June 20th, 2024

ShotSpotter does not reduce gun violence or increase clearance rates

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson discontinues ShotSpotter due to reliability concerns and its role in a police shooting. Research shows it doesn't reduce gun violence. Chicago plans to explore alternative solutions until 2024.

Read original articleLink Icon
ShotSpotter does not reduce gun violence or increase clearance rates

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced the discontinuation of the city's ShotSpotter gunshot detection system, citing concerns about its reliability and role in a police shooting. Research by Eric L. Piza and colleagues found that while ShotSpotter led to quicker police responses and increased recovery of illegal firearms, it did not reduce gun violence or improve clearance rates in Chicago and Kansas City. The study compared ShotSpotter areas to control areas and found no significant impact on crime reduction. Despite some benefits like facilitating faster emergency responses, the decision to cancel ShotSpotter in Chicago aligns with research findings. The city plans to assess alternative tools and programs to address gun violence until the contract lapses in September 2024. Moving forward, Chicago should consider evidence-based approaches to public safety investments based on research on effective crime control and prevention strategies.

Link Icon 8 comments
By @pxeger1 - 4 months
Related: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighbourhood https://computer.rip/2024-03-01-listening-in-on-the-neighbor... (3 months ago, 523 points, 399 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39576974)
By @phendrenad2 - 4 months
A lot of problems can only be solved by a combination of solutions A and B. If A and B have never existed together, it's trivial to write research papers "proving" that A and B are ineffective. Of course they are.
By @limpbizkitfan - 4 months
ShotSpotter seemed (in Chicago, at least) to be a huge source of graft. Before word got out of the cancellation there were some nodes installed in the more right wing or blighted wards last minute. Scope is really important when people sign a contract. All ShotSpotter did was generate overtime hours for CPD without having any noticeable effect to crime. The amount of money ShotSpotter gives to Ald. Napolitano or the media to stoke anxiety about the city saving on SaaS bills is insane…
By @spoonjim - 4 months
This is not because of the technology but because of broken governance.

When someone is shooting other people, that person must be removed from society if that society is to remain functional.

The fact is that American cities simply do not do this. Japan does it. Singapore does it. And if the US incarcerated every person who fired a bullet at a person for the remainder of their natural lifespan, we could do it too.

By @elintknower - 4 months
Well... if you don't use the data from shot spotter in an actionable way and the mal-incentives for murder / illicit firearm possession don't change... yeah a tool meant to observe and record instances of gun violence probably won't prevent it.

This isn't about politics it's about understanding what a functioning society looks like.

By @seventyone - 4 months
It does a great job picking up voices though
By @Solololo - 4 months
It's incredible how technosolutionism keeps coming back in Law Enforcement in either a reliance on the Chilling Effect or as a 'new' way of Predictive Policing, while they never work
By @Neywiny - 4 months
Cool tech in theory. I didn't read how the study was conducted but I'll assume the results are correct. The note on the time to reporting makes me wonder about victim survival likelihood. I didn't see that in there, but I assume that 93 seconds could be the difference for someone who was shot.

I don't understand how police could show up later. This technology doesn't replace humans calling, right? I didn't have time to check out that other report, it's very long.