Gunshot Locators...for or against?

[Bay Area]

This seems effective in densely populated areas with lots of ambient surveillance. Pinpoint the location and time, then check all the local security cameras for whatever you can find.

This. The overall consensus seems to be without cameras, the system is not that effective.

 

[Scrody]

Against. How I dispense of rats in my own apartment is no one's business.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

This. The overall consensus seems to be without cameras, the system is not that effective.

If it could be used to distinguish sound signatures such that it could accurately identify false reports of gun shots then that might be something too. Not sure how important that is though.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Against. Too much state power. If we ever need to oust them it will be way harder if they have gun trackers.

 

[nhbbear]

When used in conjunction with a camera system and active operator, these can be effective crime solving and suppression tools.

If they are not paired with a camera and an operator to direct the camera in the direction of the shots, these are just very expensive noise detectors that come in moments before the 911 calls.

I would not advocate every city having them, but certain high crime neighborhoods could benefit. So any objection I have is cost related. I wholly reject the basis that these infringe on anyone's rights. They are a set of ears in public-not listening to anyone's conversation. They provide the opportunity to get a camera to a crowd or vehicles leaving the scene of a shooting that would be gone by the time witnesses decide to call 911 and provide the information.

 

[KrazyKanadian]

Well, how much effect would this really have?

It's not like some dude is going to shoot his gun in public and just stand there waiting for cops to show up.

Seems like a waste of money. I guess a test system could be put in to see if it has any effect on crime but I don't see it.

There would need to be a camera there for this to work properly I think.

 

[alexdlrg]

I don't think this technology infringes on anyone's privacy rights. You make the noise, it can be recorded and triangulated.

However, in urban environments with lots of tall buildings it would be almost impossible to have enough cameras to get line-of-sight to a significant portion of the ground. That's true even if the sensors were equipped with cameras that automatically pointed in the direction of the triangulated gunshot.

The possibility for early response seems to be the primary benefit of this technology.

It may be too expensive for the benefit it provides now, but the price should be coming down significantly in the near future. In 10 or 15 years, something that costs $250K now will cost $45K or so. At that point, it would be silly not to have it.

 

[Dolomite]

Typical stimulus money spending. Anyway,

They're always on, the 'sensors' are always reporting.

They're recording what people say - and its being used against them in court (and this will continue unabated because of all this: Oh, I think it might a good idea in some neighborhoods bullshit).

 

[oldshadow]

They're always on, the 'sensors' are always reporting.

They're recording what people say - and its being used against them in court (and this will continue unabated).

Do you have a link to this recording and if true then I would have a problem with them.

If just locating shots I don

 

[Dolomite]

It was a murder case in Boston a few years back IIRC. Gots no audio.

They've also recorded plane crashes and vehicle accidents as well - even though the company marketers swear on a bible that their technology can't do that.

 

[2DUM2TAP]

For it. Even if it doesn't get the crook the improved response time could save the life of someone who is bleeding out.

 

[Like A Bas]

Is the technology even close to where it needs to be? I'd prefer not to eat blacktop because I slam my car door too hard.

 

[Chesten_Hesten]

If it can hear gunshots, what else is it listening for?

 

[Bay Area]

The main gripes I have found are it increases the paperwork police have to do, because they are constantly responding to loud bangs. That and the cost of the system.

 

[Lord_Impaler]

Against. Too much state power. If we ever need to oust them it will be way harder if they have gun trackers.

This.

 

[BubbaH]

Against it for sure. Too much government already. All we need now is the police kicking in peoples' doors after some kid lights a firecracker in his back yard.

 

[panamaican]

Against it but I don't have a problem with it being installed in those communities that want it.

If it's on the public streets and only picks up sounds at the gun shot level or louder then I'm fine. But if it can pick up the sounds of people in a closed automobile or through a window then I'd be against.

 

[j98]

 

[Lord_Impaler]

Silencers are illegal in my state.

 

[j98]

Silencers are illegal in my state.

make your own like this guy