Lots of interesting news today

[RatLabGuy]

Me thinks you do not understand how many gunshots go off daily in the city of Durham. I would not be surprised if someone told me there were more gunshots per day than 14

14 shots is what one magazine? That is completely plausible amount let alone if it was 14 separate occasions.

The systems covers a 3 mile radius. Thats really small, about 28 sq miles. And within that it is nowhere close to 100% coverage of the internal area, consider how much of that is filled with buildings, acoustically occluded, etc. Typical spatial coverage on these kinds of things is around 30% at best.
Durham is over 115 sq miles, and thats only the official city limits.
So ideally we are talking about less than 8% of the space in the city limits. Extrapolated out that would mean the proposed rate is at least 175 shots a day, and thats if it doesn't miss a single one.
I have no idea if that's right or not... but neither do they, bc there is no known ground truth to actually confirm it against.

Now I'm sure they put it in the most crime-ridden areas so extrapolation isn't accurate, but that also begs the question of search and confirmation bias.
e.g.....

"Some argued that ShotSpotter increases police activity in communities of color."

Maybe there's a correlation.

hmmmm

 

[CasterTroy]

I'm sure they put it in the most crime-ridden areas so extrapolation isn't accurate

Just imagine if they put COPS in those areas or maybe 3 Kyle Rittenhouse's

 

[jeepinmatt]

Serious question though:
How many of those shots are actually at a person/vehicle/dwelling vs just shooting for fun in a safe direction? I guarantee you I hear 500-1000 shots every saturday and sunday out where I'm at. And I understand the geography and demography are different, but just because someone is shooting in their "backyard range" doesn't mean they are a threat to society.

 

[RatLabGuy]

Serious question though:
How many of those shots are actually at a person/vehicle/dwelling vs just shooting for fun in a safe direction? I guarantee you I hear 500-1000 shots every saturday and sunday out where I'm at. And I understand the geography and demography are different, but just because someone is shooting in their "backyard range" doesn't mean they are a threat to society.

Again it's been placed in a 6 mile bubble in the middle of the city.
I really doubt there are many "backyard ranges" in that zone.

 

[jeepinmatt]

Again it's been placed in a 6 mile bubble in the middle of the city.
I really doubt there are many "backyard ranges" in that zone.

I bet there are at least 50 if not 100. I ain't talkin official and proper ranges, I just mean a place to shoot at a target instead of a person. Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

 

[benXJ]

I bet there are at least 50 if not 100. I ain't talkin official and proper ranges, I just mean a place to shoot at a target instead of a person. Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

no way you're implying that most of the shots in the middle of the city of durham are people just shooting at a pepsi can in their backyard?!

you OK with your apartment neighbor, 10 feet away through the paper thin wall, letting of some rounds on his balcony?

 

[RatLabGuy]

I bet there are at least 50 if not 100. I ain't talkin official and proper ranges, I just mean a place to shoot at a target instead of a person. Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

What do you think the average lot size is in this part of town?

 

[jeepinmatt]

no way you're implying that most of the shots in the middle of the city of durham are people just shooting at a pepsi can in their backyard?!

you OK with your apartment neighbor, 10 feet away through the paper thin wall, letting of some rounds on his balcony?

Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

 

[jeepinmatt]

no way you're implying that most of the shots in the middle of the city of durham are people just shooting at a pepsi can in their backyard?!

you OK with your apartment neighbor, 10 feet away through the paper thin wall, letting of some rounds on his balcony?

What do you think the average lot size is in this part of town?

Why do yall assume we are shooting on our own property?

 

[benXJ]

Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

no one is negatively affected by shooting an ar15 off the balcony of a densely packed apt complex?

 

[RatLabGuy]

no one is negatively affected by shooting an ar15 off the balcony of a densely packed apt complex?

One could argue that simply the act of firing has no victim.
It becomes a victim-crime when the bullets hit a person, which carries its own charge that is seperate from just taking the shot.

You're really hedging your bets and living dangerously but it's a reasonable argument.

 

[jeepinmatt]

no one is negatively affected by shooting an ar15 off the balcony of a densely packed apt complex?

Whether it is a subsonic .22 or an AR15 or a Desert Eagle or a 10 gauge is irrelevant, so I'm just going to disregard that part. You are now projecting that the "they" in this scenario live in an apartment, it is a densely packed complex, and they are shooting off the balcony. There are tons of places in cities that back up to woods, typically a creek or drainage that can't be built on, that are at the back of neighborhoods and apartment complexes. Durm specifically is full of pockets of Duke Forest land. It could be your scenario, which is potentially problematic, or it could be some guy back in the woods behind their apartment practicing for their concealed carry class next weekend. While I agree that it is a less-than-likely scenario, the inherent assumptivity of location, class, and living conditions is a bit humorous to me. All city people shoot their AR15's off the balcony of their apartment.

There's a lot of houses and pockets of green in this area, not just densely packed apartment complexes.

So yeah, I'll stand by my statement, shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime. Also, just because someone is "negatively affected" doesn't make it a crime. Probably half the crap I deal with in a normal day negatively affects me (traffic, job stress, dumb people, etc), but generally none of it is a crime. Wasting tax dollars on pointless, ineffective technology should be a crime. And so should shooting another person (or car or house or apartment, etc).

