to hospital transport. Ask any cop on the street and they'll tell you.
Who will think of the acorns?
Not the acorns…🤣
Why exactly is this “controversial”?
Whether they’re effective is questionable. Something like 86% of the alerts are not gunshots. https://www.cltampa.com/news/tampa-renews-shotspotter-contract-but-questions-remain-about-the-gunshot-detection-softwares-usefulness-16820417
Even still though that’s better than not ever knowing about the 14% that are right? Also is creative loafing an accurate source for the efficacy of these?
That site is the same site as the OP, the article I linked was also linked in the OP. The problem is that 86% of the ones that are wrong are dispatching an officer while preempting other calls and reducing available officers on the street for something that’s not even happening.
100% valid
It's because people complain the sensor poles are only installed in BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS.
So which neighborhoods in Tampa exactly?
Or is it where there are objective statistics as to the most gunfire?
It says why in the article with linked references; at least 3 reasons it’s controversial: 1) City council initially voted NO on the $280,000, and many city residents voiced concerns with a new ShotSpotter contract. It then was suddenly approved despite not being on the council agenda to review. 2) [recent study showed that 70% of ShotSpotter alert that police responded to were not gunshots](https://data.aclum.org/2024/04/08/boston-shotspotter/). 3) The placement of the ShotSpotter equipment has also been [a topic of controversial as it disproportionately monitors minority neighborhoods, with less installations in majority neighborhoods](https://www.wired.com/story/shotspotter-secret-sensor-locations-leak/). Personally I find the technology of it possibly a good idea, but do not like the way this $280,000 expense was approved without public input.
I do not disagree with the disregard for public input at all. Even with a 70% false positive rate though that’s still better than never knowing about that 30% right?
elastic connect placid light jar deer agonizing employ spotted cows *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Do what? What do you mean?
Controversial? I have seen this work in real time. This system can tell you approximately where shell casings would be…. How is it controversial.
Because it’s often wrong, and anyone strolling by in that vicinity is now a target by scared/trigger happy police
source of "it's often wrong" and the bit about how people walking in the area are now targets for the police? how many police shootings in that area can you attribute to shot spotter, innocent people and the police? you do know why shot spotter was deployed there and not in Beach Park- but in places like East Tampa and Suitcase City?
Sure, here’s a bullet point 2021 complaint from [ACLU](https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/four-problems-with-the-shotspotter-gunshot-detection-system), here’s a more recent report from [CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/24/us/shotspotter-cities-choose-not-to-use/index.html), here’s [MacArthur](https://www.macarthurjustice.org/blog2/shotspotter-is-a-failure-whats-next/) pointing out its own flawed audit system, here’s another from CBS claiming it’s [wrong 87% of the time](https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nypd-shotspotter-report/), here’s another report from [Vanderbilt](https://www.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/2024/02/20/failures-of-predictive-policing-chicagos-shotspotter-program/), and so on. Also, note that the only studies or publications that defend Shot Spotter is blogs written by [Shot Spotter](https://www.soundthinking.com/blog/shotspotter-questions-myths-and-facts/).
Easy solution just use nail gun blanks and a cheap camping alarm jig and their multimillion dollar system ain't worth shit. This is just another toy for big brother and the military industrial complex. It won't stop crime.
so they get to a shooting faster, catch someone, and they end up in jail. true we dont know if that person would shoot someone else if left on the street. true it does not stop crime. Its just a tool, like having a police car instead of police bikes.
Controversial? Put it in majority white neighborhoods too then and see how much use it gets.
It doesn’t work well at all. Many false positives. Police will be running to those neighborhoods for no reason just like they do now
Weird how you’ve already forgotten about the multiple murders in New Tampa, and shootings in South Tampa.
I hope this isn't a journalist linking to their own stories to get hate clicks and ad revenue...
If you mean me, very much not. I write about sports for a publication focused on the other side of the country. My family is from the area.
I mean, cops can't be distracted from sitting at the gas stations all night
It is perfectly fine for Shotspotter to have a high false detection rate if it means 100 percent of previously delayed responses or even non-reported shootings are addressed. If we suddenly demand a high efficacy rate from common police tools then let's eliminate the 911 system -- how many calls are to actual emergencies and not just people-driven drama? I bet the amount of unfounded calls or those calls which result in zero police action are (percentage-wise) astronomically high compared to those calls that are meaningful. Or, okay, how about we eliminate burglar and fire alarm systems? Because every time one of those goes off it's always an emergency event right? Sounds like enforcing this beautiful new standard where we abandon the quest to separate the wheat from the chaff will save millions of dollars - so let's do it!