14 Mar
2014
14 Mar
'14
3:43 p.m.
i can't tell if you replied to the list or just privately to me.
that sounds like it would be fun, but it would be more worthwhile if there
were a larger goal to be accomplished, ideally with funding.
it wouldn't be trivial - what is the right way to record timestamps onto
an audio recording from a GPS? perhaps use one of the two audio channels
as a SMPTE timing track? that's kinda ridiculous but there's probably
lots of code already written...
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Hol Gaskill wrote:
14 Mar
14 Mar
3:49 p.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
If combined with a lightning detector and an acceleromter it could pinpoint
lightning, earthquakes and large trucks. Also noise pollution mapping. Also
add speakers and you could use it in reverse to get steer cops around
oakland like a laggy rc car parade.
On Friday, March 14, 2014, Jake <jake(a)spaz.org> wrote:
4:21 p.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
So Gabby are you saying that a person who fires a gun in the city has a
right to privacy that is more important than the community's right to
share that information?
also, if you object to calling the police on people who are shooting guns
in the city, do you have an alternate suggestion or are you volunteering
to do something about it yourself?
for what its worth, i am not suggesting that the data from a system we
build would be sent to only the police, but rather to everyone who wants
to know where and when shots are being fired.
-jake
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Gabrielle Silverman wrote:
4:45 p.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
Oh boy there are a bunch of things here:
1. "Minus shotspotter, shootings will increase, guaranteed." - To call
this unfounded is being polite. There are significant sentencing
enhancements for crimes that are perpetrated with guns in the state of
California. These people are potentially facing years in prison.
Shooting a gun in these situations is an entirely irrational action.
You're perpetuating the notion that if we just make people more scared
of the police, they'll be less likely to participate in violent crime,
and it's bogus theory.
2. It's not clear to me that shotspotter was particularly good at
discerning between gun shots and other loud noises, or at least that it
was used for other purposes:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/video/7473317-oakland-police-use-shotspott…
This is typical surveillance mission creep.
3. It might be hard for some of the folks on this list to understand,
but for communities who have been the consistent target of state and
police violence, there is a very reasonable fear of the cops. Whether or
not you think that the police are the appropriate response to a
particular given situation, by choosing to partner with the police in
any way, we are making a specific galvanizing decision. Sudoroom (and
hackers, and new residents to west oakland) will be judged by these
sorts of decisions, and in this case, I think that perception is a real
and important thing to take into consideration.
Of all of the projects that really have the possibility to make Oakland
a more peaceful city, I think it's likely that this is money and time
poorly spent.
On 03/14/2014 04:21 PM, Jake wrote:
5:18 p.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
Re. Max B:
1) If you want to propose an experiment to test the hypothesis, I'm all
ears. However it's already well established in criminology that the
best deterrent to crime is the swiftness and sureness of getting caught.
The fact that shooting someone is an irrational action doesn't matter if
the shooter is irrational, impulsive, strung out on meth, or jonesing
for a fix. Really now, do you think robbers & street gang members sit
around discussing philosophy & science? "What do you think about the
Higgs boson?" "I think we're still pretty far from having a unified
field theory. Now let's go out and find someone to rob, OK?"
For some people, being sufficiently scared of the police is the only
thing that will stop them doing violent crimes. Go look up
"psychopathy" and "sociopathy", do some reading and get back to us.
Social justice reduces crimes of desperation such as the often-cited guy
who sticks up a store to get money to feed his kids. Social justice
doesn't do squat for predatory crimes committed by sociopaths & psychopaths.
2a) Shotspotter effectiveness: If there's a question about
effectiveness, you should be supporting efforts to make it more effective.
2b) Shotspotter abuse: If shotspotter is being used for "other
purposes," that can be stopped via city ordinances regulating its uses.
What I'd like to see is for shotspotter to also respond to the sound of
a particular combination of audio frequencies that can be produced by
whistles the city could issue to members of neighborhood watch groups
and persons with well-founded fears of violent crime. Better still if
the frequencies were ultrasonic.
3) Red herring. The vast majority of Oakland residents are far more
afraid of getting robbed, raped, carjacked, shot in a drive-by, etc.,
than they are of being "oppressed by the police." Crime is a form of
oppression, and inadequate public safety is also a form of oppression.
Criminals oppress their neighbors. Think about that.
Ask a few single moms in the tough sections of town about how they and
their kids have had to change their behavior to reduce their risk.
"Can't play outside after school" is oppression. "Can't visit
friends
after dark" is oppression. "Have to look out for who's on the street
before I walk to the store" is oppression. "Crack house / gang house
next door" is oppression. "Lay down in the bath tub because there are
bullets flying" is oppression. And failure to see how those forms of
oppression are oppressing people, is just enabling more of the same
types of oppression.
-G.
=====
On 14-03-14-Fri 4:45 PM, Max B wrote:
4 p.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
I think there are significant principles in here, maybe on everybody's mind
but not called out specifically: if data is made available to the public,
rather than made available only to the police, it's much more palatable. In
either case, it's important that individual privacy not be infringed beyond
some certain point. If all the data is public (and presented in a way that
is structured & useful to the public,not some PDF report) then it's easier
for everybody to see whether it is done in a way that respects individual
privacy in appropriate ways.
Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]] on the wiki
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Marc Juul <juul(a)labitat.dk> wrote:
15 Mar
15 Mar
12:02 a.m.
New subject: shotspotter will be discontinued
Hello:
You have posted some interesting comments on the Shotspotters.
I have not followed the discussion in whole, so my comment may be redundant.
Last week, Oakland’s City Council and Mayor voted on measures to limit some aspect of DAC.
Prior to voting on the bill, City Council presented the testimonies of representative of
both Oakland’s Police and Fire Departments. Of interest, the representative from the
Oakland Police Department disfavored continued use of the Shotspotters. He also
disapproved of activating (tuning on) certain Shotspotters that are installed and on-line,
but not green-lighted for operation.
I do not know the reason that OPD seeks to not use the Shotspotters, but I would assume
there exists certain technical glitches or other things the do not aid in crime prevention
or the capture of shooters.
On reasonable belief, some Shotspotters are in place at the Oakland Port. I believe these
devices will remain operable throughout the next budget year.
IM
On Mar 14, 2014, at 4:00 PM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
4102
days inactive
4103
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Gabrielle Silverman -
GtwoG PublicOhOne -
Ibrahim Moss -
Jake -
Marc Juul -
Max B -
Pete Forsyth