Parts of St. Louis will soon be covered by a gunshot-detection system that can even tell investigators if the shooter was standing still or moving.
Using sound-recognition software, the ShotSpotter system claims to pinpoint the location of gunfire. It quickly alerts police by sending the location and details about how many shots were fired.
Watch this ShotSpotter Inc. video to see how the system works
...continued
That would all depend on response time. Generally, when people fire a gun, they don't hang around the area very long. So, unless there is an officer within a few blocks, I'm not sure what good it would do. The only way that I could see that it would help would be in the case of a shootout, or running gun battle, where it could give nearly instantaneous updates on the suspect's location. I can't see it being that accurate though.Doug wrote:Does it reduce crime?
Well it can't stop shots from being fired but if it can help catch more criminals, it can't be all that bad. Here's some testimonials but take them with a grain of salt as they come from Shotspotter's webpage: http://www.shotspotter.com/customers/testimonials.htmlDoug wrote:Does it reduce crime?
steve wrote:The article suggests that it does reduce crime.
Sound triangulation isn't that accurate? Why wouldn't it be?jlblues wrote:I can't see it being that accurate though.Doug wrote:Does it reduce crime?
migueltejada wrote:
Only a matter of time before we get the London system of cctv hooked into the SLPD. Enjoy your limited freedom while you have it folks before the government saves us from ourselves!
Great, another sap falls for the "Nothing to hide" logical fallicy.Aviator wrote:migueltejada wrote:
Only a matter of time before we get the London system of cctv hooked into the SLPD. Enjoy your limited freedom while you have it folks before the government saves us from ourselves!
I would be happy to have a London-style cctv system operating in St. Louis. Being on camera wouldn't keep me from doing anything I already do so I don't see how that would inhibit my freedom.
The reasoning of this argument is that when it comes to government surveillance or use of personal data, there is no privacy violation if a person has nothing sensitive, embarrassing, or illegal to conceal. Criminals involved in illicit activities have something to fear, but for the vast majority of people, their activities are not illegal or embarrassing.
Understanding privacy as I have set forth reveals the flaw of the nothing to hide argument at its roots. Many commentators who respond to the argument attempt a direct refutation by trying to point to things that people would want to hide. But the problem with the nothing to hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. Agreeing with this assumption concedes far too much ground and leads to an unproductive discussion of information people would likely want or not want to hide. As Bruce Schneier aptly notes, the nothing to hide argument stems from a faulty “premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong.”75
The deeper problem with the nothing to hide argument is that it myopically views privacy as a form of concealment or secrecy. But understanding privacy as a plurality of related problems demonstrates that concealment of bad things is just one among many problems caused by government programs such as the NSA surveillance and data mining. In the categories in my taxonomy, several problems are implicated.
LinkHollywood.com wrote:HOLLYWOOD - A man cleared of murder after he was spotted in the background of outtake footage of TV comedy Curb Your Enthusiasm has been awarded damages of $320,000.
Juan Catalan, 28, spent five months in jail charged with the murder of 16-year-old Martha Puebla until he used outtake footage--showing him at an L.A. Dodgers game in Los Angeles when the crime occurred--to prove his innocence.
How come when you are a victim of a crime though, none of those cameras seems to help prevent the crime, or help catch the criminal?Matt wrote:Try to become less naive. Haven't you visited Google Earth? The declassified technology like it is only a fraction of what is possible.
I work downtown in a secured builded, take Metro, and live in Soulard. I'm on camera just about everywhere except the restroom. It doesn't alter my behavior in the least....I guess because I don't engage in criminal behaviors.
Make a list of the places that are not under some type of surveillance -- where are we NOT being watched? Now I guess sounds will be monitored and tracked. Under Bush, any telephone call can be recorded.
I know--I've thought of becoming a hermit on a beautiful island or mountain somewhere.
Community Eye uses high quality security cameras and a gunshot detection system to monitor an eight square mile crime-heavy area of Newark. The cameras have night vision, record in high definition video and stream wirelessly to a nearby police station, where officers can control the cameras, zoom in on areas, etc. The gunshot detection system can triangulate on gunfire immediately after firing, and can automatically move cameras to monitor the area. Police are able to respond immediately. Community Eye now has over 100 cameras in place, and the gunshot detection system is going online soon.
