4 ms·

Live near Chicago, just want to point out they recently discovered a murdered person quickly near where the report was. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t

Live near Chicago, just want to point out they recently discovered a murdered person quickly near where the report was. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want the police to have another tool to reduce shootings on the southside. Reducing the number of shootings anywhere in the city is not a racist policy contrary to the articles assertion.

butterandguns 3y ago
I believe part of the argument is that it can lead to over policing. I’m in Cleveland where it’s been controversial because most of the devices have been deployed to predominantly black neighborhoods. So they get the most detections because that’s where the most sensors are because they were guided by police data on where the most gun violence historically has been located. Which leads to more police presence, more shakedowns, harassment of people in those neighborhoods. It can lead to a bad reinforcement loop.
- theultdev 3y ago
  Devices are installed where shootings are frequently reported by civilians. The shootings are usually gang related, not at the police, so I don't see how your theory of heightened policing causes a loop. The best way to protect the innocent civilians in the area is to increase surveillance and police presence. Removing police presence is a disservice to the people who are victims of the gang violence in the area. Those people are the ones who call the police and want them there. Only if you remove the police in areas do you get a feedback loop (no protection, so you join a gang for protection, which leads to more gang violence)
  - jononor 3y ago
    Doesn't the police frequently bring in people for drug related things, even if the reason they were present was fun violence related?
    - theultdev 3y ago
      fun violence related? gangs make money by selling drugs. they use that money to buy guns. they then have turf wars over where they can sell drugs. that leads to shootings which strike innocent civilians. what do you suggest the police do? allow those gangs to sell the drugs and kill each other and other innocent bystanders? also this thread is about whether they should monitor shootings...
      - jononor 3y ago
        Gun violence! Apologize for the typo, I spotted it after edit window ended. I am not proposing to do anything. I just described a possible mechanism for how additional policing can lead to additional incarceration, aside from homicide and attempted murders.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  Only if you fall into the trap of thinking that disparate impact = discrimination. It's easier to blame selective enforcement than accept that there's a problem there. That being said, there has been abuse with them. Police pushing to classify ambiguous sounds as shots to justify their actions.
- daft_pink 3y ago
  I guess that argument might make some sense with “victimless crimes” like drugs where it’s possible that people in other neighborhoods are doing drugs and the amount and level of police makes it appear certain people are commiting more crimes. However, I’m not convinced that things like shootings and murder is something that’s being enforced less in other areas of the city as you are probably going to end up in a hospital or discovered either way. You might think it would be more likely to be reported in other areas where the community generally supports the police or has more access to healthcare. So I think it’s totally logical and reasonable to install these tools where the most murders and shootings occur and to have a higher police presence there to try and reduce them.
ben_cog 3y ago
My neighbor just had a police officer move into his spare bedroom full time. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want the police to have another tool to reduce shootings, which this clearly does. It's not like the cop has a personality, with biases and subjective opinions which form his or her worldview and consequent behavior.
limpbizkitfan 3y ago
I live in Chicago. My neighbor (a police officer) was finally able to kill her rapist boyfriend (another police officer) after years being subjected of abuse. He might be in hell but the people he affected, family, neighbors, still live through it. The Chicago Police Department is an institution that lacks oversight and smart staffing. Even the most well intentioned graft startup like ShotSpotter won’t improve their ability.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
giraffe_lady 3y ago
It feels like you're pointing to your proximity to those affected as the source of your authority here? I live on the south side and more or less always have so hopefully my view is taken at least as seriously on that principle. The police don't use this tool to reduce shootings on the south side. It's debatable whether this tool is even capable of that, but regardless that is certainly not what the police have done or intend to do with it. Chicago police are a menace to my community and any power or tool they have been given they use primarily to harm and intimidate. Regardless of what the tool could do, or is intended to do, the history of CPD here is very clear.
xkcd-sucks 3y ago
Live near Boston, just want to point out they recently discovered a pedophile priest was communicating with his victims using strongly encrypted messaging platforms. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want the police to have another tool to reduce child sexual abuse. etc.
SkyPuncher 3y ago
So, this device is completely ineffective in preventing homicide? That murdered person would have been discovered anyways.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  The sooner you know about it the more likely it is to catch them. And the more exactly you know the time the more likely it is to catch them.
- theultdev 3y ago
  You don't always die instantly when you're shot, especially in quick drive-bys. A quicker response could mean the difference between someone surviving and someone bleeding out.

