Gun Fire Detectors


HK4U

New member
This story was on local television here in Fort Worth last night. What is you guys take on this?



DPD To Consider Purchasing Gunfire Detectors
Reporting
J.D. Miles DALLAS (CBS 11 News) ― Tracking down people responsible for random gunfire seems like an impossible challenge, but Dallas police plan to install new technology that could help solve those cases.

A proposal will be presented to the city next month to purchase new devices that monitor neighborhoods for gunfire.

"At this point, we'll present it to the council and see if they like the idea," said Lt. Vernon Hale, Dallas Police Department. "We'll give them the pros and cons of those types of software."

The sensors, which would be placed on buildings and light poles, are expensive. They cost up to $250,000 for every square mile covered, but can narrow the origin of gunfire to within 30 feet.

The type of sensors Dallas is looking to purchase can distinguish gunfire from fireworks or a car backfire. It can dispatch a police officer within three to ten seconds. The devices also have cameras that can zoom in on suspects.

Dallas police haven't decided how many sensors would be purchased or where they would be placed.

Safety Dynamics is one of the companies that has installed the devices in cities such as Boston and Minneapolis.

(© MMVIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
I tend to dislike anything that sounds like Orwell, but a system like this could be helpful in documenting cases of lawful self-defense. Due to the cost of the system, it probably would not be deployed anywhere besides the ghetto. However, what is often the case in bad neighborhoods is that neither the victim nor the attacker is really legally allowed to carry a firearm, and they may both be less than reputable people. When the cops show up, they may be choosing between two thugs to determine who was the attacker and who acted in self-defense.

Now, obviously many people are going to be less than sympathetic to a victim who they feel has been less than virtuous - "Let them kill each other", and so on. The reality though is that self-defense is a basic human right and even felons have to defend themselves if threatened with a gun.
 

kwo51

New member
I think it will put our cops in more armed conflicts. Will make the market for supresed guns go crazy.
 

Samurai

New member
This story was on local television here in Fort Worth last night. What is you guys take on this?
...the sensors, which would be placed on buildings and light poles, are expensive. They cost up to $250,000 for every square mile covered, but can narrow the origin of gunfire to within 30 feet.

What happens if the BG's shoot 'em from 31 feet away?
 

stumpjumper101

New member
They installed that type system in the east end of Newport News Va. about 2 years ago. dont know how helpful its been at putting officers on the scene. From what ive been told its pretty accurate at locating where the source was even with only one shot being fired. I have not heard of any cases of someone useing a silencer/suppressor to avoid being detected by it. i do know that the east end of Newport News is still not somewhere you want to be caught outside in low light alone, thats for sure. it definatly has not cleaned the Hood up any. :D
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
I live in Gary, Indiana and we have already had these devices for several years. It's called ShotSpotter. It works, but it does not seem to have done anything to bring down the murder rate in the city that has had the nation's highest per capita murder rate for 12 of the past 13 years.
 
ok yeah good idea lets spend 250,000 dollars per square mile in DALLAS TEXAS!!! one of the nations largest cities on a unit that has reportedly done nothing in the places it has been installed. I can think of better things to do with that money and i have never even been to Dallas.
 

HK4U

New member
250,000 dollars

ok yeah good idea lets spend 250,000 dollars per square mile in DALLAS TEXAS!!! one of the nations largest cities on a unit that has reportedly done nothing in the places it has been installed. I can think of better things to do with that money and i have never even been to Dallas.


Yep, how about spending 500 dollars each to buy all law abiding citizens a gun and arm them to fight crime. Would do more to stop crime.
 
Maybe the local government needs a push in the right direction. A responsible and concerned citizen should bring to their attention that the device is currently being used in other places. Let them know were the device has been installed and present them with the statistics. Show them that although the system functions properly, it does nothing to stop BG activity. Maybe the BG in the area have started using knives or blunt instruments? :D

What would be really messed up is if the first device is installed near an outdoor shooting range. :(

Like your idea of $500 for law abiding citizens to buy a gun. Don't think the government would go for it though. Great idea in any case. :)



gf
 
I tend to dislike anything that sounds like Orwell, but a system like this could be helpful in documenting cases of lawful self-defense. Due to the cost of the system, it probably would not be deployed anywhere besides the ghetto. However, what is often the case in bad neighborhoods is that neither the victim nor the attacker is really legally allowed to carry a firearm, and they may both be less than reputable people. When the cops show up, they may be choosing between two thugs to determine who was the attacker and who acted in self-defense.

Now, obviously many people are going to be less than sympathetic to a victim who they feel has been less than virtuous - "Let them kill each other", and so on. The reality though is that self-defense is a basic human right and even felons have to defend themselves if threatened with a gun.


Whats a bad neighborhood ?

if you think any neighborhood in America is immune from crime and is a good neighborhood , then you don't need a weapon, you can just stay in those safe neighborhood and you'll never need to carry.

Even the "10 Safest City in America" has seen murders,
I wont link to sources of Crime in the Suburbs, because lurking antis may pick up the info and use against the Pro2A movement

Or maybe you can tell us where in the US we can live, where we don't have to "carry" ?
 
I live in Gary, Indiana and we have already had these devices for several years. It's called ShotSpotter. It works, but it does not seem to have done anything to bring down the murder rate in the city that has had the nation's highest per capita murder rate for 12 of the past 13 years.

Exactly

these expensive devise does nothing to reduce crime

someone may already have been hit with the shot fired, only thing the device does is alert the police to the location, AFTER THE SHOT has already been fired, and victim may already have been hit.

They have been installed in Boston a long while now, and no reduction in crime, no increase in solved cases.
 

shooter57

New member
The shots it picks up are usually in areas the cops won't go into at night anyway without the SWAT.
The uninformed would vote the people back into office thinking there going to fix crime.
 

Scarecrow

New member
the devices also have cameras... can't say I like that.. seems like just another way to have some one watching what you are doing at any given moment.. people playing God... if they are going to spend so much money on something like that.. they should issue military weapons to law abiding households like switzerland... and they have the lowest crime in europe!
 

daddyo

M. Todd Bayliss
Birmingham just installed this system. They had a write up in the local paper had an article about the first arrest attributed to the system. It said police were first notified of shots fired by the system and individual 911 calls helped them pinpoint the location and catch the suspect. It says the system can differentiate between firecrackers and shots. That's a big problem around here as on the 4th or New Years the police are inundated with shots fired calls, many of which turn out to be fireworks. Maybe they should just rent it twice a year.
 

DrDavidM

New member
While in theory I don't think it is a bad idea. If I have to fire my handgun I will be calling the police anyway. Therefore, I do not have anything to fear from it. However, I have a hard time believing that the cameras would actually be able to identify a suspect. Hopefully if they can it is the right suspect. Even with increased response time from LEO's the BG could fire and be long gone before they arrived. I guess this is obvious from the other cities that have tried it. I think it is just a political ploy to make the sheepie feel better.
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
Whats a bad neighborhood ?

if you think any neighborhood in America is immune from crime and is a good neighborhood , then you don't need a weapon, you can just stay in those safe neighborhood and you'll never need to carry.

Even the "10 Safest City in America" has seen murders,
I wont link to sources of Crime in the Suburbs, because lurking antis may pick up the info and use against the Pro2A movement

Or maybe you can tell us where in the US we can live, where we don't have to "carry" ?
Ummm...at what point did I say it's unnecessary to carry in any particular neighborhood? :confused: Where to carry wasn't even the subject under discussion - and I carry in all neighborhoods, regardless of income.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,435
Messages
623,654
Members
74,274
Latest member
Jlynn610
Top