Slashdot Mirror
Chicago Debates Merits of ShotSpotter Technology
theodp writes "After a week that saw more than 40 people shot and at least 4 killed, Chicago politicians and police are at odds on whether to implement ShotSpotter, a camera and acoustic sensor-based gunshot-location system that is designed to pinpoint a shooter's location within seconds. The Chicago Police Department opposes such a move, saying ShotSpotter wasn't reliable in an earlier trial and — at $250,000 for a square mile of coverage — is too expensive. The company says the system has dramatically lowered crime rates in cities across the country. ShotSpotter is currently deployed in two countries and 51 US cities and counties."
Or we could have reasonable gun control laws.
Guns are already illegal within the Chicago city limits. Guess those "reasonable gun control laws" aren't quite working out like you'd hoped, huh?
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Charge $300,000 per sq mile and kick $50k back to the police department for 'overtime related to training and special classes.' Don't monitor if the classes are performed or even necessary. Don't check if the system is used after implementation.
The police get funding - they win. The company gets cash - they win. The politicians get to look like they're doing something using cutting edge technology against crime which they can feature in their next election - they win.
It's the perfect solution! No one who matters (in the mind of our leaders) gets hurt.
Please explain why they should not have cameras, especially when almost every city in the United States have laws against discharging fire arms within city limits?
Because in the UK, the home of the highest number of cameras per capita, the technology has not helped one bit. Crime is not down, and the cameras are used instead to look into peoples' windows (as been documented more than once). Cameras are an excuse for the flatfoots to get flat asses from sitting around all day.
In other words, impracticality and blatant misuse as entertainment.
That's why.
That's totally ignoring any sociological/political argument which I will not go into here because it will be like pissing into an ocean of piss.
--
BMO
People killing people is a separate problem from firearms ubiquity. It is easy to legally purchase and carry a weapon in both Isreal and Switzerland, yet they don't have high gun crime rates. Every large survey of gun crime rates and gun control laws show very low correlation between the two.
Police in the United States are not required to respond to anything.
You mad
Warren v. District of Columbia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
Castle Rock v. Gonzales
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales
As loath as I am to link to this site, it gives a very good explanation.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
You mad