October 23, 2006
Do You Hear What I Hear?
Written by DCist contributor Lindsay Gibson.
As we mentioned earlier, a new grid of high-tech sensors meant to pinpoint gunshots is being tested in D.C. as part of a pilot program by the FBI. The sensors, which use a technology called ShotSpotter, picks up the distinct noise of gunfire and automatically alerts police to its location within a few feet. District officials credit the system with last week's rapid arrest of a suspect after the fatal shooting of man in SE.
It's certainly exciting to hear about new, and apparently successful, ways of fighting crime in D.C., but this technology has implications that reach far beyond catching shooters and helping their victims. These gadgets create an opportunity to change the way both police and neighbors respond to crime. Currently there's an asymmetry between the information citizens in high-crime areas report and the incidents police effectively respond to. The Post casually admits that "gunfire has become a part of the urban landscape," numbing people to the sound and making them less likely to call police. Some legitimate shootings go unreported while cops lose precious time hunting down noises which may just as likely come from a backfiring car. ShotSpotter alleviates the latter of these problems, but not the former.
While helping police find shooting victims faster is critical, the sensors could decrease public involvement in reporting crimes. A system touted to automatically alert police in case of gunfire takes the onus off of neighbors to call 911. Cops can't be everywhere and the vigilance of residents is a critical factor in keeping neighborhoods safe. Some people may not take this burden seriously, but those who live in crime hot-spots shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of security that squad cars will magically appear after a shooting.
The technology depends on proper maintenance and oversight by mere humans. In the busy MPD it's impossible to say with certainty that any system is running smoothly, let alone one buzzing with newfangled doodads. More worrisome is that over-stretched law enforcement may be less likely to take the report of gunfire seriously if their sensors are silent.
So let's applaud ShotSpotter, but also remember that we all need to stay vigilant and report crime when it happens. In the words of Metro Transit, "If you see something, say something." Police share the burden. Promptly responding to tips and forming relationships in communities will do much to dispel the gunshot numbness that pervades parts of the District.
|
Do you seriously think, that with this new technology, most people will disregard their own safety enough and fail to call in a heard gunshot that is just a few yards from their location?
I think you are underestimating the fear the average city-dweller has in order to criticize something for the sake of criticism...
- "Honey, the kids are playing outside and I think I just heard a gunshot!"
- "Eh, don't worry about it, dear, ShotSpotter has our kids covered."
... quite ridiculous. Next guest contributor, please!
Oh, I don't know about that, CN. I've lived in areas of DC where gunfire was common enough- night after night, week after week, that calling the police almost got to seem pointless. I'll bet in areas like that the frequency with which gunfire is reported is lower than in areas where it's a rare and more subjectively scary thing. These would be the exact areas that would benefit most from this.
This is fantastic technology. We need it. People's perceptions are notoriously unreliable, especially episodic memory of emotionally charged events. This system sounds like an incredible way to eliminate the fuzzy and inaccurate information provided to emergency responders and police during gun violence.
I wonder if it would also help in immediately localizing issues like exploding manhole covers (get ready for it... winter rains plus salt on the roads are going to corrode more power line conduits in our sewers this winter...), and possibly other attacks, like pipe bombs (nothing new to DC) and other mischief.
Though, the july 4th season will be a blind period, surely.
Wow. Such . . . faith. $50 says that the system is the subject of a scathing "It doesn't work. At all." Washington Post report within three years.
The company website claims that it can resolve location to within 25 meters and, in multiple gunshot incidents, it can resolve the source locations of single shots to within inches...
At the risk of being gullible, I want to see the street testing of it fast tracked!
's great that this system can pinpoint the location of a gunshot, or a bunch of them, but (at the risk of stating the completely obvious) gunshots are not the problem; the shooters are the problem. I'm no criminologist or CSI, but it seems to me that finding where shots are fired is the easiest part of an investigation (it's usually somewhere around all those bullet holes and in the vicinity of the victim). Because shooters tend to be less stationary than either bullet holes or victims, the new detection system only has value if it aids in tracking the shooters after a shooting.
Now, certainly, if police heed the call of the ShotSpotter they will arrive more quickly, but unless some brave citizen sticks his or her head out of the window and reports to the police who they should be looking for and which way the shooter escaped, then very little has been gained. Without the human element, these are ambulance beacons, not crime-stoppers.
Criswell predicts a "booming" underground trade in DC for automatics fitted with silencers.
I'm always amazed at how multimilliondollar Flash Gordon technology, like biometrics, can be defeated with ordinary Macgyver tools like a Ziploc baggy full of water. Apparently the City Council and law enforcement learned nothing from Return of the Jedi.