3 ms·
Having an 11% success rate seems pretty impressive to me. Much better than the rate of false panic alarms, for example. And I'm sure a lot of those ShotSpotter
by GhostVII 5y ago
Having an 11% success rate seems pretty impressive to me. Much better than the rate of false panic alarms, for example. And I'm sure a lot of those ShotSpotter alerts were accurate, but the police didn't get there soon enough.
- handmodel 5y agoI think for the purposes of sending a car over to drive through a street its pretty good. The article discusses instances where it is used in trial and for that it is obviously pretty weak - surprised it can be used at all.
- beerandt 5y agoI can see a use to confirm timing, or approx location, or as backing up a witnesses testimony. But it shouldn't be used as stand alone evidence.
- giantg2 5y agoIt shouldn't have anything to do with getting there soon enough. If they find shell casings, victims, or other evidence that a crime occurred (usually even discharging a firearm in a major city is considered a crime with very limited defenses), then they should still be collecting evidence and logging a report. Now, they may not be doing that because they don't want to have high crime numbers that are unsolved, or even dragging down the reputation of the safer areas (I've heard of officers doing this).
- GhostVII 5y agoI was thinking of cases where someone fires a few shots and then everyone runs off - odds are the shell casings aren't going to be seen unless they do a careful sweep of the area, and the victims all left pretty quickly. No idea how often that actually happens though.
- giantg2 5y agoYeah, but if the people running off aren't calling in, then the technology isn't going to make any impact until the public relations change.