 

[Futbalfantic]

Serious question though:
How many of those shots are actually at a person/vehicle/dwelling vs just shooting for fun in a safe direction? I guarantee you I hear 500-1000 shots every saturday and sunday out where I'm at. And I understand the geography and demography are different, but just because someone is shooting in their "backyard range" doesn't mean they are a threat to society.

Absolutely 0. But also it is illegal to discharge a firearm within city limits

Shooting inside the city limits in and of itself is a victimless crime.

False. Someone will call 911 or a police officer with hear a crime committed. It will get a dispatch and officer will investigate. That takes the police officer time when he could be responding to other calls.

I hate the term “victimless crime” just because you can’t see the victim or connect the dots to a victim doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

 

[benXJ]

oh yea, i forgot that guns don't make any sound past about 5 feet

yea, no one would be bothered/scared/inconvienced by shooting in the city, regardless of location or dwelling

 

[benXJ]

This guy just doesn't understand math.
So in 1 year the system picked up an average of 14 "shots" every single day. Either this is one dangerous as hell city or the system has a really high false positive rate, which of course will drive up arrests and seizures, just by luck.

I'll design you a system that identifies 20,000 gunshots and get you even more recoveries and arrests. Lets just not talk about the fact it also makes you do 10x as much unnecessary work and pisses off a lot more people.

what is uncecessary about enforcing the laws and stopping shootings?

 

[jeepinmatt]

Absolutely 0. But also it is illegal to discharge a firearm within city limits

False. Someone will call 911 or a police officer with hear a crime committed. It will get a dispatch and officer will investigate. That takes the police officer time when he could be responding to other calls.

I hate the term “victimless crime” just because you can’t see the victim or connect the dots to a victim doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

So the police officers are victims?

 

[jeepinmatt]

oh yea, i forgot that guns don't make any sound past about 5 feet

yea, no one would be bothered/scared/inconvienced by shooting in the city, regardless of location or dwelling

Cities are full of loud noises. There are laws against certain amounts at certain times. I'm pretty sure I've heard dumpsters being dumped that are louder than gunfire. Maybe they need a Dumpdetector!

yea, no one would be bothered/scared/inconvienced by shooting in the city, regardless of location or dwelling

Are we talking about crime or about being bothered/scared/inconvenienced? Moving in so many directions here.

what is uncecessary about enforcing the laws and stopping shootings?

The ENTIRE POINT that kicked off this discussion hinges around the excess work created for the police officers by a sound detection system, which does NOT equate to actual shootings. As @Futbalfantic pointed out, this system turns the LEO's into victims of the Shotspotter system with no benefit, and also dispenses taxpayer dollars to a private company against the will of those being "profiled" by living in the area.

 

[trailhugger]

So the police officers are victims?

Just the taxpayers.

 

[Futbalfantic]

So the police officers are victims?

No the waste of taxpayers money is the victim. You sitting on the side of the road waiting for LEO to fill out accident paperwork is the victim. The family waiting for the police report after their house was broken into is the victim. Everyone is the victim.

Again. Just because we can’t see a direct link between the action and the result doesn’t mean that link doesn’t exist.

 

[Futbalfantic]

Cities are full of loud noises. There are laws against certain amounts at certain times. I'm pretty sure I've heard dumpsters being dumped that are louder than gunfire. Maybe they need a Dumpdetector!

A dumpster doesn’t being dropped doesn’t indicate that a piece of lead was accelerated to a lethal velocity with an unknown vector. One which could be into your child’s space resulting in death or a life threatening injury. Which you know, happens when people fire guns in the city or other spaces with an unknown (or known) back drop. I’ve seen it. I’ve been there.

 

[benXJ]

Cities are full of loud noises. There are laws against certain amounts at certain times. I'm pretty sure I've heard dumpsters being dumped that are louder than gunfire. Maybe they need a Dumpdetector!

Are we talking about crime or about being bothered/scared/inconvenienced? Moving in so many directions here.


The ENTIRE POINT that kicked off this discussion hinges around the excess work created for the police officers by a sound detection system, which does NOT equate to actual shootings. As @Futbalfantic pointed out, this system turns the LEO's into victims of the Shotspotter system with no benefit, and also dispenses taxpayer dollars to a private company against the will of those being "profiled" by living in the area.

its illegal to shoot inside city limits because the masses wanted to make it illegal because it can be dangerous, and yes, quite 'scary' and bothersome and super loud. Shooting can be alot of things.....deadly AND annoying and there is no need for it, most of the time

 

[jeepinmatt]

So are y’all pro Shotspotter or not? I’m getting mixed messages.

 

[CasterTroy]

You are now projecting that the "they" in this scenario live in an apartment

 

[awheelterd]

So are y’all pro Shotspotter or not? I’m getting mixed messages.

Not my tax money, so no worries here. Shootings in Durham do take up a disproportionate amount of time on the morning news, so they should probably do something about it. I don't live there so I'm really don't care what though.

 

[RHSCTJ]

So are y’all pro Shotspotter or not? I’m getting mixed messages.

I dont care enough to read the article but what was the intended use of this? It goes off and they send a cop to look for someone who was shot? I can't imagine a situation where the shotspotter would give PC or RAS for a cop to do anything more than just check the area.