butterandguns 3y ago

I believe part of the argument is that it can lead to over policing. I’m in Cleveland where it’s been controversial because most of the devices have been deployed to predominantly black neighborhoods. So they get the most detections because that’s where the most sensors are because they were guided by police data on where the most gun violence historically has been located. Which leads to more police presence, more shakedowns, harassment of people in those neighborhoods. It can lead to a bad reinforcement loop.

theultdev 3y ago
Devices are installed where shootings are frequently reported by civilians. The shootings are usually gang related, not at the police, so I don't see how your theory of heightened policing causes a loop. The best way to protect the innocent civilians in the area is to increase surveillance and police presence. Removing police presence is a disservice to the people who are victims of the gang violence in the area. Those people are the ones who call the police and want them there. Only if you remove the police in areas do you get a feedback loop (no protection, so you join a gang for protection, which leads to more gang violence)
- jononor 3y ago
  Doesn't the police frequently bring in people for drug related things, even if the reason they were present was fun violence related?
  - theultdev 3y ago
    fun violence related? gangs make money by selling drugs. they use that money to buy guns. they then have turf wars over where they can sell drugs. that leads to shootings which strike innocent civilians. what do you suggest the police do? allow those gangs to sell the drugs and kill each other and other innocent bystanders? also this thread is about whether they should monitor shootings...
    - jononor 3y ago
      Gun violence! Apologize for the typo, I spotted it after edit window ended. I am not proposing to do anything. I just described a possible mechanism for how additional policing can lead to additional incarceration, aside from homicide and attempted murders.
LorenPechtel 3y ago
Only if you fall into the trap of thinking that disparate impact = discrimination. It's easier to blame selective enforcement than accept that there's a problem there. That being said, there has been abuse with them. Police pushing to classify ambiguous sounds as shots to justify their actions.
daft_pink 3y ago
I guess that argument might make some sense with “victimless crimes” like drugs where it’s possible that people in other neighborhoods are doing drugs and the amount and level of police makes it appear certain people are commiting more crimes. However, I’m not convinced that things like shootings and murder is something that’s being enforced less in other areas of the city as you are probably going to end up in a hospital or discovered either way. You might think it would be more likely to be reported in other areas where the community generally supports the police or has more access to healthcare. So I think it’s totally logical and reasonable to install these tools where the most murders and shootings occur and to have a higher police presence there to try and reduce them.

ben_cog 3y ago

My neighbor just had a police officer move into his spare bedroom full time. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want the police to have another tool to reduce shootings, which this clearly does. It's not like the cop has a personality, with biases and subjective opinions which form his or her worldview and consequent behavior.

limpbizkitfan 3y ago

I live in Chicago. My neighbor (a police officer) was finally able to kill her rapist boyfriend (another police officer) after years being subjected of abuse. He might be in hell but the people he affected, family, neighbors, still live through it. The Chicago Police Department is an institution that lacks oversight and smart staffing. Even the most well intentioned graft startup like ShotSpotter won’t improve their ability.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

giraffe_lady 3y ago

It feels like you're pointing to your proximity to those affected as the source of your authority here? I live on the south side and more or less always have so hopefully my view is taken at least as seriously on that principle. The police don't use this tool to reduce shootings on the south side. It's debatable whether this tool is even capable of that, but regardless that is certainly not what the police have done or intend to do with it. Chicago police are a menace to my community and any power or tool they have been given they use primarily to harm and intimidate. Regardless of what the tool could do, or is intended to do, the history of CPD here is very clear.

xkcd-sucks 3y ago

Live near Boston, just want to point out they recently discovered a pedophile priest was communicating with his victims using strongly encrypted messaging platforms. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want the police to have another tool to reduce child sexual abuse. etc.

SkyPuncher 3y ago

So, this device is completely ineffective in preventing homicide? That murdered person would have been discovered anyways.

LorenPechtel 3y ago
The sooner you know about it the more likely it is to catch them. And the more exactly you know the time the more likely it is to catch them.
theultdev 3y ago
You don't always die instantly when you're shot, especially in quick drive-bys. A quicker response could mean the difference between someone surviving and someone bleeding out.