shotspotter at work in Milwaukee

MKEgal · Sep 9, 2011

According to the MPD Facebook page:

Shotspotter, good police work, take gun, suspect off street.
On 9-6, NTF Sgts Steven Herrmann, Richard Jack and NTF POs John Schott, Dustin Frank doing proactive focused patrols in data-identified areas.
Shotspotter pinpointed single shot to exact address near N 13 & Locust.
Officers responded seconds later & talked w/ 3 suspicious persons on porch.
In house, officers saw box of shotgun shells & shotgun.
Suspect admitted firing it & was arrested.
One more gun fired with impunity off the street!

Wow... the computer ate my original post, or at least most of it.

A) it wasn't on the street, it was in a house
B) the person was on the porch
C) shotspotter didn't stop the crime, only reported it
D) I'd be surprised if they really responded in "seconds" (implying few seconds)
D1) doubt it could be pinpointed to an address in a densly populated area
E) if you're going to do something stupid, put away the gun, close the door, cover the windows, & deny permission to search
F) DON'T TALK TO COPS!
. . . if you behave well in the first place, they're less likely to show up & want to talk with you
G) I wouldn't say it was "fired with impunity" if he was arrested

TaurusToter · Sep 9, 2011

Personally, I'd say it's a false report to boost the "ego" and "effectiveness" of spotshotter.

I don't think you could get the police to respond in seconds even if they were in front of the house waiting for the gun to go off.

That being said, I don't think the other report on there blotter about retrieving the gun during a traffic stop is accurate/true either.

MKEgal · Sep 9, 2011

You mean this one:

Traffic stop leads to gun recovery.
D3 Officers William Esqueda, Eric Rom, Christopher Randazzo did traffic stop 2200 block N 39 St on 9/2 when they heard gunshots nearby.
They saw 4 suspects come out of a rear yard & saw 1 putting a rifle into vehicle parked on street.
They ran when they saw officers. 3 arrested.
A scoped high powered rifle recovered along w/ ammo.
One suspect, a felon, already on parole for a shooting.

At most they happened to be in the right place at the right time completely by random chance.
Shotspotter had nothing to do with that one.
"Scoped high powered rifle"? Probably a hunting rifle.
And if the felon didn't handle the rifle, he probably didn't break probation (that way).

So they (apparently) discharged it in city limits (don't know if that's a crime or just a forfeiture),
and possibly had it loaded & not cased in a school zone when they stepped onto the street,
and apparently did not have it cased when putting it into the car (a forfeiture).

All in all, not serious other than if they hit someone/something other than the ground when shooting.
Not worth all the hoopla they're making of it.

I wonder if this concentration on "look at all the evil guns we're taking away from subjects" is in reaction to the new cc law?

protias · Sep 9, 2011

So officers responded to the address seconds later or ShotSpotter reported it, a call went out, officers responded to that call seconds later, and then (who knows how long) they showed up at the house.

Yup, looks like ShotSpotter prevented a crime. Oh wait, no it didn't! I reported a crime!

sheller · Sep 9, 2011

Shotspotter is a gunfire locating system only. Does not have the capability of reporting a crime, period.

Big Dipper · Sep 9, 2011

sheller said:
Shotspotter is a gunfire locating system only. Does not have the capability of reporting a crime, period.

But discharging a firearm within the city limits IS a crime, is it not? Thus by definition, when it recognizes and locates gunfire, the system is "reporting a crime"!

sheller · Sep 9, 2011

Big Dipper said:
But discharging a firearm within the city limits IS a crime, is it not? Thus by definition, when it recognizes and locates gunfire, the system is "reporting a crime"!

Spotshotter was not designed to discern between an unlawful discharge of a firearm and a legal discharge of a firearm. The gunfire it recognizes maybe from a police officer or a citizen in self defense. That would not necessarily be a crime.

oak1971 · Sep 9, 2011

Don't need shot-spotter to hear gunfire. People do have ears after all. Sounds like a case of lazy cops and slick marketing by the folks at shot-spotter. I wonder if they were in on the deep tunnel project that cost millions and does nothing to help the sewage problems? :banghead:

Motofixxer · Sep 9, 2011

Speaking of shotspotter and tunnels, I wonder if shotspotter could locate a shot in a tunnel...I'm guessing no, but maybe it could.

