Omaha Police to Use Cameras to Curb Gun Violence ....

[unfy]

http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/nebraska/omaha-police-to-use-cameras-to-curb-gun-violence/article_48ab5b32-8405-5d19-bb11-c6677c8abb06.html


More stupidity.  The camera's aren't really what's to stop gun violence, it's the 'where did it come from' system that will do so.  And uhhhhh... don't they realize that knowing where it came from doesn't stop it from happening in the first place ?

Sigh.

Assuming this is a mic mounted on cruisers that only responds to concussive waves, then sure, whatever.  If it's a network of mic's spread throughout the town the city is deploying, now I have a problem.

I generally support and like my LEO's, but there are some things that are too much.


Side note, there's a lot of gun related news lately, WTF ?

[wallace11bravo]

Your tax dollars at work. Sound like the boomerang tied with some other systems.

Boomerang systems are borderline useless most of the time and absolutely useless in urban settings. Too many echos. They also don't work right if the system is moving at all, there is a strong wind, if your mother's maiden name starts with a consonant, or if you look at it wrong.

OK, I made those last two up. Serious waste of money, if that is what they bought.

[instag8tr]

Shhh Big Brother is listening

[dcjulie]

I'm waiting for the US to be more like England with CCTV EVERYWHERE!!  UG~

[bkoenig]

if your mother's maiden name starts with a consonant, or if you look at it wrong.

I come from German/Eastern European stock, so I have an abundance of consonants.  Sounds like I'm safe.

The sad thing is, the average guy on the street will welcome government monitoring in the name of "safety".  Years ago I watched the movie Demolition Man and thought "this is stupid, Americans would never stand for a government like this".  Now I fear that's exactly where we're headed.  Guess I'd better figure out the three seashells.

[Famous556]

That article from the LJS is really bad.  I read it three times trying to find what I am missing because it has literally no information.  The article is so vague... like a book report written by a middle schooler who didn't read the book or even bother to look at the cliffnotes. 

Anyways... if you guys are talking about Omaha's shotspotter system, that has been in place for a year or so now.  Citywide (well certain parts anyways) permanent mounted microphone systems to determine gunshots.

http://www.ketv.com/Gunfire-To-Be-Tracked-With-New-Tool/-/9675214/10133240/-/qe74qc/-/index.html

Big brother is watching already.

[abbafandr]

Demolition Man, what a good movie.  Big brother versus the the libertartians.

We got the nanny state we voted for.  Paraphrasing, if we sacrifice a little liberty for a little safety we deserve neither.

[unfy]

Just gotta post it....

[LM4202]

Don't you think you guys should go down to the City Council and demand the shot spotter system be taken down?

[unfy]

It's possible the system in place can record regular conversations, but I'd kinda doubt it.  More research would be required.  Then there's the thing that cameras are typically allowed by law for public safety reasons etc. Trying to argue away this shot system would be difficult.

The argument against the system would be if it's even remotely effective or just a waste of cash.  I have ZERO doubt it's the latter, but it'd require reports, statistics, etc etc etc

[AAllen]

OK the article is talking about two different things, first it appears there is a new system that officers dash cams now not only are able to record but can be monitored remotely.  I see this as an officer safety issue and with dash cams being legal don't see how anyone would be able to attack the remote monitoring of these.

Second issue is the "Shot Spotter" system, this has been deployed in area's of Omaha for a couple of years.  It does not make recordings and the mic's are not actively monitored by a person but by a computer.  This computer is able to pick up on the signature of a shot being fired and based upon multiple Mic's picking up upon the shot and the strength of the sound is able to triangulate the approximate position of the shooter.  Is this triangulation perfect; most likely not, but with the large number of shots being fired in Omaha not all of them get reported to the police.  Also not everytime they get a call can the caller/s give any real definition of where the shots came from.  This is another tool police can use to find where shooting happen and get officers to the scene faster (shot spotter usually notifies the call center several minutes before they get their first 911 call reporting shots fired) and when someone has been shot every minute counts in trying to save a life as well as find a suspect.

In several other cities that have deployed the "Shot Spotter" system there have been multiple lives that have been saved and it has directly been attributed to this system, either no report of shots fired or a late report that would not have allowed emergency personell to save the life.  The system as has been installed here in Omaha was (at least the initial installation, don't know about any expansion) paid for through a grant from a private entity and private donations, no tax payer moneys were spent. 

If a passive system like this has the ability to save a life and get a criminal off the streets I have trouble finding a fault with using it.  Yes I do hope that as the technology improves to be more exact in finding locations that those improvements are incorporated into the system here, monies considered.  No system is perfect but this is reported to be a major step forward.

[unfy]

Dash cams I've always liked, particularly if their unaltered recordings are available to the public (or at least to those who have a legal interest in them concerning a particular case).

The shot system I'd venture doesn't use regular mics but rather something that requires a bit more of a shockwave to trigger.  It could be entirely software, but an off the shelf typical mic seems like a poor choice due to noise etc.

This is also the first I've heard of the 'shot' system actually having done some good.  If it has indeed done good, then I'm prolly cool with it (assuming the cost is reasonable).

[AAllen]

Unify, I agree what it does for the price is questionable but since it was payed for by private means (donations) and not tax payer funds I don't have any complaints.

[Famous556]

Unify, I agree what it does for the price is questionable but since it was payed for by private means (donations) and not tax payer funds I don't have any complaints.

I believe it was paid for by a Department of Justice grant.  "Donation" from the feds maybe but still taxpayer money.

[AAllen]

I do not remember a DOJ grant but there may have been, but there was also a lot of private funds used.