HandyHamlet · Sep 9, 2011

Motofixxer said:
Speaking of shotspotter and tunnels, I wonder if shotspotter could locate a shot in a tunnel...I'm guessing no, but maybe it could.

If it could there would be no more prostitution I guess.

smithman · Sep 9, 2011

Every rifle cartridge to the media other than a .22LR is considered High Powered. It's catchy and the news needs to maintain its catch phrases. You'd be amazed though at how many gun owners also use the phrase when referring to guns that are varmint rifles. The media always calls those high powered, even though they are not compared to a 30-06. But they would still call a 30-06 a "scoped high powered rifle". You just can't win with the media.

hermannr · Sep 10, 2011

Note three things in this discussion:

#1: There are three cops involved (you need triangulation to make this system work)

#2: All three officers were purposely in a "data selected area" (there have been unknown discharges in that area before?)

#3: They responded in seconds. (they were really close, thereby not disclosing the range of the system)

Unknown factor, was it a set-up demonstration? (a publicity stunt by the MPD)

TaurusToter · Sep 10, 2011

hermannr said:
Unknown factor, was it a set-up demonstration? (a publicity stunt by the MPD)

My point exactly. I think its rigged

paul@paul-fisher.com · Sep 10, 2011

The technology is VERY accurate. I was watching a show the other night that showed a Humvee with a gun mount and a microphone array, They showed tests where they would have remote controlled firearms shooting blanks and the gun on the Humvee, while the vehicle was moving, would 'hear' the shot and shoot it's gun and hit the other gun.

I had always 'ASSuMEd' that they needed 3 disparate points to triangulate but it was all on this Humvee.

http://www.bbn.com/boomerang

hermannr · Sep 11, 2011

paul@paul-fisher.com said:
The technology is VERY accurate. I was watching a show the other night that showed a Humvee with a gun mount and a microphone array, They showed tests where they would have remote controlled firearms shooting blanks and the gun on the Humvee, while the vehicle was moving, would 'hear' the shot and shoot it's gun and hit the other gun.

I had always 'ASSuMEd' that they needed 3 disparate points to triangulate but it was all on this Humvee.

http://www.bbn.com/boomerang

the bbn device is interesting, still needs more than one point if only acoustic, however, MPD specifically is talking about "shotspotter".

Here: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/180112.pdf is the study that was done specifically with shotspotter...

This pears to be an objective evaluation as of 2000, not sales information. I am sure the systems have improved, but they are both basied on the same basic assumptions ans ideas as the seismic evaluation of the location of an earthquake.

It appears that there needs to be stationary sensors distributed throughout the area being monitored....

Still wondering if it wasn't a publicity stunt...

MKEgal · Sep 15, 2011

answered my own question

Discharge of a firearm in city limits appears to be a misdemeanor, so yes, it's a crime.
City code 80-10(c)(1)(l) references state law chapter 941, which includes 941.20 (endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon) subsection (d):

while on the lands of another discharges a firearm within 100 yards of any building devoted to human occupancy situated on and attached to the lands of another without the express permission of the owner or occupant of the building

So if someone could get permission from everyone within 100 yards it'd be legal, but how likely is that, and how likely is it that the responding police would know the law & believe that you have permission? (get it in writing)

They could make an argument for 941.30 recklessly endangering safety.

Shotgun · Sep 15, 2011

MKEgal said:
Discharge of a firearm in city limits appears to be a misdemeanor, so yes, it's a crime.
City code 80-10(c)(1)(l) references state law chapter 941, which includes 941.20 (endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon) subsection (d):

So if someone could get permission from everyone within 100 yards it'd be legal, but how likely is that, and how likely is it that the responding police would know the law & believe that you have permission? (get it in writing)

You left off the portion of that statute that says "While on the lands of another..." That portion of the statute does not apply if you're on your own property at the time you discharge a firearm, but one might (and quite likely) be charged under other provisions of the statute.

shotspotter at work in Milwaukee

MKEgal

Regular Member

TaurusToter

Campaign Veteran

MKEgal

Regular Member

protias

Regular Member

sheller

Regular Member

Big Dipper

Regular Member

sheller

Regular Member

oak1971

Regular Member

Motofixxer

Regular Member

HandyHamlet

Regular Member

smithman

Regular Member

hermannr

Regular Member

TaurusToter

Campaign Veteran

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member

hermannr

Regular Member

MKEgal

Regular Member

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.